First impression of Taiwan

Taiwan Living in Taiwan
21

Street sweepers get less than NT$10.000 a month down in Yangmei.

While Taipei is usually reasonably clean, smaller town are garbage heaps. Yangmei is downright dirty in a way I’ve yet to see any Danish city or town. Hong Kong would appear much cleaner, but I have yet so see any Asian city as clean as North European cities generally are.

The littering of Taiwanese (instant noodle bowls with soup left in them thrown out of trucks - and on my windscreen) is a Taiwanese value I can’t get. Moreover, a lot of people complain about this - and litter themselves.

22
quote:
Originally posted by Holger Nygaard: The littering of Taiwanese (instant noodle bowls with soup left in them thrown out of trucks - and on my windscreen) is a Taiwanese value I can't get. Moreover, a lot of people complain about this - and litter themselves.

Part of this may have to do with a lack of garbage cans. At least that is an observation I have made in the past. I would end up carrying a bag of garbage for half of the day for lack of a place to dump it. When you walk around Hsinchu you will notice that many people don’t have this problem, they simply through on the ground.

The first impression that I remember having was this incredible wall of heat as we left the airport. My God what a change that was from my Island home in Canada.

23

Well…and the lack of garbage cans (at least in Taipei) is because of the “pay-per-bag” garbage policy. Interesting how a policy to encourage people to throw away less actually results in more trash in the streets.

I really think that the reason Taiwan is “dirty” has a lot to do with people’s attitudes and sense of environmental responsibility. Simply put, Taiwan has come in contact with first world luxuries while maintaining a third world mindset towards the environment.

24
quote:
Originally posted by answerer: Interesting how a policy to encourage people to throw away less actually results in more trash in the streets

Eh? Have you forgotten already what the streets were like before the new garbage bag policy was implemented? More trash in the streets? What utter nonsense!

I haven’t seen any six-foot-high mounds of rotting garbage lying on street corners for quite some time now.

25

True, but the big piles of garbage stopped being a problem long before the garbage bag policy was instituted–at least in the parts of town I lived in. Running out to the garbage truck every night at 10 PM kind of sucked, but was better than the piles of trash. I think answerer was refrring to littering?

26
quote:
Originally posted by answerer: Well...and the lack of garbage cans (at least in Taipei) is because of the "pay-per-bag" garbage policy.
No, there haven't been any garbage cans before either. And there aren't any (at least usually) in any other city in Taiwan. Try to find one in Taichung... I solve this problem by heading to the next convenient store. Except it is a rather small one, they will have some kind of container outside, sometimes even a few for different kinds of garbage.
27

The dump truck was moving at aroung 60 km/h - like I was.

I remember seeing some garbage bins in Taipei. That’s the only place though.

28

I love the clean feeling of Denmark - Holgers home country - probably the best in the world.

I guess asians, in general, do not have a gene for keep the steet clean - they certainly have one for keep the home clean.

29

I thought Taiwanese are a rather dirty race … but no one tops my flatmates

30
quote:
Originally posted by NrG: I thought Taiwanese are a rather dirty race...

Making generalisations like that is what’s known as racism, pal. Besides, since when has “Taiwanese” been a race? You can edit your own postings, so I suggest you think over what you said and then change it.

31

Ahh, excuse me folks, but I have to introduce a few points of REALITY here…

  1. Taiwan is not first world
  2. Taipei IS dirty, polluted, and squalid - perhaps not quite as bad as the Bronx, or an industrial city in the former Soviet Union, but don’t kid yourself that it is clean, or that the locals in general give a flying %$#@ about either the natural, or the urban environment. It’s not contempt, just pure indifference.

My first impression was - ugly, cluttered, and not really a big city (how can it be compared to Tokyo, Shanghai or Bangkok, the entire population of Taipei would fit in 1 or 2 suburbs there). I’d add to that mono-cultural and parochial. Compare it any “hub” city like HK or Singapore, and you realise what a backwater it is. Why is it that “foreigners” still get stares and comments?

BUT, if you like the renao (sp?), the buzz, and of course the (cool and friendly) people, then you can forgive it these things and love living here regardless.

32
quote:
1. Taiwan is not first world

Really? How do you define that?

PS, you might not know Taipei’s population. It’s not that small. Only about half the size of Bangkok, so you exaggerate a bit. Anyway, due to density, Taipei ‘feels’ bigger than spread out cities like London (which feels like a huge village).

Bri

33
quote:
Originally posted by NFI: Ahh, excuse me folks, but I have to introduce a few points of REALITY here...
  1. Taiwan is not first world
  2. Taipei IS dirty, polluted, and squalid - perhaps not quite as bad as the Bronx, or an industrial city in the former Soviet Union, but don’t kid yourself that it is clean, or that the locals in general give a flying %$#@ about either the natural, or the urban environment. It’s not contempt, just pure indifference.

My first impression was - ugly, cluttered, and not really a big city (how can it be compared to Tokyo, Shanghai or Bangkok, the entire population of Taipei would fit in 1 or 2 suburbs there). I’d add to that mono-cultural and parochial. Compare it any “hub” city like HK or Singapore, and you realise what a backwater it is. Why is it that “foreigners” still get stares and comments?

BUT, if you like the renao (sp?), the buzz, and of course the (cool and friendly) people, then you can forgive it these things and love living here regardless.

Taiwan isn’t the first world? Guess you haven’t travelled much… Check out the CIA worldfactbook for some stats for an idea of what constitutes a first world industrialized nation. Taiwan IS first world by all accounts including GDP, economy, commercialization, etc… Btw, the taiwan GDP per capita is 17,400…compare that to small countries in europe like Sweden, Finland, Denmark which have GDP per capita of 20,000-25,000 and Taiwan isn’t far behind at all…

Hell, just your remarks in comparing Taipei with the former soviet union shows you haven’t been to the FSU before. Even Moscow as a whole is quite a bit more dangerous and dirty compared to Taipei. Not to mention it’s a MUCH poorer country. I don’t hear about businessmen/journalists getting wacked left and right in Taipei either…

Here are some economic stats from the CIA worldfactbook for your perusal…

Economy - overview: Taiwan has a dynamic capitalist economy with gradually decreasing guidance of investment and foreign trade by government authorities. In keeping with this trend, some large government-owned banks and industrial firms are being privatized. Real growth in GDP has averaged about 8% during the past three decades. Exports have grown even faster and have provided the primary impetus for industrialization. Inflation and unemployment are low; the trade surplus is substantial; and foreign reserves are the world’s fourth largest. Agriculture contributes 3% to GDP, down from 35% in 1952. Traditional labor-intensive industries are steadily being moved offshore and replaced with more capital- and technology-intensive industries. Taiwan has become a major investor in China, Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Vietnam. The tightening of labor markets has led to an influx of foreign workers, both legal and illegal. Because of its conservative financial approach and its entrepreneurial strengths, Taiwan suffered little compared with many of its neighbors from the Asian financial crisis in 1998-99. Growth in 2001 will depend largely on conditions in Taiwan’s export markets and may be about 5%.
GDP: purchasing power parity - $386 billion (2000 est.)
GDP - real growth rate: 6.3% (2000 est.)
GDP - per capita: purchasing power parity - $17,400 (2000 est.)
GDP - composition by sector: agriculture: 3%

industry: 33%

services: 64% (1999 est.)
Population below poverty line: 1% (1999 est.)
Household income or consumption by percentage share: lowest 10%: NA%

highest 10%: NA%
Inflation rate (consumer prices): 1.3% (2000 est.)
Labor force: 9.8 million (2000 est.)
Labor force - by occupation: services 55%, industry 37%, agriculture 8% (1999 est.)
Unemployment rate: 3% (2000 est.)
Budget: revenues: $42.74 billion

expenditures: $48.8 billion, including capital expenditures of $NA (2001 est.)
Industries: electronics, petroleum refining, chemicals, textiles, iron and steel, machinery, cement, food processing
Industrial production growth rate: 8% (2000 est.)
Electricity - production: 139.676 billion kWh (1999)
Electricity - production by source: fossil fuel: 67.26%

hydro: 6.32%

nuclear: 26.42%

other: 0% (1999)
Electricity - consumption: 129.899 billion kWh (1999)
Electricity - exports: 0 kWh (1999)
Electricity - imports: 0 kWh (1999)
Agriculture - products: rice, corn, vegetables, fruit, tea; pigs, poultry, beef, milk; fish
Exports: $148.38 billion (f.o.b., 2000)
Exports - commodities: machinery and electrical equipment 51%, metals, textiles, plastics, chemicals
Exports - partners: US 23.5%, Hong Kong 21.1%, Europe 16%, ASEAN 12.2%, Japan 11.2% (2000)
Imports: $140.01 billion (c.i.f., 2000)
Imports - commodities: machinery and electrical equipment 51%, minerals, precision instruments
Imports - partners: Japan 27.5%, US 17.9%, Europe 13.6% (2000)
Debt - external: $40 billion (2000)
Currency: new Taiwan dollar (TWD)
Currency code: TWD
Exchange rates: new Taiwan dollars per US dollar - 33.082 (yearend 2000), 31.395 (yearend 1999), 32.216 (1998), 32.052 (1997), 27.5 (1996)
Fiscal year: 1 July - 30 June (up to FY98/99); 1 July 1999 - 31 December 2000 for FY00; calendar year (after FY00)

34

ABCguy,

I thought you had left us “losers” to wallow in our own mire. Glad to see that you are still crusading on.

 <blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, Geneva">quote[quote]Taiwan isn't the first world? Guess you haven't travelled much.. Check out the CIA worldfactbook for some stats for an idea of what constitutes a first world industrialized nation. Taiwan _IS_ first world by all accounts including GDP, economy, commercialization, etc.. Btw, the taiwan GDP per capita is 17,400..compare that to small countries in europe like Sweden, Finland, Denmark which have GDP per capita of 20,000-25,000 and Taiwan isn't far behind at all..[/quote]

While the CIA Factbook would certainly list Taiwan as an Advanced Economy, they don’t make any attempt to even classify “First World” countries. This is because there is no real set, definable list of “First World” nations. The phrase isn’t definable by objective economic standrards such as per capita GDP. The whole notion of “First World” is farily dubious… The West coined terms such as “First World” and “Third World” in order to give people the sense that the Eurocentric Capitalistic West was indeed in first place on the list when it came to human progress and enlightenment. In the meantime, the poor and backward “Third World” nations were struggling hard to catch up and emulate the “First World”; so that those countries would be considered and given the assurance that they are now “civilized” (according to how the West defines the word). That Japan is always included in any sense of “First World”, shows that the term, in conventional usage, is really talking about the mature capitalist economies that together built the instituions that define today’s global capitalism.

You seem to be a well traveled guy. Do you really get a “First World” feeling when you travel around Taiwan, or even Taipei? Things have improved dramatically - and I mean that totally sincerly. But can Taiwan can really say it has attained an infrastructural sophistication comparable to what we would normally associate with “First World” standards? You compare Taiwan to Sweden - have you been there? If you have, perhaps you’ll have a sense why, by just about anyone’s standards, it is thuroughly “First World”, where Taiwan… just isn’t on the same par.

You emphasize GDP. People in nouveau riche Taiwan, too, dwell on their “wealth” - but in a sense - it’s not how much money you have in the bank that really counts, but rather how you got the money, and how you use it.

35

ABC guy

According to The Economist and the GIO, Taiwan’s per capita GDP is more like US14,000. Moreover, Sweden, Denmark and Finland have per capita GDP between 23,000 - 30,000 - almost double that of Taiwan.

Surely a well travelled guy like you knows better than to quote the CIA!

36
quote:
Originally posted by chung: ABC guy

According to The Economist and the GIO, Taiwan’s per capita GDP is more like US14,000. Moreover, Sweden, Denmark and Finland have per capita GDP between 23,000 - 30,000 - almost double that of Taiwan.

Surely a well travelled guy like you knows better than to quote the CIA!

Sorry, the CIA is still more reliable than your claptrap. Quote exact article date and issue # of where you saw those per capita GDP figures. Also the figures for scandanavia I quoted were directly from the CIA world factbook as well. No fudging on the GDP stats…and their GDP per capita wasn’t “double” as you claim. 17,400 x 2 = 34800 which would be nearly the U.S. GDP per capita. Scandanavia sure as hell isn’t pushing 34,800 per capita unless you were high on crack while reading your “articles.” It’s curious how white westerners always try to downplay asia’s advancement…very curious indeed.

Also, the smaller scandanavian countries benefit from having a flexible port and interscandanavian trade. They also each contain populations roughly 1/2 to 1/3 of Taiwans 22 million people.

Here’s a side by side comparison with Taiwan against Finland/Sweden. Read it and weep…

Economy - overview: Taiwan has a dynamic capitalist economy with gradually decreasing guidance of investment and foreign trade by government authorities. In keeping with this trend, some large government-owned banks and industrial firms are being privatized. Real growth in GDP has averaged about 8% during the past three decades. Exports have grown even faster and have provided the primary impetus for industrialization. Inflation and unemployment are low; the trade surplus is substantial; and foreign reserves are the world’s fourth largest. Agriculture contributes 3% to GDP, down from 35% in 1952. Traditional labor-intensive industries are steadily being moved offshore and replaced with more capital- and technology-intensive industries. Taiwan has become a major investor in China, Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Vietnam. The tightening of labor markets has led to an influx of foreign workers, both legal and illegal. Because of its conservative financial approach and its entrepreneurial strengths, Taiwan suffered little compared with many of its neighbors from the Asian financial crisis in 1998-99. Growth in 2001 will depend largely on conditions in Taiwan’s export markets and may be about 5%.
GDP: purchasing power parity - $386 billion (2000 est.)
GDP - real growth rate: 6.3% (2000 est.)
GDP - per capita: purchasing power parity - $17,400 (2000 est.)
GDP - composition by sector: agriculture: 3%

industry: 33%

services: 64% (1999 est.)
Population below poverty line: 1% (1999 est.)
Household income or consumption by percentage share: lowest 10%: NA%

highest 10%: NA%
Inflation rate (consumer prices): 1.3% (2000 est.)
Labor force: 9.8 million (2000 est.)
Labor force - by occupation: services 55%, industry 37%, agriculture 8% (1999 est.)
Unemployment rate: 3% (2000 est.)
Budget: revenues: $42.74 billion

expenditures: $48.8 billion, including capital expenditures of $NA (2001 est.)
Industries: electronics, petroleum refining, chemicals, textiles, iron and steel, machinery, cement, food processing
Industrial production growth rate: 8% (2000 est.)
Electricity - production: 139.676 billion kWh (1999)
Electricity - production by source: fossil fuel: 67.26%

