Credit cards are relatively new in Taiwan. Thus, for many -- particularly the naive and inexperienced -- the ability to buy now and pay later is an attractive temptation.
The slow but steady accumulation of debt goes unnoticed amidst the immediate gratification of being able to enjoy consumable items. Eventually, of course, reality sets in and the piper must be paid.
That same naivete or expectation that the bill can always be passed on is evident in discussions on cross-strait relations. A friend recently made the comment: "Don't you think Taiwan would be stronger if we decided to join China? Think of all the jobs in Shanghai."
But everything has its price tag. The bullying threat of China's missiles coupled with the vision of a booming Shanghai seems to be like the offer of an unlimited credit card.
But, however rich Shanghai may appear and whatever opportunities it offers, it all comes at a price.
What price? I won't discuss the obvious and real loss of the values of democracy, a free press, freedom of speech, movement and religion.
These can be summed up with the saying, "You don't know what you've got until it's gone."
No, I want to simply look at more practical matters that touch the pocket book.
I will examine three in particular: the quality of health care, the quality of the environment and the most efficient use of tax dollars.
Overall, the quality of Taiwan's health care is excellent. Over 94 percent of the population is covered under the Bureau of National Health Insurance's (BNHI) scheme and costs are minimal compared to the US and most other countries.
So inexpensive is healthcare here that many Taiwanese living in the US readily bear the cost of a flight back to Taiwan to enjoy the inexpensive hospital costs.
With a growing budget deficit, the BNHI has reduced the number of reimbursable drugs covered under its plan.
The general populace naturally complained. But in actuality the cost per doctor's visit and prescription has only gone up by about US$5.
This is not an extreme burden but think of the costs if Taiwan had to share the gargantuan burden of providing the same standard of healthcare to the 1.3 billion people in China.
Second is environment. The quality of Taiwan's environment is far below the quality of its healthcare.
There is much to be done, and the cost of that will be high. Nevertheless there have been successes such as cleaning up Ai River in Kaohsiung. Look, however, across the Strait. Many of the world's most polluted cities are in China; likewise polluted rivers are in such abundance that even good drinking water is scarce.
If Taiwan finds it hard to put its money into cleaning up its own environmental problems, do the unificationists think they will get a free pass on the burden of cleaning up pollution in China? Who will pay the bill?
A third area is the effective use of tax dollars for the greater benefit of the country. Taiwan's education system is good but in need of continuous upgrading and improvement.
The chance to attend a university is becoming more and more available. When once there were only enough openings for less than 30 percent of the students who took the Joint Entrance Exam, now over 90 percent can find places.
In China a billion people do not have access to higher education. Who will foot that bill?
As for military expenditures, in Taiwan, the pan-blue dominated legislature has consistently rejected an arms bill on the grounds that such money should be used for more appropriate local projects.
Yet these same unificationists ironically promote joining a country that spends billions on its military (including the 700-plus missiles that it aims at Taiwan). Does the pan-blue camp think that Taiwan's taxpayers will get a free pass on the burden of that military buildup? Who will pay the bill?
Does anyone care to speculate on who would be sucked dry if a small prosperous country the size of Taiwan were taken over by a giant the size of China?
In the early 1990s, it became permissible and fashionable for Taiwanese nationals to go to China to visit family members. Many who took advantage of this returned to Taiwan disillusioned. They were welcomed in China, but soon they were besieged by the grasping hands of cousins they never imagined they had, all expecting gifts.
Put simply, if Taiwan faced a takeover by China (hostile or otherwise), whose pocket do you think the over 1 billion grasping hands would be reaching into?
Businessmen of course look only at immediate personal profit, and pan-blue unificationists wonder how they can profit from the takeover. But the bills will still have to be paid. They will mount with interest and always be passed on to the common man.
Credit-card companies offer free gifts to entice customers into their money pit. Once in, the naive find they struggle to make the monthly payments. High interest rates continue and the bills keep mounting.
Jerome Keating is a Taiwan-based writer.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS