Is tourism Taiwan's savior?
With all the talk about a weaker Taiwan economy, I can understand why the Taiwan government is looking at several alternative ways to boost the economy.
Tourism looks like a good proposition, especially in a country in which it is not yet well developed.
If tourism is not well planned and controlled, however, it will probably do more harm than good.
Tourism, especially seasonal tourism, often puts tremendous pressure on local infrastructure, creating increased demand in terms of, for example, sewage, water, garbage and roads.
As with natural areas, cultural areas also have limits to the amount of human activity they can sustain before decay and degradation starts.
These limits can only be determined by an intensive scientific study on the proposed area of tourist development. Furthermore, if you want to attract international tourists, the development of a sound local tourist industry is crucial. A local industry test drives any attraction is a barometer for the success of a project.
In order to create a strong tourist industry two very important factors should be taken into consideration. Firstly does the population have enough excess capital to allow it to travel? In the case of Taiwan I believe that this shouldn't be a problem. It's the second very important requirement, however, that might keep tourism from blooming in Taiwan: the population must have enough free time.
In a country where the average employee only gets seven days paid leave a year (in their first year) there is no time for relaxing. If the government wants its tourist initiative to succeed it should increase the number of paid vacation days available to Taiwanese, even if only to 10 or 15 days annually.
The success of any long-term economic planning depends on the state of the environment . We cannot afford to ignore the environment for the sake of possible short-term economic benefits. Maybe we are already paying the price for the environmental degradation of the past decades. It's not just an assessment of the nation's capacity to sustain a tourist industry that is needed but maybe also a change in labor structures, with the emphasis more on quality of life and not so much on standard of living.
Cobus Olivier
Chungli, Taoyuan
Parent power to the rescue
The article "English instruction becoming polarized" (Oct 17, page 8) highlights very clearly some of the problems Taiwanese schoolchildren face with English.
With so many children learning English at kindergarten or even earlier, it presents a challenge for primary schools to teach half the class their ABCs, when the other half are already far past that.
The latest textbooks mentioned in the article compound that problem. Everybody should know that a student should learn the basics before he tackles Shakespeare. Everybody should know that a baby has to walk before he can run. Yet most of the new textbooks I've seen seem to have adopted a liberal mentality where instead of teaching "walk" the baby is commanded to "run, RUN ... JUMP! ... YAY! SKI DOWN THE MOUNTAIN!"
Perhaps it's a symptom of modern life, this demand for instant results, instant credit, instant divorce etc. Or the publisher's desire for instant profits ? where advice comes not from experienced teachers but from marketing specialists.
But the real test is in the classroom, and kids' opinions of such books are summed up by how fast they trash them. Cute graphics are no replacement for a sensible learning curve.
It's no wonder some give up. And frankly, it's no wonder too that many classes degenerate into behavior control sessions, where instead of learning English they're learning the limits of the teacher's patience.
Of course it falls on parents' shoulders to pick up the pieces, and it's commendable that so many do spend the time and money so their children can advance. But it costs a lot of taxpayers' money to maintain a public education system.
It's high time more parents supported their local parent associations and campaigned for some constructive reforms for the benefit of all.
In a democracy, parents do have a right to demand a decent education for their children.
This is a democracy, isn't it?
Graeme Keon
Taipei
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS