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
Pat Gelsinger took the reins as Intel CEO three years ago with hopes of reviving the US industrial icon. He soon made a big mistake. Intel had a sweet deal going with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), the giant manufacturer of semiconductors for other companies. TSMC would make chips that Intel designed, but could not produce and was offering deep discounts to Intel, four people with knowledge of the agreement said. Instead of nurturing the relationship, Gelsinger — who hoped to restore Intel’s own manufacturing prowess — offended TSMC by calling out Taiwan’s precarious relations with China. “You don’t want all of
A chip made by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) was found on a Huawei Technologies Co artificial intelligence (AI) processor, indicating a possible breach of US export restrictions that have been in place since 2019 on sensitive tech to the Chinese firm and others. The incident has triggered significant concern in the IT industry, as it appears that proxy buyers are acting on behalf of restricted Chinese companies to bypass the US rules, which are intended to protect its national security. Canada-based research firm TechInsights conducted a die analysis of the Huawei Ascend 910B AI Trainer, releasing its findings on Oct.
In honor of President Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday, my longtime friend and colleague John Tkacik wrote an excellent op-ed reassessing Carter’s derecognition of Taipei. But I would like to add my own thoughts on this often-misunderstood president. During Carter’s single term as president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, despite numerous foreign policy and domestic challenges, he is widely recognized for brokering the historic 1978 Camp David Accords that ended the state of war between Egypt and Israel after more than three decades of hostilities. It is considered one of the most significant diplomatic achievements of the 20th century.
As the war in Burma stretches into its 76th year, China continues to play both sides. Beijing backs the junta, which seized power in the 2021 coup, while also funding some of the resistance groups fighting the regime. Some suggest that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is hedging his bets, positioning China to side with the victors regardless of the outcome. However, a more accurate explanation is that China is acting pragmatically to safeguard its investments and ensure the steady flow of natural resources and energy for its economy. China’s primary interest is stability and supporting the junta initially seemed like the best
RSS