Government Subsidies for Taiwanese Businessmen Returning to Invest is Bad Economics: Short-Term Effects and Worsening Terms of Trade

This article criticizes the Tsai Ing-wen government"s highly publicized "Taiwanese businessmen returning to invest" policy. The author questions that the announced NT$700 billion investment mostly consists of domestic funds, with zero overseas funds remitted, believing that the government is creating a false illusion of economic prosperity for electoral purposes. From an economic perspective, the author points out that Taiwanese businessmen returning is primarily to avoid high tariffs in the US-China trade war, representing a temporary order transfer effect. Moving products lacking comparative advantage back to Taiwan for production not only worsens the efficiency of internal resource utilization but also continuously deteriorates Taiwan"s external terms of trade, ultimately harming people"s living standards. The author concludes that government subsidies for domestic capital investment are "bad economics."

2019年11月23日

Power Hierarchies in the 0815 Taiwan Power Failure: 'Wrong Button' but Minister Resigns? Satirizing the DPP's Punishment Logic

This article critiques the 0815 power failure in Taiwan in 2017, questioning the government's claim that a CPC employee pushed the wrong button. It satirizes the punishment results where the heads of CPC and Taipower remained safe while the Minister of Economic Affairs resigned, highlighting the absurdity of power distribution within the DPP's core.

2017年8月15日

Authoritarian Pension Slashing—Taiwan Falling Behind into Developing Nations

The article criticizes the Tsai Ing-wen government's pension reform, arguing it is authoritarian pension slashing. The backdrop is Taiwan's imminent economic bankruptcy while the government offers no effective reform solutions. The author accuses the government of deflecting toward traditional 'non-voter-base' military, civil service and teaching communities to make economic numbers look good, using 'intergenerational justice' and 'vested interests' rhetoric to legitimize unilateral contract changes. The author uses analogies to emphasize that military and civil service personnel are defending government promises and the status quo, not greed, and sarcastically highlights the absurdity of the government demanding 'sharing the burden' while stigmatizing protesters.

2016年9月3日