Ministry of Education data provided to legislators show that more than 20,000 college and university students, including students in school-to-work programs, suspended their studies in the last fall semester. This is more than in either of the 2006 or 2007 academic years.
The main reason for this increase was that the students were forced to enter the workplace because their parents couldn’t afford their tuition fees because of recent employee and salary reductions.
A lot of people do not know that if the government were to allocate an extra NT$450 million (US$13.5 million) to education annually, it could pay the interest on student loans for 750,000 students. If the government were to spend an extra NT$2 billion, it could reduce tuition fees for private schools and more than 10,000 students would not have had to discontinue their education last semester.
This is not only a personal loss, but also damages the nation’s competitiveness.
Nor do those who choose to stay in school have an easy time of it. A recent survey conducted by 1111 Job Bank showed that the average college student works 18.3 hours a week, which is very close to their average of 18.5 hours of classes.
At a meeting of the Alliance of Angry Youths, which is composed of college students and members of the Taiwan Youth Public Affairs and other organizations, it was said that over 70 percent of college students have part-time jobs, citing a MiniJob survey announced in September.
What’s more, Taiwanese higher education has moved toward corporatization. There are nearly 1 million college and graduate students in Taiwan, 60 percent of whom go to private schools. In order to pay tuition — which is much higher than at public schools — and increased living expenses, they have to work part time, which in turn has an impact on the quality of their education.
Despite the fact that college students and their parents are under great pressure, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his administration still offered a subsidy of NT$80 billion each year to cover the 18 percent preferential interest rate on public servants’ retirement funds.
In addition, the government spent about NT$8 billion on its shortsighted scheme to issue consumer vouchers to all Taiwanese citizens regardless of whether they are rich or poor. It is uncertain if they can be used to pay for tuition fees.
The government also spent NT$57.3 billion in an attempt to expand domestic consumption, although who knows where the money went? It could well have been aimed at consolidating grassroots support used to build the museum to Ma’s honor.
Who cares about the plight of students who have had to suspend their studies? Ma certainly hasn’t initiated any measures to help out students financially. Why can’t the government spare some money to help relieve the financial difficulties of students? What future do they have?
As for the 18 percent interest rate, the government could have used that money to freeze university tuition fees for 10 years or offer subsidies to all students, so they could enjoy the same privileges as the children of military personnel, civil servants and public school teachers.
The government could also have offered full scholarships for the more than half of all college students that are not the children of military personnel, civil servants and public school teachers. These are all measures that could be carried out immediately, with immediate effects.
But will the government do it?
Tseng Tsung-kai is a member of the Alliance of Angry Youths and a graduate student at Culture University.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS