Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Wu Tsung-hsien (吳宗憲) said that while taking a taxi on a visit to Hualien County, the driver began to curse the Democratic Progressive Party’s cross-strait policy, saying it caused Chinese tourists to stop visiting Taiwan, hurting his business. He also said that civil servants used to visit Hualien and Taitung counties for the hot springs, but that they have stopped coming since the implementation of pension reforms.
Wu shared this anecdote to exaggerate the situation, with the aim of creating social panic to benefit specific political parties or individuals.
Pension reform has caused social conflict and civil unrest, but after much difficulty, the government has finally established a fairer system. Yet, some people want to stir up trouble in hopes of overturning the reforms.
The original pension system for the military, civil servants and teachers was indeed too high. Even with annual reductions, it is still much more favorable compared with other pensions — especially those for laborers.
To claim that these reductions make it impossible for pensioners to travel the world is hard to believe, let alone to say that they are financially unable to travel to Hualien or Taitung.
Pension reform should be approached holistically. With its limited resources, the government is tasked with looking after the entire public. The military, civil servants and teachers already claim disproportionate access to those resources, which in turn reduces the support available to other social groups.
Even if the nation’s financial resources improve, they should be used to expand overall support rather than be redirected back to specific groups. That would avoid a tilt in national development, which could give rise to social division.
It is alright for legislators to speak up for specific social groups, but deliberately exaggerating individual cases only illustrates a pattern of intolerance. A rising tide lifts all boats, but if legislators only focus on the interests of certain groups, national development as a whole would fall to pieces. When that happens, the military, civil servants and teachers would also become victims. Is that the outcome KMT legislators want?
Li Kuan-long is a university lecturer.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
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 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
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,
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
RSS