hydro: 6.32%

nuclear: 26.42%

other: 0% (1999)
Electricity - consumption: 129.899 billion kWh (1999)
Electricity - exports: 0 kWh (1999)
Electricity - imports: 0 kWh (1999)
Agriculture - products: rice, corn, vegetables, fruit, tea; pigs, poultry, beef, milk; fish
Exports: $148.38 billion (f.o.b., 2000)
Exports - commodities: machinery and electrical equipment 51%, metals, textiles, plastics, chemicals
Exports - partners: US 23.5%, Hong Kong 21.1%, Europe 16%, ASEAN 12.2%, Japan 11.2% (2000)
Imports: $140.01 billion (c.i.f., 2000)
Imports - commodities: machinery and electrical equipment 51%, minerals, precision instruments
Imports - partners: Japan 27.5%, US 17.9%, Europe 13.6% (2000)
Debt - external: $40 billion (2000)
Currency: new Taiwan dollar (TWD)
Currency code: TWD
Exchange rates: new Taiwan dollars per US dollar - 33.082 (yearend 2000), 31.395 (yearend 1999), 32.216 (1998), 32.052 (1997), 27.5 (1996)
Fiscal year: 1 July - 30 June (up to FY98/99); 1 July 1999 - 31 December 2000 for FY00; calendar year (after FY00)

==================================================

FINLAND

Economy - overview: Finland has a highly industrialized, largely free-market economy, with per capita output roughly that of the UK, France, Germany, and Italy. Its key economic sector is manufacturing - principally the wood, metals, engineering, telecommunications, and electronics industries. Trade is important, with exports equaling more than one-third of GDP. Except for timber and several minerals, Finland depends on imports of raw materials, energy, and some components for manufactured goods. Because of the climate, agricultural development is limited to maintaining self-sufficiency in basic products. Forestry, an important export earner, provides a secondary occupation for the rural population. Rapidly increasing integration with Western Europe - Finland was one of the 11 countries joining the euro monetary system (EMU) on 1 January 1999 - will dominate the economic picture over the next several years. Growth in 2001 will be bolstered by strong private consumption, yet may be 1 or 2 points lower than in 2000, largely because of a weakening in export demand.
GDP: purchasing power parity - $118.3 billion (2000 est.)
GDP - real growth rate: 5.6% (2000 est.)
GDP - per capita: purchasing power parity - $22,900 (2000 est.)
GDP - composition by sector: agriculture: 3.5%

industry: 29%

services: 67.5% (1999)
Population below poverty line: NA%
Household income or consumption by percentage share: lowest 10%: 4.2%

highest 10%: 21.6% (1991)
Inflation rate (consumer prices): 3.4% (2000 est.)
Labor force: 2.6 million (2000 est.)
Labor force - by occupation: public services 32%, industry 22%, commerce 14%, finance, insurance, and business services 10%, agriculture and forestry 8%, transport and communications 8%, construction 6%
Unemployment rate: 9.8% (2000 est.)
Budget: revenues: $36.1 billion

expenditures: $31 billion, including capital expenditures of $NA (2000 est.)
Industries: metal products, shipbuilding, pulp and paper, copper refining, foodstuffs, chemicals, textiles, clothing
Industrial production growth rate: 7.5% (2000)
Electricity - production: 75.792 billion kWh (1999)
Electricity - production by source: fossil fuel: 41.88%

hydro: 16.77%

nuclear: 28.82%

other: 12.53% (1999)
Electricity - consumption: 81.611 billion kWh (1999)
Electricity - exports: 232 million kWh (1999)
Electricity - imports: 11.356 billion kWh (1999)
Agriculture - products: cereals, sugar beets, potatoes; dairy cattle; fish
Exports: $44.4 billion (f.o.b., 2000)
Exports - commodities: machinery and equipment, chemicals, metals; timber, paper, pulp
Exports - partners: EU 58% (Germany 13%, Sweden 10%, UK 9%, France 5%, Netherlands 4%), US 8%, Russia, Japan (1999)
Imports: $32.7 billion (f.o.b., 2000)
Imports - commodities: foodstuffs, petroleum and petroleum products, chemicals, transport equipment, iron and steel, machinery, textile yarn and fabrics, grains
Imports - partners: EU 60% (Germany 15%, Sweden 11%, UK 7%), US 8%, Russia 7%, Japan 6% (1999)
Debt - external: $30 billion (December 1993)
Economic aid - donor: ODA, $379 million (1997)
Currency: markka (FIM); euro (EUR)

note: on 1 January 1999, the EU introduced the euro as a common currency that is now being used by financial institutions in Finland at a fixed rate of 5.94573 markkaa per euro and will replace the local currency for all transactions in 2002
Currency code: FIM; EUR
Exchange rates: euros per US dollar - 1.0659 (January 2001), 1.0854 (2000), 0.9386 (1999); markkaa per US dollar - 5.3441 (1998), 5.1914 (1997), 4.5936 (1996)
Fiscal year: calendar year

