Lessons from Monopoly
Many people know how to play Monopoly, a multiplayer board game based on real-estate transactions.
Each player starts with the same amount of money and rolls two dice to move around the board. As they move, players buy and trade properties, and develop them with houses and hotels. When players land on others’ properties, they have to pay the owners. Players aim to drive their opponents into bankruptcy.
I played Monopoly when I was a child. It never enlightened me or gave me a lesson in life — until now, with the presidential and legislative elections tomorrow.
Former legislator Yen Kuan-heng (顏寬恒), who is seeking a legislative seat in Taichung with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), has 67 properties registered under his name. No wonder he was able to occupy and block roads for three days to aid his campaign activities.
He is indeed the “owner of the land.”
Moreover, when I learned that New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜), the KMT’s presidential candidate, owns a 103-room building and collects rent from it, I realized that he has applied the lessons of Monopoly to real life.
The goal of the game is to “monopolize” the means of making money. Hou has apparently monopolized the rental market. His running mate, Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), even defended Hou by saying that if the rent is too high, people do not have to live there.
I am not hostile toward rich people, but is it necessary for them to occupy public property and build mansions on it?
For a rich person who can collect a massive amount of rent, would it be necessary for them to evade paying taxes? Would it be impossible for them to pay taxes as an honest person would?
Hou said that everything he has done was in accordance with the letter of the law. If so, this is pure exploitation of students and wanton pursuit of huge profit. Could a person like this, without integrity or morality, defend the country and do good for the public?
I have not made a lot of money, but I pay taxes every year as an honest Taiwanese. I despise those who talk about serving the people and the country, but do the opposite.
I would never cast my ballot for candidates with such low integrity.
Lin Chun-fa
Taichung
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