The Lunar New Year celebrations late last month witnessed the reunion of many a family, including visits to family members who are in long-term care. With the financial turmoil last year resulting in a drastic contraction in individual wealth, stability has become a key concern for laid-off workers and first-time job seekers. Pondering long-term care in Taiwan at this point in time requires some deep thought.
It is not as if Taiwan does not have a long-term care program; the problem is the system is flawed, so not everyone in need receives equal care. One also has to bear in mind that institutional care is only a small part of the long-term care system and should be seen as a last resort, rather than as hospital wards or even prisons in disguise. The nation’s long-term care system relies greatly on migrant workers. As the living standard in neighboring countries rises, this kind of long-term care system will be difficult to maintain.
It isn’t a problem of the government not paying any attention to long-term care, but rather the existing system is unable to keep up with public demand and the changing times. As long-term care is supervised by local governments, how can financially strapped counties map out an innovative, comprehensive and long-term plan?
There are two major misconceptions about about long-term care. First, many think it only concerns the elderly, whereas in truth any person of any age might require long-term care any time. Second, long-term care is not tantamount to medical treatment. If the government fails to improve the long-term care system, it will become increasingly common for emergency care beds to be occupied by chronically ill patients. Not only does this increase the burden on the National Health Insurance (NHI) program, it also leads to waste of limited resources.
A compulsory public insurance program is not necessarily the only solution to financing long-term care. If the government does decide to promote long-term care insurance, it may need to set up a separate program under the NHI. Why? There is a difference in product structure, market, target, service providers and financial management. The NHI is a short-term insurance program in which premiums paid this year do not cover next year. The entire financing system is pay-as-you-go. A long-term care insurance program, however, is an extended insurance in which premiums are calculated based on the population structure of future generations, so that it will not increase the burden on them.
Germany is often cited as an example in discussions on long-term care insurance programs. However, the Netherlands was actually the first country to implement such a program. Germany has drawn more attention given its economic status. Japan has also implemented a long-term care insurance program. In 1993, despite its financial troubles, then German chancellor Helmut Kohl resolutely pushed through his government’s plan and submitted a draft for a long-term care insurance program to the parliament. Within four months, the draft passed its third legislative reading.
When I was studying in Germany 20 years ago — the year when the Berlin Wall collapsed — I witnessed the efficiency of the German administrative system, which finished installing the system within a year.
A long-term care insurance program is not a new system and it is not as complex as the NHI. I hope the government will exercise its executive power to set up a comprehensive system for long-term care so that a benevolent system will soon be put in place to help those in need.
Chou Li-fang is dean of the Office of Research and Development at National Chengchi 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