Is bigger better?
A recent editorial (Editorial, Feb. 14, page 8) criticized certain methods the government is adopting in an effort to increase the birthrate in response to the supposed threat of a declining population and an aging society.
It is astonishing that few have bothered to question the premise on which this change has been made, namely that society needs more people, especially in Taiwan, a country with the world’s second-highest population density.
Furthermore, neither the editorial, the government nor the pundits mention anything but the hypothetical negative consequences of a declining population and aging demographic structure. What about the positive effects of reducing pressure on the environment and smaller class sizes in schools, to name only two, or the numerous and serious negatives that come hand in hand with an increased birthrate?
While the current government policies of honeymoon vouchers, encouraging soap operas, slogan contests and so on are faintly ridiculous, they also miss an excellent opportunity to address serious flaws in the governments premise: quantity over quality.
By increasing the birthrate to cater for an aging population, there is a need to increase the birthrate again to cater for that aging generation and then again for the next, as people live longer and longer.
Raising the birthrate is a “Band-Aid solution,” which the editorial criticized. Does it make sense to devote all the additional resources needed for education, housing and social services for these babies when those same resources could much more efficiently be applied directly to caring for our elders?
Regarding the proposal for “generous and long-term” financial incentives to increase the birthrate, it is useful to take a look at Japan and South Korea’s recent efforts on this front.
Financial incentives were not convincing enough when couples and individuals lacked sufficient money for themselves in an increasingly expensive world, nevermind bringing up a child.
Furthermore, women now marry later, giving priority to career opportunities and social mobility over reproduction and raising children.
A simple review of the literature on academic research into Taiwan’s declining birthrate supports these assertions, yet the editorial and government policy seem intent on ignoring such considerations, preferring instead to take the expedient course of appearing to be “doing something,” but basically wasting taxpayer’s money.
In summary, before we truly accept the assertion that we need more young people to support an aging and decreasing population in order to avoid economic catastrophe, let’s first look at whether the “catastrophe” is simply hyperbole.
For such an important issue, the government should reach out with an open mind and seek input from the public as well as the experiences of other countries to see whether there might be more sustainable and long-term ways to support the non-working population. For starters, we could look at ways to encourage an increase in savings rates, a rethinking of public spending and careful planning for a better social security system.
EMILY WHEWELL
Taipei
From the Iran war and nuclear weapons to tariffs and artificial intelligence, the agenda for this week’s Beijing summit between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is packed. Xi would almost certainly bring up Taiwan, if only to demonstrate his inflexibility on the matter. However, no one needs to meet with Xi face-to-face to understand his stance. A visit to the National Museum of China in Beijing — in particular, the “Road to Rejuvenation” exhibition, which chronicles the rise and rule of the Chinese Communist Party — might be even more revealing. Xi took the members
Taiwan’s higher education system is facing an existential crisis. As the demographic drop-off continues to empty classrooms, universities across the island are locked in a desperate battle for survival, international student recruitment and crucial Ministry of Education funding. To win this battle, institutions have turned to what seems like an objective measure of quality: global university rankings. Unfortunately, this chase is a costly illusion, and taxpayers are footing the bill. In the past few years, the goalposts have shifted from pure research output to “sustainability” and “societal impact,” largely driven by commercial metrics such as the UK-based Times Higher Education (THE) Impact
The inter-Korean relationship, long defined by national division, offers the clearest mirror within East Asia for cross-strait relations. Yet even there, reunification language is breaking down. The South Korean government disclosed on Wednesday last week that North Korea’s constitutional revision in March had deleted references to reunification and added a territorial clause defining its border with South Korea. South Korea is also seriously debating whether national reunification with North Korea is still necessary. On April 27, South Korean President Lee Jae-myung marked the eighth anniversary of the Panmunjom Declaration, the 2018 inter-Korean agreement in which the two Koreas pledged to
I wrote this before US President Donald Trump embarked on his uneventful state visit to China on Thursday. So, I shall confine my observations to the joint US-Philippine military exercise of April 20 through May 8, known collectively as “Balikatan 2026.” This year’s Balikatan was notable for its “firsts.” First, it was conducted primarily with Taiwan in mind, not the Philippines or even the South China Sea. It also showed that in the Pacific, America’s alliance network is still robust. Allies are enthusiastic about America’s renewed leadership in the region. Nine decades ago, in 1936, America had neither military strength
RSS