Questions of economy
As a student of National Taiwan University, I am embarrassed that the institution employs economics professors as naive as Lu Hsin-chang (盧信昌), who claimed the following in a recent article: “The trade system is capable of dealing with the short-term impact caused by climate change. Unless world population growth skyrockets, agricultural trade is expected to be healthy and prices will remain stable” (“The nation’s agricultural policy needs overhauling,” June 8, page 8).
However, this is not true for the short term and even less so for the long term. Lu still seems to think that markets can regulate everything when it has become increasingly clear that we need better government regulation and investment concerning everything from food safety and security to environmental protection.
Just a quick read of Wednesday’s Taipei Times would have set Lu straight.
The UN reports that food speculators have greatly influenced food prices during the past few years and will continue to do so unless regulated by the world’s governments (“Speculators pushing up food prices: UN,” June 8, page 6). Food speculation by corporations and the wealthy explains the short-term price hikes which make food unaffordable to the poorest. Much worse is that food prices can only go up in the long term. More people want to eat meat-based diets, while water supplies are drying up and climate change creates unpredictable weather patterns that drive up food prices worldwide (“Warming planet puts additional strains on food supply chain,” June 8, page 9).
Again, the solution does not lie in promoting the “capable” trade system (aka the free market), but in governments investing more in a new “green revolution” to deal with the problems caused by climate change and water scarcity. Naturally, greenhouse gases need to be cut worldwide, and Taiwan is still one of the worst offenders.
If these examples do not make the case for more active government oversight, the latest food scares surely do (“Global food chain emphasizes profit more than health,” June 8, page 9 and “Food scare presents test for public,” June 8, page 8). And that is all in one day’s reading. Seems like somebody did not do their assignment.
Let’s hope students will one day be taught by economics professors who also read about environmental issues instead of blindly believing in the so-called wisdom of the free market.
FLORA FAUN
Taipei
Easing the pain?
Proponents of the death penalty say that it is necessary because it helps the families of the victims feel a sense of justice, thus alleviating the pain and suffering of losing a loved one to crime.
With the recent news of the wrongful execution of air force serviceman Chiang Kuo-ching (江國慶), I have been thinking about this a great deal.
How much did the execution of Chiang alleviate the pain and suffering of the raped and murdered girl’s family?
Very little I suspect.
But how much has the knowledge that an innocent man was murdered to give them this slight solace increased the family’s pain and suffering?
A great deal I expect.
BILL MCGREGOR
Fengyuan
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS