Taiwan’s birth rate is dropping like a stone, and is now the lowest in the world. If nothing is done, the population will age and the long-term consequences would cause drastic national problems. The Ministry of the Interior has announced a competition to come up with a slogan that will encourage people to have children. It has caused quite a stir, but most people are joking about it rather than making serious suggestions.
Many of the slogans suggested by Internet users are ridiculing the idea of slogan-induced birth rates. Anyone who believes a NT$1 million (US$31,500) reward will produce a slogan that will make people want to have children just by hearing it, and that a single slogan can reverse a major social trend, is being a bit too simplistic.
Government agencies have already come up with innumerable policies — birth subsidies, educational allowances and pregnancy and maternity leave — to encourage people to have children, but Taiwanese birth rates still remain the world’s lowest. These policies have been ineffective because the government has not always implemented them, while industry has not given its full support and the general public has not fully accepted them.
If we look at the government’s implementation of the maternity leave policy as an example, business has not cooperated even though the government issued a legal order. Pregnant workers do not trust that they can return to their jobs after going on maternity leave. The result is that the law looked good, but is rarely applied. When even policy and legal decisions are useless, what good will a slogan do?
The population issue is a serious problem, but the ministry’s slogan concept will remain a quaint news report. The focus should instead be on the fact that low birth rates are a general trend in the post-industrial world. European countries, for example, have many policies to promote childbirth, but birth rates remain low. The results of Taiwan’s family planning may have surpassed those of other countries in the past, but given that the problem of low birthrates has been developing for years, it should have been easy to foresee that subsidies would be necessary to promote population growth.
The problem is not one of slogans, and the results of preferential policies have been limited. Falling population numbers have already become an unstoppable trend, and so it becomes necessary to find the real causes behind it. This is more important than any slogan.
In modern society both husband and wife must work, bringing in two salaries to pay the cost of bringing up children, educating them and paying for the family’s medical bills, often across at least three generations. The childcare system is insufficient at best and nonexistent or unrealistically expensive at worst. Many companies do not accept maternity leave. The economy is sluggish. Unemployment figures, housing prices and divorce rates are high. The natural environment is deteriorating at an alarming rate with no indication that anything will be done about it. The public has no enthusiasm for the country’s future. With so many problems in need of a solution, it is only natural that people think twice before having children.
The ministry’s approach to the low birth rate issue is a direct copy of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) rule by propaganda and slogan.
The authorities are avoiding the real issues and hope to divert the focus with slick advertising and cute slogans. They are doing nothing to facilitate a real solution, while the public once again sees through it all to the government’s “impotence.”
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers