Enjoy some links and stuff.
BLOGS:
- Lao Ren Cha rants about chocolate
- Taiwan AirPower on US POWs executed in Taiwan, part 3
- River tracing in Taiwan, from Neil Wade
- Are Taiwanese friendly? Some thoughts
- Some Taiwanese reporters won't serve the WantWant media monster
- David Reid on Blundell's new edited volume, Taiwan Since Martial Law
- Traveling Tamsui
- Drew's Tour of Changhua Preview
- Breastfeeding in Taiwan
- Taipei Photographers' website. Great pics.
- DPP says give Chinese students in Taiwan NHI...
- ....even the spies.
- Asia's cities: strained as they grow faster than their planners can handle
- ROC extends runway in the South China Sea
- Merrill Lynch argues that Taiwan should dismantle protections against Chinese investment. Hey Merrill Lynch, do us a favor and argue that China should cease threatening to kill Taiwanese in order to annex their island, thus complicating the trade relationship. We can't have normal trade relations until we have normal relations, period. Meanwhile WSJ correctly notes that you can sign pacts til the cows come home, but until the day China actually has something resembling rule of law, they won't count for much.
- AFP: Taiwan same sex wedding points to shift in Asia on gay rights.
- Canon opens new factory in Taiwan
- Post-PC, the computer industry struggles in Taiwan
- Taiwan receives two coastal minehunters, unglamorous but truly important vessels. You can never have enough ships like these.
- Southern reservoirs filled to overflowing thanks to incessant rain this summer, water shortage risk is low.
- More "activists" off to the Senkakus to cause trouble.
- Don't underestimate Taiwan's talent crisis, says China Times
VIDEO: Bloggingheads on South China Sea, US-China war, etc
TYPHOON: On the way this week.
_______________________
[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.
17 comments:
Thanks for the link!
It's Merrill's job to tell Taiwan how to make money. It's not Merrill's job to tell Taiwan how to survive as a de facto independent country.
Maybe the real issue here is that there is no nexus pushing for a Taiwan-independent worldview. In this regard, the DPP is fundamentally one-dimensional. I mean, the DPP has never communicated any compelling benefit for any stakeholder in Taiwan to support independence. Even a traditional supporting of TI, Japan, does not see a benefit in any shift from the status quo to formal independence. That's not indicative of some nefarious Chinese plot--that's indicative of gross incompetence from the other side.
It's Merrill's job to tell Taiwan how to make money. It's not Merrill's job to tell Taiwan how to survive as a de facto independent country.
Wow did you ever miss the point. Thanks anyway, though.
Maybe the real issue here is that there is no nexus pushing for a Taiwan-independent worldview.
No, it is for people pushing some economic idea like Merrill to stop pretending that Taiwan-China economic exchanges take place in a political vacuum.
Michael
Wow did you ever miss the point. Thanks anyway, though.
What's the point?
Point:
No, it is for people pushing some economic idea like Merrill to stop pretending that Taiwan-China economic exchanges take place in a political vacuum.
No, it is for people pushing some economic idea like Merrill to stop pretending that Taiwan-China economic exchanges take place in a political vacuum.
That doesn't seem very relevant. If you were Merrill, what would you say? Make it specific.
That doesn't seem very relevant.
LOL.
LOL.
I'm honestly curious.
1) What point should Merrill make?
2) Why is it Merrill (or any economic actor's) responsibility to make those points?
1) What point should Merrill make?
2) Why is it Merrill (or any economic actor's) responsibility to make those points?
I dunno. I guess it will have to remain a mystery to you.
For starters, Merrill could acknowledge that one can make money by pursuing more than politically harmful or unpopular decisions - such as by diversifying one's economy as opposed to concentrating it. Failure to adequately acknowledge political risk is certainly a problem for many enterprises, financial and otherwise. I am just curious as to why you can't recognize that.
Merrill Lynch argues that Taiwan should dismantle protections against Chinese investment. Hey Merrill Lynch, do us a favor and argue that China should cease threatening to kill Taiwanese in order to annex their island, thus complicating the trade relationship. We can't have normal trade relations until we have normal relations, period.
Isn't that the point? If Merrill Lynch wants Taiwan to dismantle protections, then Merrill Lynch should first address the reason those protections are needed.
I'll say it again: Merrill's responsibility is to make money for its investors. Merrill's responsibility has not, is not, and will never be to the inhabitants of Taiwan island. Hoping an entity like an investment bank somehow will care about the political survival of Taiwan is misguided.
Let me put it more bluntly: Merrill views Taiwanese barriers to trade as an impediment to its profits. But Beijing's threats against Taiwan independence do not impinge on its profits, so it frankly doesn't care. Even if the barriers to trade are there because of the threats to violence, it would much rather Taiwan just accept the threats, bend over, and carry on with business as usual, since all Merrill (or any investment house) *should* worry about are the profits of its shareholders and fiduciary stakeholders. Basically, the genius of the Chinese position isn't that they are nice or not nice to the people in Taiwan--it is that they have made an annexation of Taiwan profitable for every major Western stakeholder group. That is what most people would consider a diplomatic triumph. I have never seen any Taiwan independence supporter get anywhere close to doing that. Got it?
Basically, unless Taiwan can figure out a way to make its independence have value to global elites, then why expect global elites to ever give a shit about what flag flies over the island?
That is what most people would consider a diplomatic triumph. I have never seen any Taiwan independence supporter get anywhere close to doing that. Got it?
Had it the first time, thanks. You can stop trolling now.
>>... then why expect global elites to ever give a shit about what flag flies over the island?
Then, why do you give a shit and spend so much of your time trolling on this?
What is it in it for you?
-----
Any macroeconomic investor knows that politics is the number one factor in macroeconomic calculation.
Pay to go to school to learn. Don't ask other people to give you free education here.
Any company that ignores political risk puts its investors' assets at risk. Promoting Taiwan's dependence on China is precisely a way to increase risk for investors. This is because it renders Taiwan more vulnerable to pressure from China and more vulnerable to shocks to the Chinese economy. Since one of the first rules of investment is that risk should be diversified, Merrill Lynch is doing its clients a disservice by promoting an outcome that might increase short-term gain while increasing concentration of risk. Therefore, I return to my original comment. If Merrill Lynch wants to help its clients, Merrill Lynch should be promoting the expansion of Taiwan's trade and investment relations with the rest of the world, not the further expansion of its already outsized trade and investment relations with China.
To make a long story short, Merrill Lynch may actually be harming the ability of its clients to make money by focusing on short-term gains at the expense of long-term stability. This would be par for the course. Remember the pre-2007 days when banks told customers how much money they could make by selling derivitive-backed securities willy nilly? Short term benefit, long term gain, disastrous results.
Long-term loss rather.
Post a Comment