Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) in 2015 scrapped the annual Double Ninth Festival cash gift for all senior citizens, but his opponents keep trying to bring the outdated practice back. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taipei City councilors two weeks ago proposed reinstating the holiday gift, but yesterday the city council elected against doing so.
The policy, which is still in place in all other localities in Taiwan, entails giving NT$1,500 to NT$10,000 (US$47.65 and US$318), depending on age, in cash to all people older than 65 and Aborigines older than 55. This cost the Taipei City Government about NT$800 million per year. Under Ko’s revised policy, only older residents from low to lower-middle-income households receive NT$1,500 and those older than 99 receive NT$10,000.
Ko’s policy makes sense on a practical level, as free money should only be given to the needy, not indiscriminately by age. There are other ways for the nation to respect or give back to elders through various discounts, subsidies, programs and services. There is always room for improvement, but reinstating the gifts for all should not be the solution.
It seems like this topic is conveniently brought up in the run-up to elections. Ting Shou-chung (丁守中), Ko’s KMT opponent in the Taipei mayoral election in November last year, strongly emphasized that he would reinstate the cash gift to “turn Taipei into a model city of respect toward the elderly and filial piety.”
Such a “model city” should spend its time and money improving general welfare and services for its older residents; a yearly cash gift is merely a symbolic gesture that would do little to improve their conditions — especially when many people receiving the cash presumably do not need the money. The funds saved should go to improving the lives of Taipei’s senior citizens. The last thing society needs is more symbolic policies.
The majority of Ko’s constituents agree with his stance, as the results of a survey released by the Taipei Research, Development and Evaluation Commission last month showed that 57 percent of Taipei residents support the city’s current policy.
The Taipei Times criticized Ting’s campaign promise as “nothing but an attempt to bribe voters” in an editorial on Nov. 24, 2017, and with the nation looking toward next year’s elections, it is not surprising that KMT city councilors are bringing up this issue once again.
They do not seem to have any convincing arguments. For example, KMT Taipei City Councilor Wang Hsin-yi (王欣儀) said that not giving the money would make Taipei’s older residents feel like “second-class citizens,” as it is the only city in Taiwan not doing so. So the message is that just because everyone else is doing it, it is acceptable to do the wrong thing?
As Ko said, calling for the reinstatement of the cash gifts “is very effective in soliciting votes.” Allowing such issues to become part of the battleground for elections could set a dangerous precedent in which candidates resort to proposing other forms of gifts or cash to reward people for voting for them. It is lazy and shortsighted, and only serves to benefit politicians in the long run.
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