AFP reports:
Parliament's defence committee passed a resolution from the ruling Kuomintang party calling on security authorities to follow similar moves in the United States and Britain.The Taipei Times said that a TSU legislator claimed that the gov't is mulling opening up certain telecoms anyway, despite the global suspicions that Chinese telecom firms are catspaws for Chinese intelligence services.
"The National Security Bureau should work together with the Ministry of Defence and relevant units to conduct a comprehensive evaluation as to which infrastructure items should not be invested (in) by mainland companies," the resolution said.
.............
Under the new measures, Chinese investors will be allowed to buy up to 50 percent of shares in key public infrastructure including subways, light rail systems, bridges and tunnels, as well as cultural and educational facilities.
They will also be allowed to invest in conference centres, national parks, cable car systems and six other categories without restrictions, the ministry said.
At first glance it may look like Taiwan is being sold off to China in pieces, but things are not so simple. Investors are profit-oriented, and many large public infrastructure projects are money-losers. As I noted a while back, China does not invest much in the economies around it. There is some potential for Chinese influence, but more importantly, the pressure to provide subsidies so investors can get their money back will be stronger if China is backing them..... Recent major overseas investments have been to secure resources, which Taiwan is not rich in, or to purchase assets at fire sale prices in stressed economies, in Europe. Sorry, but I suspect we'll several well-publicized cases, but little serious interest, from China.
__________________________________
Daily Links
- Congressional paper Roll Call opinion piece: China threatens Taiwan's media
- Salon.com hosts pro-Beijing piece from advisor to Stonebridge, a consulting firm that does much business with China, without informing readers he works for said firm. One reason China policy is so difficult to carry out in the US is China's ownership of large chunks of our chattering classes.
- Georgia company bribed customs officials in Taiwan, allegedly, in US tax avoidance case.
- Excellent piece on how regs and rules were subverted in the case of the Central Taiwan Science Park
- Hey, remember the Lin Yi-shih case? Didn't think ya did.
- Hong Kongers unhappy that Taiwan has visa-free status in US.
- Regulations for Chinese spouses to be relaxed
- BEST COMMENT ON THE PRESIDENTIAL "DEBATE" From my friend J F: Georgetown Professor @DrMChatelain: This debate is like when I assign a paper on the Civil Rights Movement and students turn in a paper about the time they saw the movie Glory.....But see Glenn Greenwald's piece on how the two parties collude to keep the debates stupid.
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.
5 comments:
On the Science Park link:
Erlin is regarded as one of the most corrupt townships in Taiwan. It is said to be run by organized crime families. No wonder there were problems.
Local politics in Taiwan is really dirty.
>>Taiwan to be sold off to China in pieces....?<<
Taiwan has been being sold off to China in pieces by their trajan horse Ma Ying-Jeou (no question mark.)
The US has been being fooled/fueled by him (armed with the massive KMT/CCP joint lobby war chest) for quite some years now.
"But see Glenn Greenwald's piece on how the two parties collude to keep the debates stupid."
The parties definitely try to keep out the third party candidates - both from the debates and even from getting their names on the ballot. But that is not the source of the stupidity.
Despite the claim made by Greenwald, the debates are more open to spontaneity than before. He quotes some leaked rules saying, "Under this elaborate regime, the candidates 'aren't permitted to ask each other questions, propose pledges to each other, or walk outside a 'predesignated area.''" But if you watched the debates, the candidates were talking directly to each other, interrupting each other, and asking each other questions.
The source of stupidity lies in the voters they are trying to sway. Nearly everyone who regularly follows world events and politics made up their minds during the primaries. The candidates are different enough, the philosophies are different enough, and the records of each candidate are well known. As for the debates, are you going to believe what they say during the debates as opposed to their record, the record of their party (from whom their thousands of appointees will come) and what they've been saying for months on the campaign? Of course not IF you've been paying attention.
The vast majority of voters who are undecided and likely to be swayed by the debates are people who just aren't paying attention. And since they're not paying attention, they're generally uninformed and will believe anything so long as it is accompanied by the right theatrics. The same applies to campaign commercial.
American campaigns are so messed up because they target the undecided voters.
Michael, you captioned:
- - -
I think this one […] is from a private association.
- - -
Private? It says at the bottom right of that banner that it's from Yilan County Councilor Lin Yueh-hsien (林岳賢, KMT).
Tim Maddog
Post a Comment