In the current discussions about pension reform, the government’s basic approach seems to be that contributions should increase, payments should be cut and the retirement age should be raised. This will probably stem the bleeding from the various national pension funds, but although raising the retirement age may help reduce payments, it will also have serious side effects that the government must consider before making a decision.
In 2011, the threshold for civil servants to qualify for monthly pension payments was raised, from the “rule of 75” system (age and years worked add up to 75) to the current “rule of 85” system. The government is now contemplating raising the requirement from 85 to 90 so that a person must have worked for 30 years to be able to retire at age 60 and receive monthly pension payments, rather than a one-time lump sum. The retirement age for labor pension eligibility is also being raised to 65 years for monthly pension payments.
With the “rule of 90” system, a retiree will receive payments for five to 10 years less than under the old system, which will reduce the government’s financial burden. Some advanced countries have adopted this system, which suggests it would be a good reform.
The side effect of raising the retirement age would be that the average age of the labor force will increase, making it more difficult for young people to enter the labor market. This will result in less mobility into and out of the labor market and a more passive work environment and labor force. The willingness to innovate and take risks will go down, and many young people will not be able to find work. Youth unemployment does not only affect the unemployed, it also affects the social dynamic and creates serious social problems.
International Labour Organization data shows that there will be more than 200 million people unemployed around the world this year and that youth unemployment makes up a big part of that figure. Data from the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) shows that, although unemployment was low last year, it is increasing among college and university graduates. This will result in a situation where older workers will have to do entry-level jobs and highly educated people will have to accept low pay.
Few new jobs have been created in Taiwan over the past dozen years and salaries continue to drop. Young people have to accept the situation. A job as a civil servant with guaranteed benefits looks safer than pursuing dreams of entrepreneurship or high pay. It avoids performance pressure, the risk of being laid off and promises a retirement without worries.
DGBAS data also shows that, due to the slow economy, the replacement of workers by technological advances and automation, foreign labor imports and the export of jobs to China, it takes university graduates an average of seven months to find a job and that unemployment among young people between the ages of 15 and 24 stands at 12.66 percent.
If hidden unemployment is added, accounting for students who have to retake their exams or people doing military service, it is easy to see that real youth unemployment must be substantially higher.
Although youth unemployment in Taiwan has not reached the 20 percent levels seen in some European countries and the US, a higher retirement age will add to these problems. Our young people will have to face an employment cliff, and one can only wonder how this generation, lost and unemployed, will be able to shoulder responsibility for the future cost of social welfare.
If the government takes a shortsighted approach and only tries to solve the current pension problems by raising the retirement age, youth unemployment will continue to grow. The government must devise complementary employment policies and invest more resources in training and nurturing a competitive work force. If it continues to simply kick the can further down the road, it will only destroy the younger generation.
Speaking at the Asia-Pacific Forward Forum in Taipei, former Singaporean minister for foreign affairs George Yeo (楊榮文) proposed a “Chinese commonwealth” as a potential framework for political integration between Taiwan and China. Yeo said the “status quo” in the Taiwan Strait is unsustainable and that Taiwan should not be “a piece on the chessboard” in a geopolitical game between China and the US. Yeo’s remark is nothing but an ill-intentioned political maneuver that is made by all pro-China politicians in Singapore. Since when does a Southeast Asian nation have the right to stick its nose in where it is not wanted
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has released a plan to economically integrate China’s Fujian Province with Taiwan’s Kinmen County, outlining a cross-strait development project based on six major themes and 21 measures. This official document by the CCP is directed toward Taiwan’s three outlying island counties: Penghu County, Lienchiang County (Matsu) and Kinmen County. The plan sets out to construct a cohabiting sphere between Kinmen and the nearby Chinese city of Xiamen, as well as between Matsu and Fuzhou. It also aims to bring together Minnanese cultural areas including Taiwan’s Penghu and China’s cities of Quanzhou and Zhangzhou for further integrated
During a recent visit to Taiwan, I encountered repeated questions about “America skepticism” among the body politic. The basic premise of the “America skepticism” theory is that Taiwan people should view the United States as an unreliable, self-interested actor who is using Taiwan for its own purposes. According to this theory, America will abandon Taiwan when its interests are advanced by doing so. At one level, such skepticism is a sign of a healthy, well-functioning democratic society that protects the right for vigorous political debate. Indeed, around the world, the people of Taiwan are far from alone in debating America’s reliability
As China’s economy was meant to drive global economic growth this year, its dramatic slowdown is sounding alarm bells across the world, with economists and experts criticizing Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) for his unwillingness or inability to respond to the nation’s myriad mounting crises. The Wall Street Journal reported that investors have been calling on Beijing to take bolder steps to boost output — especially by promoting consumer spending — but Xi has deep-rooted philosophical objections to Western-style consumption-driven growth, seeing it as wasteful and at odds with his goal of making China a world-leading industrial and technological powerhouse, and