==================================================
SWEDEN
Economy - overview: Aided by peace and neutrality for the whole twentieth century, Sweden has achieved an enviable standard of living under a mixed system of high-tech capitalism and extensive welfare benefits. It has a modern distribution system, excellent internal and external communications, and a skilled labor force. Timber, hydropower, and iron ore constitute the resource base of an economy heavily oriented toward foreign trade. Privately owned firms account for about 90% of industrial output, of which the engineering sector accounts for 50% of output and exports. Agriculture accounts for only 2% of GDP and 2% of the jobs. In recent years, however, this extraordinarily favorable picture has been somewhat clouded by budgetary difficulties, high unemployment, and a gradual loss of competitiveness in international markets. Sweden has harmonized its economic policies with those of the EU, which it joined at the start of 1995. GDP growth is forecast for 4% in 2001.
GDP: purchasing power parity - $197 billion (2000 est.)
GDP - real growth rate: 4.3% (2000 est.)
GDP - per capita: purchasing power parity - $22,200 (2000 est.)
GDP - composition by sector: agriculture: 2.2%

industry: 27.9%

services: 69.9% (1999)
Population below poverty line: NA%
Household income or consumption by percentage share: lowest 10%: 3.7%

highest 10%: 20.1% (1992)
Inflation rate (consumer prices): 1.2% (2000 est.)
Labor force: 4.4 million (2000 est.)
Labor force - by occupation: agriculture 2%, industry 24%, services 74% (2000 est.)
Unemployment rate: 6% (2000 est.)
Budget: revenues: $133 billion

expenditures: $125.2 billion, including capital expenditures of $NA (2000 est.)
Industries: iron and steel, precision equipment (bearings, radio and telephone parts, armaments), wood pulp and paper products, processed foods, motor vehicles
Industrial production growth rate: 7% (2000 est.)
Electricity - production: 146.633 billion kWh (1999)
Electricity - production by source: fossil fuel: 5.53%

hydro: 47.24%

nuclear: 45.42%

other: 1.81% (1999)
Electricity - consumption: 128.819 billion kWh (1999)
Electricity - exports: 15.9 billion kWh (1999)
Electricity - imports: 8.35 billion kWh (1999)
Agriculture - products: grains, sugar beets, potatoes; meat, milk
Exports: $95.5 billion (f.o.b., 2000)
Exports - commodities: machinery 35%, motor vehicles, paper products, pulp and wood, iron and steel products, chemicals
Exports - partners: EU 55% (Germany 11%, UK 10%, Denmark 6%, Finland 5%, France 5%), US 9%, Norway 8% (1999)
Imports: $80 billion (f.o.b., 2000)
Imports - commodities: machinery, petroleum and petroleum products, chemicals, motor vehicles, iron and steel; foodstuffs, clothing
Imports - partners: EU 67% (Germany 18%, UK 10%, Denmark 7%, France 6%), Norway 8%, US 6% (1999)
Debt - external: $66.5 billion (1994)
Economic aid - donor: ODA, $1.7 billion (1997)
Currency: Swedish krona (SEK)
Currency code: SEK
Exchange rates: Swedish kronor per US dollar - 9.4669 (January 2001), 9.1622 (2000), 8.2624 (1999), 7.9499 (1998), 7.6349 (1997), 6.7060 (1996)
Fiscal year: calendar year
Sweden Communications Top of Page
Telephones - main lines in use: 6.017 million (December 1998)
Telephones - mobile cellular: 3.835 million (October 1998)
Telephone system: general assessment: excellent domestic and international facilities; automatic system

domestic: coaxial and multiconductor cables carry most of the voice traffic; parallel microwave radio relay systems carry some additional telephone channels

international: 5 submarine coaxial cables; satellite earth stations - 1 Intelsat (Atlantic Ocean), 1 Eutelsat, and 1 Inmarsat (Atlantic and Indian Ocean regions); note - Sweden shares the Inmarsat earth station with the other Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, and Norway)
Radio broadcast stations: AM 1, FM 265, shortwave 1 (1998)
Radios: 8.25 million (1997)
Television broadcast stations: 169 (plus 1,299 repeaters) (1995)
Televisions: 4.6 million (1997)
Internet country code: .se
Internet Service Providers (ISPs): 29 (2000)
Internet users: 4.5 million (2000)

=

37
quote:
Originally posted by Mwalimu: ABCguy,

You seem to be a well traveled guy. Do you really get a “First World” feeling when you travel around Taiwan, or even Taipei? Things have improved dramatically - and I mean that totally sincerly. But can Taiwan can really say it has attained an infrastructural sophistication comparable to what we would normally associate with “First World” standards? You compare Taiwan to Sweden - have you been there? If you have, perhaps you’ll have a sense why, by just about anyone’s standards, it is thuroughly “First World”, where Taiwan… just isn’t on the same par.

You emphasize GDP. People in nouveau riche Taiwan, too, dwell on their “wealth” - but in a sense - it’s not how much money you have in the bank that really counts, but rather how you got the money, and how you use it.

You have some well thought out salient points for your definition of “first world.” However, there are varying degrees of the term “first world” as you implicated in your reply. First world doesn’t necessarily mean it has to contain infrastracture on par with every western nation. I can name quite a few western european nations that have serious problems with corruption, stagnant economy, imploding population growth…but does this detract from it being first world? Not really…Taiwan is doing comparably well against most asian AND european countries. It’s by no means top tier but the majority of the people are at least enjoying a standard of living that you would equate with at least the top 10% of first world nations. Also, scandanavia is run off a social welfare system with extremely high taxes which Taiwan doesn’t have. Btw, I have been to Helsinki, Finland and it’s comparable with the rest of scandanavia. Yes it’s a very nice country and has that manicured garden look but unemployment is fairly high there at nearly 10%. Standard of living is good for most people but mainly because of their welfare system. Ask a rich businessman from Finland how he feels about their tax system and unemployment situation sometime…

Personally, do I get a first world feel in Taiwan? Having travelled through Europe and seen crime infested cities, corrupt government oligarchies, and an oppressed underclass…yes I have to say Taiwan is still first world. The problem is you’re probably comparing it to the U.S. standard of living where of course it will be lacking. It’s definitely not
“backwater” like the original poster I was replying to implied. Southeast Asia and the Phillipines is what you would call “backwater” but not Taiwan.

Just a side question what WOULD you call Taiwan in your opinion? It certainly wouldn’t fit the moniker of 2nd world. South America, China, and SE Asia is considered developing and “2nd” world by most standards. Africa and a good portion of the Middle East is 3rd world.

38
quote:
Originally posted by ABCguy24:

It’s curious how white westerners always try to downplay asia’s advancement…very curious indeed.

=

Curious indeed. Actually I missed the big ‘white westerners’ meeting about how to behave last month, so for the next fiscal quarter, I cannot be held responsible for what ‘the white westerner does’.

I’m very happy that is looks like you’re backing up your arguments with some sort of listed facts now, but your comment above is not quite ‘first world.’

In terms of economy, infrastructure, toys (I mean like cell phones, internet…), etc, I believe Taiwan is clearly first world. If you talk about society, it might not be completely there yet in my mind. I’d also like to say, not to make things more confusing , is that Taipei is NOT Taiwan; Taipei is vastly different from say Tainan or Nantou County (anyone who has actually lived in both places I would think would back me up on this). Not something that requires discussion per se, but just something to keep in mind.

