The three typhoons that recently hit Taiwan in quick succession sent food prices soaring to stubbornly high levels, but government efforts to determine if prices are being manipulated and track possible gougers have proven ineffective.
Premier Lin Chuan (林全) wants to track down people suspected of manipulating food prices, and prosecutors and police nationwide have been scrambling to inspect food markets and supermarkets for signs that prices are being artificially inflated and find those responsible.
Typhoons interrupt normal supply and demand. Fluctuating food prices are a given. Should unscrupulous resellers conspire to artificially inflate prices, the sky is the limit.
There is no easy solution. Food distribution is complex, and certainly more complicated than office-bound authorities can reasonably be expected to unravel. The government can send police to markets to keep an eye on prices, but how exactly are they supposed to do that?
If police officers do not know the typical prices of vegetables, they will certainly understand the ins and outs of supply and demand, or whether the prices being asked are reasonable, or indeed whether there has been illegal price manipulation.
Lin’s policy has turned out to be a lot of noise with little to show for it, except to force profiteers into hiding until the storm blows over. The failure to actually nab any profiteers has set the government up for ridicule.
To muddy the waters further, few things in Taiwan are untainted by politics. No sooner had the policy of going after suspected manipulators been announced than there was media speculation that it was all about bringing down former Yunlin County commissioner Chang Jung-wei (張榮味), a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) member who is chairman of Taipei Agricultural Products Marketing Corp, the nation’s largest agricultural products distributor.
Political conspiracy theories such as this are of little help in stabilizing food prices. While the corporation controls the vegetable and fruit situation in Taipei, it does not have major influence in the nation as a whole. The idea that the government would topple Chang to stabilize food prices is far-fetched.
However, if the Taipei City Government cannot deploy farming experts to sort the situation out and the central government sends its own personnel, then this will give rise to such conspiracy theories.
It is undeniable that the distribution process is not entirely above board. Fair Trade Commission Chairman Wu Shiow-ming (吳秀明) has conceded that collusion between auctioneers and market manipulators cannot be ruled out.
The idea of unscrupulous elements working to manipulate food prices is not new, but we have seen precious little evidence that the government is actually looking into monopolization of the market.
Lin’s policy is just a repeat of former premier Hau Pei-tsun’s (郝柏村) efforts 20 years ago. It certainly would not be favored by any economist worth their salt.
This is more about political show. The government should work to release supplies held in cold storage onto the market, or increase food imports so that prices can stabilize and the gap between demand and supply can be brought to a more manageable size. This would reduce the profit margins of the wholesalers and discourage their disruptive behavior.
The government’s approach is extending the fluctuation in food prices. It is little wonder that some people have accused it of incompetence. This farce should be brought to an end; the government has to stabilize the supply, make it easier for farmers to replant their crops, remove obstacles to distribution, and turn its attention to solving the root causes of the annual problem.
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
History might remember 2026, not 2022, as the year artificial intelligence (AI) truly changed everything. ChatGPT’s launch was a product moment. What is happening now is an anthropological moment: AI is no longer merely answering questions. It is now taking initiative and learning from others to get things done, behaving less like software and more like a colleague. The economic consequence is the rise of the one-person company — a structure anticipated in the 2024 book The Choices Amid Great Changes, which I coauthored. The real target of AI is not labor. It is hierarchy. When AI sharply reduces the cost
US President Donald Trump recently repeated his claim that “Taiwan stole America’s chip industry,” reigniting public debate on the issue. As a former Taiwanese minister of economic affairs and an entrepreneur deeply involved in semiconductor supply chain development, I feel a responsibility to clarify this misunderstanding. From the perspective of global industrial evolution and the economic principle of comparative advantage, such a statement appears overly simplistic and risks obscuring the essence of the issue. The rise of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry was not built on “replacing America,” but rather emerged as a result of countries pursuing different development paths within the
RSS