Wrong-headed measure
Responding to rising global oil prices, the Ministry of Economic Affairs on Monday started to initiate controls to mitigate rising international oil prices. Under the mechanism, CPC Corp, Taiwan will absorb part of the cost increases if oil prices reach a certain level: If the price of unleaded gasoline reaches between NT$30 and NT$32.4 per liter, CPC would shoulder 25 percent of the price increase and consumers must cover the remaining 75 percent.
If the price reaches between NT$32.5 and NT$34.9 per liter, CPC must absorb half of the increase in the fuel price, with consumers paying the other half.
If the price goes above NT$35 per liter, CPC and the government together will absorb 75 percent of the increase and the consumer will shoulder the remaining 25 percent.
However, the paradox is that although the government said it was introducing these measures to protect people’s livelihoods, by fixing gasoline prices or implementing price mitigation measures, the ministry is essentially providing subsidies for the rich.
Those who were using less gasoline are now encouraged by the subsidies to use more, while those who were not using gasoline before are incentivized to start using it.
The bigger the vehicle, the more gasoline is used by the individual or company and the cheaper the price becomes, due to economies of scale.
However, the average member of the public uses relatively little gasoline and so has no option but to shoulder the price increase. It is nothing more than exploitation by stealth: A policy that is neither just nor fair.
Conventional economic modeling shows that when gasoline prices increase, consumers will use less gasoline. However, when price mitigation measures are introduced and the government intervenes in the market, this goes against the fundamental principal of capitalism that the most economically efficient allocation of resources occurs when consumers pay the full cost of the goods that they consume.
This means that the ministry’s price mitigation measures will actually de-incentivize the use of public transport, which goes against the government’s stated objective of reducing carbon emissions and protecting the environment.
Wei Shi-chang
Yilan
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS