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.
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
As an American living in Taiwan, I have to confess how impressed I have been over the years by the Chinese Communist Party’s wholehearted embrace of high-speed rail and electric vehicles, and this at a time when my own democratic country has chosen a leader openly committed to doing everything in his power to put obstacles in the way of sustainable energy across the board — and democracy to boot. It really does make me wonder: “Are those of us right who hold that democracy is the right way to go?” Has Taiwan made the wrong choice? Many in China obviously
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
RSS