39
quote:
Originally posted by LittleIron:

Curious indeed. Actually I missed the big ‘white westerners’ meeting about how to behave last month, so for the next fiscal quarter, I cannot be held responsible for what ‘the white westerner does’.

I’m very happy that is looks like you’re backing up your arguments with some sort of listed facts now, but your comment above is not quite ‘first world.’

In terms of economy, infrastructure, toys (I mean like cell phones, internet…), etc, I believe Taiwan is clearly first world. If you talk about society, it might not be completely there yet in my mind. I’d also like to say, not to make things more confusing , is that Taipei is NOT Taiwan; Taipei is vastly different from say Tainan or Nantou County (anyone who has actually lived in both places I would think would back me up on this). Not something that requires discussion per se, but just something to keep in mind.

What’s a “first world society” in your mind? Complete transformation into anglocized western cultural values? Wouldn’t that be the ideals of a colonialist and western hegemonist. It also reeks of a bit of bigotry against eastern societies. Hey,if you think everything is picture perfect “society” wise in the acknowledged western “first world” countries then you are looking at things through rose tinted glasses. Last time I heard poverty, crime, and other social ills are ever pervasive elements in even U.S. society. Tell me what exactly does Taiwan society “lack” in order to become “first world” in your view? Maybe complete conversion into Christianity and western colonization?

Also my economic stats weren’t just of Taipei but Taiwan as a whole. It’s a bit disingenuous for you to separate the two in that fashion.

40
quote:
Originally posted by ABCguy24:

What’s a “first world society” in your mind? Complete transformation into anglocized western cultural values? Wouldn’t that be the ideals of a colonialist and western hegemonist. It also reeks of a bit of bigotry against eastern societies. Hey,if you think everything is picture perfect “society” wise in the acknowledged western “first world” countries then you are looking at things through rose tinted glasses. Last time I heard poverty, crime, and other social ills are ever pervasive elements in even U.S. society. Tell me what exactly does Taiwan society “lack” in order to become “first world” in your view? Maybe complete conversion into Christianity and western colonization?

Also my economic stats weren’t just of Taipei but Taiwan as a whole. It’s a bit disingenous for you to separate the two in that fashion.

Geez, man, can anybody say ANYthing without you throwing a tantrum?

Look at what I wrote. Then look at what you wrote. Have I ever said, in ANY of my posts that the West doesn’t have problems? Did I say a country had to be completely assimilated by Western culture to be considered ‘first world’? Bigotry against Eastern society? Are you kidding? Christianity? I’m not even Christian. Why do you think you know me?

What’s with you? If somebody says something 1% different from you, you jump down their throat, tell them you’ll give them a bloody nose, say they said things they never did, and then call them a bigot ‘whitey’ for disagreeing with you.

You have serious, serious issues. The fact that you’re now trying to use big words doesn’t give what you’re saying any more clout; they just make you sound like you’re trying to sound adult.

The problem is that you’re extremely sensitive to racism against any Asian. A good quality. Yet where did I say anything racist? You also say the very things that make you upset in the first place; you say many racist things. Is it ok to be racist against whites then, but not other ethinicities? I’m confused. Personally, I don’t believe its right to be racist in any form.

I actually wrote a previous answer to the issue of the ‘separation’ of Taipei with other areas of Taiwan, and the meaning of ‘first world’ to me in terms of society. But then I realized I shouldn’t even bother, as you’ll never hear me. I’d be happy to discuss this issue sometime in a calm and rational manner, but it doesn’t look like you’re capable of discussion quite yet. No offense intended.

I would, however, be interested in hearing your thoughts on my original point of your comment about how ‘white westerners always…’?

(although by saying all of this, I realize I’m risking a, quote, ‘mouth full of blood and teeth’…)