Jeff doth winch too much
Just read your recent column ("Better to be juiced up than hard up," June 9, page 8). It is nice to see that you do not revert to the partisan politicking done by pro-blue rags.
Don't fret though; hypocrisy seems to suit most of the press correspondents on this island.
By the way, a KMT victory in 2008 would strengthen the economy and perhaps bolster the meager wages you are winching [sic] about.
Johnny replies: You imply that I'm a ... a ... press correspondent! Now really, that's just too much.
As head of research for Jones Lang LaSalle in Taiwan, I'm sure you would know a thing or two about looking up archives. Then again, you seem to have read only my last column, so maybe you don't. Here are some clues for you: Read my entries for March 10, March 31 and April 28 this year and Aug. 5 last year, then tell me what pocket dictionary you used to look up "hypocrisy."
You may not represent your company in the media, Jeff, but when you write in company time using the company e-mail address to a newspaper columnist without requesting anonymity, you may reflect what your part (at least) of the company thinks: A KMT president would be the best thing for Taiwan since Koxinga (鄭成功) plundered the hinterland.
That's fine. It wouldn't be the only one. And I've read the Jones Lang LaSalle Code of Business Ethics and there ain't nothin' that forbids you from giving support to political parties, even ones as malicious as the KMT. Hell, you can donate to them if you like.
But how can you be so naive as to think that a stronger economy and higher wages in the lower brackets are bed partners, given that the Democratic Progressive Party government and pro-KMT business interests have blocked them for many years, despite constant growth?
One thing is certain: In the current environment a KMT victory wouldn't do shit for the wages of lowly media workers, no matter who they barrack for. I can't speak for property developers/investment managers on a fat expat package.
Premier league (major league) twat you are.
I bet you will be on the first plane out when the crap hits the fan.
I have a good understanding of your type -- I lived in Taiwan for 14 years, 'til i left, voluntarily, but I was six years overdue on the visa front anyway.
Keep it up. Help them take it deeper into the swamp.
Funny how an English man banned from the country loves it more than the ones who profess to love it so.
PS: My impressions after being away for three years? Taiwan is a small province of China, only important in the eyes of those who live there 'cos they don't know how the world has changed.
Johnny replies: Taiwan misses you, Kev. But readers distraught by Mr Lax's removal should not despair, because his translations for various publications live on in his absence.
Take some advice from old Johnny, buddy. Get some therapy -- preferably Rogerian. That way, you can say and do whatever you like and you won't be challenged. Here's a sample transcript:
Kev: "All those translations, all those years I worked my arse off, all those government connections, and what happens? The Harry Hoofters declare me persona non grata. So when I think about spending six years of my life on the run in that slagheap, I want to piss in the face of the first Taiwanese tosser I see."
Rogerian therapist: "So, you'd like to piss in the face of the first Taiwanese tosser you see."
Kev: "And thinking about those ugly old expats still getting laid with all them slinky slappers makes me wanna punch the shite out of them."
Therapist: "So, you'd like to punch the, er ... `shite' ... out of them."
Kev: "Oi you twat, you making fun of how I talk?"
Therapist: "So, you're angry about me making fun of how you -- "
[Kev floors Therapist with a right hook, then starts stomping on his head.]
Kev: Sod off, you pillock! Toe-rag batty boy! Turd-burgling prat!
Therapist: "So, you're cursing me and stomping on my head."
During the US-India Strategic Partnership Forum’s third leadership summit on Aug. 31, US Deputy Secretary of State Stephen Biegun said that the US wants to partner with the other members of the Quadrilaterial Security Dialogue — Australia, India and Japan — to establish an organization similar to NATO, to “respond to ... any potential challenge from China.” He said that the US’ purpose is to work with these nations and other countries in the Indo-Pacific region to “create a critical mass around the shared values and interest of those parties,” and possibly attract more countries to establish an alliance comparable to
On August 24, 2020, the US Secretary of Defense, Mark Esper, made an important statement: “The Pentagon is Prepared for China.” Going forward, how might the Department of Defense team up with Taiwan to make itself even more prepared? No American wants to deter the next war by a paper-thin margin, and no one appreciates the value of strategic overmatch more than the war planners at the Pentagon. When the stakes are this high, you can bet they want to be super ready. In recent months, we have witnessed a veritable flood of high-level statements from US government leaders on
China has long sought shortcuts to developing semiconductor technologies and local supply chains by poaching engineers and experts from Taiwan and other nations. It is also suspected of stealing trade secrets from Taiwanese and US firms to fulfill its ambition of becoming a major player in the global semiconductor industry in the next decade. However, it takes more than just money and talent to build a semiconductor supply chain like the one which Taiwan and the US started to cultivate more than 30 years ago. Amid rising trade and technology tensions between the world’s two biggest economies, Beijing has become
With a new White House document in May — the “Strategic Approach to the People’s Republic of China” — the administration of US President Donald Trump has firmly set its hyper-competitive line to tackle geoeconomic and geostrategic rivalry, followed by several reinforcing speeches by Trump and other Cabinet-level officials. By identifying China as a near-equal rival, the strategy resonates well with the bipartisan consensus on China in today’s severely divided US. In the face of China’s rapidly growing aggression, the move is long overdue, yet relevant for the maintenance of the international “status quo.” The strategy seems to herald a new