Recent media reports that the government is planning to expand the scope of the senior citizen stipend program have initiated widespread debate. Most debates, however, focus on the sources of funds for the policy, while very few focus on the status of the policy itself. I will therefore discuss the program from a macro perspective of the whole body of welfare policies to facilitate an understanding of how to treat the stipend.
The senior citizen stipend is a social allowance and as such it is still defined as involving "regular or one-time distribution of a fixed amount of cash payments or physical objects for a defined purpose and to an approved and defined target." So social allow-ances are normally seen as universal subsidies providing services or physical objects to a defined group of people without considering their income, profession or financial assets.
From this definition we under-stand that the idea behind social allowances is to stress citizen's rights and interests, and that beneficiaries have no correspond-ing duties. They are, therefore, free and universal payments. We can thus infer that social allow-ances possess the following characteristics. First, it is a universal right and there is no need to investigate qualifications. Second, funds are provided from general tax revenues and the government burden is heavy. Third, the premise is that the allowance should guarantee the basic livelihood of citizens. Fourth, necessary administrative costs are low, but they create illusions about government finances and the level of popular acceptance is high.
Both the government and political parties must first understand and accept that implementation of the senior-citizen stipend will be a burden for the government itself. In reality, the stipend is a product of the vicious political battle between parties and its origins can be traced back to the early 1990s and the "livelihood stipend for low- and middle-income senior-citizens" idea.
This policy may appear among the government's social welfare policies for two reasons. First, the increase in senior citizens makes them a main target for political parties during elections. Second, there was considerable pressure created by the then-opposition DPP when it proposed the stipends and forced the KMT to respond by proposing its own policy.
When drafting the policy, however, the KMT also had to consider the issue of differentiating its proposal from the DPP's, causing it to make different options for low-and middle-income senior citizens its policy platform. The KMT also made an expansion of the livelihood stipend part of its campaign platform. Looking again at the current senior citizen stipend program, it seems to achieve the same ends with different means. Indeed, no one dares underestimate the effects of this policy since it affects millions of voters.
Out of concern for its own votes, each party still has to consider the future of the welfare of senior citizens from an overall point of view. We know that guarantees of economic security for senior citizens normally include social insurance, social assistance and social allowances. Taiwan's current welfare measures for senior citizens address all three of these issues. However, they are all being separately implemented. Even though there have been many plans discussing an integration of these issues, the implementation of a pension scheme is still -- despite several decades of work and a transfer of political power -- at the discussion stages.
If the government does not initiate a comprehensive discussion of the economic security of senior citizens, related problems will continuously reoccur.
Wang Shu-twu is an assistant professor in the applied sociology department at Nan Hua University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Speaking at the Copenhagen Democracy Summit on May 13, former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said that democracies must remain united and that “Taiwan’s security is essential to regional stability and to defending democratic values amid mounting authoritarianism.” Earlier that day, Tsai had met with a group of Danish parliamentarians led by Danish Parliament Speaker Pia Kjaersgaard, who has visited Taiwan many times, most recently in November last year, when she met with President William Lai (賴清德) at the Presidential Office. Kjaersgaard had told Lai: “I can assure you that ... you can count on us. You can count on our support
Denmark has consistently defended Greenland in light of US President Donald Trump’s interests and has provided unwavering support to Ukraine during its war with Russia. Denmark can be proud of its clear support for peoples’ democratic right to determine their own future. However, this democratic ideal completely falls apart when it comes to Taiwan — and it raises important questions about Denmark’s commitment to supporting democracies. Taiwan lives under daily military threats from China, which seeks to take over Taiwan, by force if necessary — an annexation that only a very small minority in Taiwan supports. Denmark has given China a
Many local news media over the past week have reported on Internet personality Holger Chen’s (陳之漢) first visit to China between Tuesday last week and yesterday, as remarks he made during a live stream have sparked wide discussions and strong criticism across the Taiwan Strait. Chen, better known as Kuan Chang (館長), is a former gang member turned fitness celebrity and businessman. He is known for his live streams, which are full of foul-mouthed and hypermasculine commentary. He had previously spoken out against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and criticized Taiwanese who “enjoy the freedom in Taiwan, but want China’s money”
A high-school student surnamed Yang (楊) gained admissions to several prestigious medical schools recently. However, when Yang shared his “learning portfolio” on social media, he was caught exaggerating and even falsifying content, and his admissions were revoked. Now he has to take the “advanced subjects test” scheduled for next month. With his outstanding performance in the general scholastic ability test (GSAT), Yang successfully gained admissions to five prestigious medical schools. However, his university dreams have now been frustrated by the “flaws” in his learning portfolio. This is a wake-up call not only for students, but also teachers. Yang did make a big