Academics are misguided
The petition initiated by Lin Thung-hong (林宗弘) and Daniel Yang (楊友仁) and publicized on Monday’s front page left me stunned with astonishment and disbelief (“Academics call on government to curb Foxconn,” June 14, page 1).
Lin and Yang accuse Foxconn of exploiting its workers in China and, in the very same breath, condemn the government in Taipei for offering subsidies and “favorable policies” for them to relocate to Taiwan — along with all of the “associated social problems.”
First, exploitation is exactly what every single company worth its stock value ought to be doing to its workers, ie, making efficient use of their freely contracted labor to produce goods highly prized — and freely so — by millions of people right across the entire planet. Such tremendous exploits are deserving of an exalted place in human history.
Second, Chinese workers are suffering because of the government in Beijing, not because of Foxconn.
Does Foxconn fiddle the currency thus wreaking havoc on market prices?
Does Foxconn forcibly prevent Chinese people from creating alternative, trustworthy currencies with which to conduct market exchange?
Does Foxconn apply the threat of imprisonment in order to extract income from the workers in a myriad forms of taxation?
Does Foxconn threaten to imprison them or even kill them and/or their families for expressing pro-freedom views?
Does Foxconn restrict their access to the Internet on pain of imprisonment?
Does Foxconn try to steal their land and wrongfully evict them from their homes?
Third, although Lin and Yang are right to criticize the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) for offering subsidies to Foxconn to relocate back to Taiwan, they do so for entirely the wrong reasons. Perhaps they could ask around and find out where Foxconn obtained its tainted Chinese subsidies in the first place — and the manner in which these funds were themselves “obtained.”
On reading such an astonishing example of moral and economic illiteracy, I reflect on the desperate need to cut the number of universities and colleges in Taiwan. In waiting for this to happen I can only hope that students will stand up and walk out of Lin and Yang’s classes if only to save their souls from any further contamination with such obdurate nonsense.
MICHAEL FAGAN
Tainan
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
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
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS