Exploiting foreign workers
The greed of many Taiwanese involved in brokerage firms handling foreign laborers is truly sickening. Fees of up to NT$220,000 for the right to work long hours at ludicrously low salaries with minimal government protection? It adds up to hundreds of millions of NT dollars stolen from desperate workers who are trying to feed their families back home.
For processing a few papers, these firms charge exorbitant fees, which foreign laborers must work years for to pay. This means that most workers earn nothing for at least two years, despite working full time. Taiwanese should be ashamed.
One wonders if the government is in collusion with these brokerage firms. Why else would a democratic government allow such shameless exploitation of these workers?
Why are there no charitable organizations offering the same service at a small fraction of the current fees? Indonesia decided to stop sending so many healthcare workers, but instead of addressing the key issues, Taiwan is simply turning to Myanmar for more workers. Unbridled greed is evident in the vultures feeding on human misery, raking in millions of NT dollars from helpless workers.
What is next? Offering employment to the hungry in exchange for food alone? Demanding a kidney? Hopefully, Myanmar will also wake up and leave Taiwan’s caregiver workforce to collapse without any foreign laborers.
Chaim Melamed
Pingtung
Marriage not a public issue
The debate over same-sex marriage caught national media attention with large protests in Taipei both for and against the issue.
Talk of Taiwan becoming the first Asian nation to grant marriage equality for members of the LGBT community brought the conversation to kitchen tables and tea shops across the nation.
Most asked if Taiwanese could accept same-sex marriage, but it should not matter what public opinion is.
Marriage is not a public decision. The public at large has no right to insert itself into private relationship decisions. What does that mean? It means the public cannot interfere with marriage.
If the bride and groom are unemployed, uneducated and living on government assistance, they can marry.
If the husband or wife is a convicted, violent felon, they can get married.
If both the potential bride and groom have previously married and divorced a half-dozen times, they can get married.
If one or both partners is incapable of having children, they can get married.
If both can clearly consent, they can marry.
The public’s opinion on the likely success of a marriage and how that union might affect society are not factors that are considered when people marry.
So, why do people feel that religious inclinations, societal apprehensions or personal discomfort should create any impediment to another person’s freedom to live and love as their conscience and heart implores them?
What kind of over-entitled mode of thinking would prevent another person from making a meaningful life commitment because it makes them feel uncomfortable?
There is too much pain, sadness and fear in this world to add more by denying people their heart’s desire.
Also, are we not all just too damn busy to meddle in the private lives of our neighbors and countrymen and women?
Aaron Andrews
Taichung
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
RSS