Tea Party unwelcome
The Tea Party movement has arrived in Taiwan. Although its actual strength remains shrouded in mystery, its frequency in the English-language media has markedly increased recently, with three letters in the Taipei Times just this month (June 8, 14 and 17).
Its message is hilariously simplistic: The free market is good, the government is bad. The worst thing, of course, are those nefarious taxes. So before the outraged Taiwanese populace reverts to revolutionary mode and starts stealing tea boxes from local supermarkets to dump them into Taiwan’s polluted rivers and seas, let me remind them that mixing black and white results in gray, and that, in the real world, governments and the rules they impose are a necessity for civilized societies to exist — and to run governments, you need taxes.
So the question really should be what is a reasonable level of taxation, and how should those taxes be spent?
The answer to this really depends. A few years ago, I lived in Denmark, where most citizens vote for governments that tax them at around 50 percent of their income because they know they get a good deal for it. Denmark is one of the best countries to live in because it is run by an extremely efficient and competent government.
On the other hand, I am sure Zimbabwe’s citizens are quite unhappy to pay just 5 percent taxes to keep President Robert Mugabe’s government in power. So it really depends: Governments can spend taxes wisely and effectively, or not.
In today’s interconnected world, we will need more and better rules and regulations to deal with globalized problems such as public health and environmental and food security, to name just a few. At a recent conference during Taipei Medical University’s 50th anniversary, the theme of how to establish global rules to handle these interconnected problems in a framework of global governance was fervently discussed.
Stephen Schneider, a member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, recently stated during his lecture at National Taiwan University that we urgently need some sort of competent global governance, because without reasonable and mutually agreed upon rules and taxes, such as taxes on greenhouse gases, our world will go down the drain in an anarchistic mess of governments squabbling over ever-decreasing resources and a deteriorating environment.
Absence of government rules and taxes means anarchy. Therefore, I advise all Tea Partiers to permanently move to a country like Somalia where they can enjoy the benefits of a society without governmental oversight, instead of publishing obdurate nonsense postulating an anti-government revolution in Taiwan, one of the better-run countries in the world, although still with many problems pending good governmental regulation, not least in the areas of public health and the environment.
BRUNO WALTHER
Taipei
Future of Taipei’s airports
I have two suggestions to make about Taipei’s airport situation, which was discussed in a recent editorial (“Taipei doesn’t need two airports,” June 18, page 8). First, have the government take over the old Taoyuan Air Force Base (AFB), which currently belongs to the Navy and turn it into a domestic airport for Taiwan and the base for all international flights between Taiwan and China. Having a tramway between Taoyuan International Airport and Taoyuan AFB along with a new MRT line will speed the way for travelers.
Second, turn Taipei Songshan Airport into a metropolitan park. Songshan Airport is dangerous for aircraft due to the mountainous terrain in the area and an annoyance because of the noise it creates for the city.
GENE HIRTE
Taichung
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’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,
For years, the use of insecure smart home appliances and other Internet-connected devices has resulted in personal data leaks. Many smart devices require users’ location, contact details or access to cameras and microphones to set up, which expose people’s personal information, but are unnecessary to use the product. As a result, data breaches and security incidents continue to emerge worldwide through smartphone apps, smart speakers, TVs, air fryers and robot vacuums. Last week, another major data breach was added to the list: Mars Hydro, a Chinese company that makes Internet of Things (IoT) devices such as LED grow lights and the
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