In a rare instance of reconciliation and coexistence in the legislature, debate over increases to the elderly farmers' allowance has transcended the political divide. Yet one cannot ignore the fact that social justice has been distorted once again.
Most people see to their needs by entering the workforce, enrolling in insurance schemes applicable to their occupations, paying their insurance fees regularly and receiving pension payments according to the number of years they worked.
However, some people do not have labor insurance and after retiring must depend on welfare benefits after passing an asset evaluation. This is how social security works in most countries. And this is why advanced nations encourage citizens to join the workforce and eliminate obstacles to help their citizens obtain labor benefits. Welfare is the last line of defense for social justice.
Around 70 percent of Taiwan's 2.26 million people older than 65 receive some sort of subsidy. Among them, 31.4 percent receive the elderly farmers subsidy, and this percentage is increasing. Over the past four years, this allowance has been increased twice; the monthly allowance is now NT$5,000. This is also the only allowance not subject to a wealth exclusion article.
Another 33.7 percent receive the NT$3,000 subsidy for the elderly, while 0.9 percent receive the NT$3,000 subsidy for elderly Aborigines. These people are subject to income, land and housing value restrictions. Another 6.7 percent of the elderly poor with a medium to low income receive a livelihood subsidy.
Seemingly on the pretext that the pension system has been stalled in the legislature for too long, the government plans to increase the elderly farmers subsidy to NT$6,000 per month. This will add NT$8.7 billion (US$263 million) to annual government expenditure. Are taxpayers willing to add this figure to a national debt of NT$4 trillion for the sake of social equality and justice?
What is the significance of adding NT$1,000 to the elderly farmers' subsidy in terms of social and labor values? Judging from a draft amendment to the Labor Insurance Act (勞工保險條例), which was approved by Cabinet on May 9, the most important task is implementing an annuity pension system.
Under this scheme, workers will be entitled to an annuity pension. Those 60 years of age or more who participated in the labor insurance plan for more than 15 years can choose between two pension plans.
The Plan A formula multiplies the average monthly insured salary by the number of years enrolled by 0.55 percent, while the Plan B formula multiplies the average monthly insured salary by the number of years enrolled by 1.1 percent.
For someone doing menial labor for 25 years with an average monthly insured salary of NT$21,000, the employer makes a monthly payment of NT$1,365 while the worker makes a monthly payment of NT$273. The monthly payment will then be NT$5,887.5 based on Plan A or NT$5,775 based on Plan B.
By contrast, the elderly farmers subsidy of NT$6,000 each month requires no insurance payments. Where, then, is the parity between elderly farmers and elderly workers? What social values does this higher payment of NT$6,000 promote?
What many elderly farmers do need is medical and personal care and a dignified life. This cannot be achieved simply by adding cash to a monthly subsidy.
What does it add to the "Taiwanese values" of equality and fairness that political parties always talk about? I believe concerned citizens would like to know the answer.
Edward Wu is an assistant professor in the Department of Social Welfare at National Chung Cheng University.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath