Governments in Taiwan have a tendency to take advantage of the disadvantaged in society. Despite paying lip service to the importance of helping the less well-off, both local and central governments tend to ignore them either in favor of corporate interests or out of a general tendency to look down on the poor.
Take the example of single and unmarried mothers. Because salaries have stagnated for more than 10 years while the cost of living has risen dramatically, growing numbers of young people find it hard to get married and raise a family. Both parents need to be working just to cover the basic costs of raising a single child. This puts pressure on any new family, and hence, divorce is on the increase.
As a result of these economic and social pressures, more of babies have been born to unmarried mothers. One might expect local governments to see this as a good thing, considering that Taiwan’s birthrate has already plummeted to one of the lowest in the world, meaning huge social problems are looming just around the corner when the population starts to fall.
Indeed, central and local governments have announced a raft of subsidies for newborns, with Hsinchu County offering a bonus of up to NT$100,000 for the birth of triplets. Although these incentives are intended to increase the birthrate, for some reason, unmarried mothers need not apply.
Local government offices say that any request for a payment relating to the birth of a newborn must be accompanied by paperwork proving the parents are married. No other requests will be considered. In other words, in the eyes of local government officials, the 7,492 babies born to unmarried mothers in 2009 are not worth spending a single dollar on. National Taiwan University professor Chen Chao-ju (陳昭如) said it was as if local governments did not consider children born to unmarried parents to be “ideal citizens,” adding that these regulations clearly violated the principle of gender equality.
Another example of the rights of the disadvantaged being trampled underfoot is the case of elderly farmers in Houlong Township (後龍), Miaoli County, who protested against a Miaoli County request to extend a deadline on the submission of an industrial park project. That’s just what elderly farmers down south need — another industrial park to pollute their land. Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) had even promised that their land would not be expropriated to build the park.
Thankfully for the farmers, the Construction and Planning Agency rejected Miaoli’s request to extend the deadline, but not before vigorous protests and not before industrial planners said they could build a somewhat smaller industrial park, which would do little to alleviate pollution.
Most of these elderly farmers that industrial planners seem to view as minor irritations to be ignored or bulldozed out of their fields to make way for huge chemical plants, own the land they occupy. They have rights that should be legally protected, and are a burden on nobody, as they mostly rely on subsistence farming. Kicking them off their land would just force them into the cities, to the houses of their grandchildren, where they would be a financial burden.
In cases too numerous to count, local governments around the nation regularly display a callous disregard for those on the bottom rung of society, or they have to be all but forced into doing their job — namely protecting the rights of the weak and vulnerable in society. If Taiwan truly aspires to serve as a beacon for human rights in the region, this has to change.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
US political scientist Francis Fukuyama, during an interview with the UK’s Times Radio, reacted to US President Donald Trump’s overturning of decades of US foreign policy by saying that “the chance for serious instability is very great.” That is something of an understatement. Fukuyama said that Trump’s apparent moves to expand US territory and that he “seems to be actively siding with” authoritarian states is concerning, not just for Europe, but also for Taiwan. He said that “if I were China I would see this as a golden opportunity” to annex Taiwan, and that every European country needs to think
For years, the use of insecure smart home appliances and other Internet-connected devices has resulted in personal data leaks. Many smart devices require users’ location, contact details or access to cameras and microphones to set up, which expose people’s personal information, but are unnecessary to use the product. As a result, data breaches and security incidents continue to emerge worldwide through smartphone apps, smart speakers, TVs, air fryers and robot vacuums. Last week, another major data breach was added to the list: Mars Hydro, a Chinese company that makes Internet of Things (IoT) devices such as LED grow lights and the
RSS