社會觀察 . 獨立評論 . 多元觀點 . 公共書寫 . 世代翻轉

  • Home
  • English
  • 評論
  • 民意
  • 時事
  • 生活
  • 國際
  • 歷史
  • 世代
  • 吶喊廣場
  • 轉載
  • 投稿須知

Can Taiwan Handle a Trump-like Tycoon as President?

  • English Article
  • 時事
  • 民意

It’s true that Gou is still an unknown political entity, and – if elected – he may end up shocking the pundits and fighting China until his last breath in the name of Taiwan’s independence.

Terry Gou, a straight-talking businessman with a mercurial temper, no political experience, a disdain for the government of his country, and a vast personal fortune at his disposal is running for president. Sound familiar?

Gou and Trump. Image source: Yahoo News
Gou and Trump. Image source: Yahoo News

Just like current US prez Donald Trump – whose successful 2016 run is said to be his inspiration for entering the political fray – Gou is one the wealthiest people in his nation, Taiwan, with his net worth estimated at US$8 billion. Putting aside the issue of where exactly Gou’s loyalties lie (his company, Foxconn, is an integral part of the economic landscape of China, employing over a million workers there, while he himself has met with the upper echelons of the CCP, including Xi Jinping), a more pertinent question is whether or not Taiwan really needs a businessman running the show.

While some voters dissatisfied with the current political situation there – like many who voted for Trump in 2016 – may jump at the chance of electing a businessman to shake up the system, if we’ve learned anything from Trump’s term in office, it’s that electing a headstrong billionaire with no experience will certainly shake things up, but not necessarily in a good way …

So far, the US mogul’s presidency has been characterized by unprecedented chaos and confusion, as Trump “has the record for White House staff turnover, for cabinet turnover and … for the highest turnover within a single department,” according to scholar Kathryn Dunn Tenpas. Pick up a newspaper on any given day, and you’re sure to read about the latest scandal or controversy unfolding in the administration. So while it may sound like a good idea to elect a political outsider to drain ‘the swap’, the reality is much more complex than that. In the case of Trump, at least, it’s seems as though his hardnosed corporate leadership style has not translated all that well into the government realm, resulting in serious instability at the top.

Additionally – if Trump’s actions are in any way indicative – a profit-first (principles-second) CEO-type leader may not always obey the ethical rules and guidelines of an advanced democracy, which exist to keep the various governing powers in balance. To mention only a few examples: Trump’s dubious firing of the Director of the FBI, James Comey, when he wasn’t happy with the direction the Russia investigation against his campaign was taking; his continual lambasting of the press when they produce stories he doesn’t like; and his administration’s blanket refusal to cooperate with the investigations of the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives, whose traditional function is to provide oversight of the executive branch. Basically, the attitude of a hardcore businessman towards to the well-honed machinery of government seems to be, “It’s my way or the highway, bub,” and – regardless of which side of the political spectrum you’re on – that can’t be a good thing for democracy.

Finally, just like Trump, who refused to fully separate himself from his business operations upon assuming the presidency, it’s not clear Gou would completely distance himself from Foxconn if elected. In the words of Taiwan political expert Lev Nachman, “In the same way Trump only marginally divested from his assets when he became president, I would not expect Gou to truly move away from his [company]”. Obviously, this creates a major conflict of interest, as the person in charge may be tempted to put his own good above that of the whole. To take just one example of this from Trump’s presidency, many people wonder if there’s a simple – and disturbing – reason he didn’t take a hard line against the Saudi government after the brutal murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Could it be because, as he’s said in the past, “I get along great with all of [the Saudis]. They buy apartments from me. They spend $40 million, $50 million. Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much.”? Essentially, if you have a wealthy tycoon in office, it may be hard for him to remove himself from his business interests, as politics and commerce are often intertwined. As Nachman says, “I would be greatly concerned with Gou’s ability to separate his business from his political endeavors. Given Foxconn’s position within the Chinese economy and Gou’s political ideals, I’m not sure he even can or wants to.”

It’s true that Gou is still an unknown political entity, and – if elected – he may end up shocking the pundits and fighting China until his last breath in the name of Taiwan’s independence. But then again, Trump was an unknown entity in 2016, and although he claimed to be a populist, so far he’s: (1) signed a tax bill that benefits corporations and upper-income earners over others; (2) obsessively attempted to repeal Obamacare, which mainly aids the poor and uninsured; and (3) led an ongoing campaign of deregulation that’s left more US workers vulnerable to exploitation and injury. But maybe that just proves the truth of the old adage that ‘a leopard never changes its spots’?

Gou, like Trump, is known for attacking the press and charging it with disseminating ‘fake news’, as well as having a harsh personal style – one that recently led him to walk out of a public forum when a DPP lawmaker didn’t look at him while he was speaking. He also seems to have a penchant for controversial quotes, as he once stated that “the harem should not meddle in politics” in reference to his wife’s objections to him running for office (the obvious implication being that a president isn’t so much a servant of the people as an emperor), and has dropped the bombshell that “democracy alone does not provide food to eat.” While this latter statement may technically be true, every voter in Taiwan should be asking themselves: ‘But then what exactly is the alternative?’

Author / Peter K. Thompson

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • More
  • Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn

Related

川普 政治 總統大選 郭台銘
2019-05-16 Peter K. Thompson

Post navigation

破解柯文哲的兩岸話術 → ← 民調與初選,鹿死誰手還不一定

Related Posts

2026 WBC台灣失分率飲恨:為何贏了韓國卻進不了八強?深度剖析「晚接午」賽程與投手斷層

2026年WBC預賽,台灣隊最痛的不是輸日本被扣倒,而是明明在關鍵戰延長賽5比4擊敗南韓,最後仍因失分率出局。根據賽制,C組出現台灣、南韓、澳洲同為2勝2敗且彼此互咬(對戰同為1勝1敗),因此改用「每防守出局數失分(runs allowed per defensive out)」判定晉級者,南韓在此項指標勝出,台灣被淘汰。 這個結果看似殘酷,但它其實把台灣隊的兩個結構問題一次放大:第一是短賽制下「一場大比分」對失分率的不可逆傷害;第二是「晚接午」賽程在投手調度與體能恢復上對深度不足的球隊特別致命。 先談失分率。台灣在小組前段吞下日本戰13比0扣倒,使得整體失分在計算上被拉高門檻。短期賽制不是看你有沒有爆發一場,而是看你能不能把失分壓到最乾淨。澳洲首戰完封台灣0比3、台灣對捷克14比0扣倒與對韓國延長賽勝利,都證明台灣不是「被打爆」的弱隊,但失分率制度不看情緒與故事,它只看你讓對手得了多少分、你防守了多少個出局數。當三隊互咬時,這種制度會把「早期的失血」變成最後的判決。 再談「晚接午」。PTT棒球板有網友統計本屆預賽「晚間19:00出賽、隔天中午12:00再打」的10次案例,戰績竟是1勝9敗,唯一拿到勝利的就是台灣(晚打日本、隔天扣倒捷克)。這不是玄學,而是恢復窗口被壓縮後,牛棚與板凳深度不足的球隊更容易崩盤;該統計也被媒體整理轉載,成為賽後最大爭議點之一。 但把責任全推給賽程,會錯過真正需要檢討的核心:台灣投手深度仍有斷層。先發端,台灣能找到王牌去扛關鍵局數;問題是當賽程壓縮、比賽進入中後段,能否穩定把「第5到第8局」吃完並維持低失分。對頂級國際賽而言,輸球常不是輸在先發,而是輸在中繼承接與壓制力的落差;一旦牛棚無法把「可控的比賽」守成,失分率制度就會讓你連翻身空間都沒有。 球迷的期待也該跟著升級:不是繼續找戰犯,而是把這次出局當作一次體檢。台灣已證明自己能在高壓下逆轉情勢、能贏韓國,但要進八強,必須讓投手養成與職棒、業餘接軌更精準,尤其是高強度連戰下的中繼投手庫、球速與控球兼具的後援輪值、以及更科學化的恢復與投球負荷管理。這些才是下一屆要把「贏球」轉成「晉級」的關鍵。 作者:新公民議會編輯小組

台股312狂瀉532點失守34000點:台積電下挫55元,中東戰雲是否戳破AI泡沫?

3月12日台股開低走低,終場大跌532點,收在33,581點,失守34,000點關卡;台積電收在1,885元,下跌55元,單一檔就拖累大盤約441點,成為這波回檔的最大壓力源。中央社指出,盤面同時出現電子與多數傳產走弱,塑膠、玻璃等類股跌幅更深,市場焦點回到中東緊張升高與油價波動對全球風險偏好的衝擊。 這次下跌最典型的特徵,是「風險規避」而非「基本面崩壞」。金管會當日出面安撫,強調3月2日至11日台股集中市場跌幅約3.67%,仍介於亞洲主要股市之間,且3月日均成交量增加、上市櫃公司累計營收年增逾兩成,基本面仍穩健。 換句話說,市場不是突然不相信企業獲利,而是對外部風險重新定價。 那外部風險是什麼?核心是「能源與通膨路徑被改寫」。路透同日報導指出,伊朗升高對波灣航運與能源基礎設施的攻擊,油價明顯上漲,市場擔心荷姆茲海峽供應中斷擴大,通膨壓力回升。 一旦油價推升通膨預期,降息時程就可能延後,資金成本上升會先打到高本益比族群。這也是為什麼台積電即便前兩月營收數據漂亮,股價仍可能在「利率假設轉向」時被迫回吐溢價。 因此,「中東戰雲戳破AI泡沫」這句話只對一半。AI並非需求突然消失,而是市場估值的支撐條件變嚴格:從「只看成長」變成「成長必須抵得過資金成本與風險溢價」。當投資人開始用通膨視角看市場,就會出現三個現象:第一,指數大跌但跌點主要由權值股貢獻(今天就是台積電一檔占了大盤跌點大部分);第二,傳產與高成本產業更弱,因油價與運費會直接侵蝕利潤;第三,資金轉向相對抗跌的族群(如部分航運、水泥等在當日反而相對強)。 PTT八卦板與Stock板的「凝重」情緒,本質上反映的是同一件事:市場在問「這是回檔,還是趨勢反轉?」就目前公開資訊來看,更像是前者。AI鏈條的訂單與資本支出仍在,企業營收也未失速;但只要油價維持高位、通膨預期抬頭,台股就會進入「高波動、強分化」階段:指數看似穩,但個股強弱差距會擴大。 結論很直接:今天的下跌不是AI泡沫破裂的證據,而是全球資金在中東風險與通膨再起陰影下,對高估值資產做的估值修正。接下來真正的觀察點是油價與戰事是否進一步升級,以及台灣與全球科技股在接下來一至兩個月的營收與展望,能否抵消通膨造成的折現壓力。 作者:新公民議會編輯小組

蘇巧慧政見:新北市長選戰的「幼老福利」起手式,能否轉成治理方案?

蘇巧慧投入 2026 新北市長選戰後,最先拋出的不是交通或大型建設,而是以「幼老」為核心的福利政見組合。她公開提出「六大福利政見」:公立國中小學生免費營養午餐、0–6歲免門診與住院部分負擔、0–6歲免費接種腸病毒與輪狀病毒疫苗、早產兒3萬元照顧津貼、65歲以上假牙補助最高5萬元、敬老卡點數提高至每月1000且全年不歸零。 這套政見的政治訊號很清楚:鎖定新北的人口結構與家庭壓力,用「可立即理解、可直接感受」的福利項目快速建立辨識度。它的優勢在於可溝通性高,能在選戰早期拉出議題主導權;但也暴露出治理層面的硬問題:財源從哪裡來、既有制度如何銜接、以及會不會變成「加碼補貼」而非「結構改革」。例如「免費午餐」牽涉中央與地方財政分工、學校供餐標準與採購治理;「0–6免部分負擔」則要面對醫療使用量上升與分級醫療可能被弱化的風險,若沒有配套,容易演變為單純擴張支出。 蘇巧慧近年在國會論述上,確實長期把「育兒與居住」綁在一起。她曾主張修訂《住宅法》,讓「育有學齡前子女且在地設籍者」納入社會住宅優先戶資格,並考慮延長承租期限以配合兒童就學需求。 這條政策線若放到新北市長選戰,可以進一步擴寫成「托育—就學—通勤—住居」的整體方案:不是只有補助,而是把家庭時間成本與居住成本一起處理。 但若只停留在「福利清單」,她仍會面臨新北政治現實:新北的施政痛點長期集中在通勤壓力、都更整合、公共托育、以及跨區資源不均。以托育來看,新北市政府主張目前公托量能居全國第一,並已形成以校舍、活動中心、社宅等空間快速布建的模式。 這意味著蘇巧慧若把「幼兒政策」當主軸,必須提出能超越現有市政成果的路徑:例如提升延托與臨托覆蓋率、改善輪班族家庭的可及性、把托育據點與捷運轉乘、社宅基地整體規劃連動,否則容易被對手反問「你要加的是哪一段、解的是哪個瓶頸」。 近期輿論也已把新北選戰拉回「可勝選性」與「結構逆風」的討論。有媒體評論提醒她可能面臨候選人對決、政黨基本盤與整體氣氛等不確定因素。 這種壓力會逼迫她把福利政見從「好感」推進到「治理可信度」:提出具體財政試算、分年期程、以及與中央政策如何對接。 總結來看,蘇巧慧目前的政見與發言策略,是用幼老福利快速卡位「生活政治」的正當性;下一步若要形成可持續的市政論述,必須把福利從單點補貼升級為制度設計,並補上新北最硬的三題:通勤、住宅、都更。她若能把「育兒—居住—交通」整合成一張可執行的治理藍圖,才有機會把選戰起手式,轉成能在新北落地的市政主張。 作者:新公民議會編輯小組

中東「斷氣」危機:美伊衝突如何成為台灣能源安全的生存測驗?

美伊衝突一旦把戰場推到荷姆茲海峽,對台灣而言就不再是「遠方戰火」,而是一次對能源系統的實戰壓力測試。路透指出,戰事爆發後,荷姆茲海峽油輪通行量在短時間內幾乎歸零;而這條狹窄水道承載全球約五分之一的原油與液化天然氣(LNG)運輸,一旦被封鎖或持續干擾,能源市場立刻出現劇烈波動。 對台灣最致命的不是油價「漲」而已,而是可能出現「運不進來」。台灣發電結構中天然氣占比高,且外部研究早已警示:台灣天然氣庫存天數大約只有 10–11 天量級,屬於臨界安全存量;只要海運受阻、船期延誤,系統就會從「價格問題」迅速變成「供應問題」。 而荷姆茲的風險不是抽象假設。路透與多家媒體在戰事進展中提到,美軍正在攻擊伊朗布雷船與相關海上能力,顯示「布雷—反布雷」已成為衝突核心之一;同時,美國海軍也向航運界表示,目前在高風險條件下難以提供護航,導致航運幾近停擺。這意味著即便盟友有意協助,護航能否落地、何時落地,都不由台灣決定。 若把「源頭打擊」的概念拆開看,台灣的脆弱點其實不在本島末端,而在三段鏈路:第一段是產氣國與液化端是否遭攻擊(例如卡達、阿聯附近設施一旦受波及);第二段是海上通行權與保險成本是否飆升;第三段是台灣港口與接收站能否持續卸收並把氣送入電廠。任何一段卡住,就會放大「短存量」的風險。 因此,台灣能源安全的策略不能只靠「臨時加價搶船」,而必須把國防思維延伸到能源供應鏈。美國國會層面已出現針對台灣能源安全的法案與倡議,例如聚焦擴大對台 LNG、強化基礎設施、確保緊急情境下能源持續供給等。這類支持固然重要,但它的效果更像「戰略保險」,無法取代台灣自身的短期調度與中期結構調整。 台灣此刻最需要的,是把「斷氣情境」當作可演練、可量化的國安情境:提高可用存量天數(不只帳面庫容,還包含卸收能力與管線瓶頸)、強化多來源長約與替代航線可行性、建立電力端燃料切換與需求管理機制,並加速儲能、電網韌性與調度自動化,讓天然氣短缺不會立刻演變成大規模停電風險。即使政府近期強調已掌握多數LNG船貨、短期不致缺氣,這種「近期可控」不等於「戰時可控」,真正要解的是系統的結構性脆弱。 結論很直接:美伊衝突把世界帶進「航道即戰線」的時代。台灣若仍用平時市場思維處理能源,只要遇到荷姆茲級別的斷鏈衝擊,就會從通膨焦慮變成生存測驗。

Recent Posts

2026 WBC台灣失分率飲恨:為何贏了韓國卻進不了八強?深度剖析「晚接午」賽程與投手斷層

2026 WBC台灣失分率飲恨:為何贏了韓國卻進不了八強?深度剖析「晚接午」賽程與投手斷層

2026年WBC預賽,台灣隊最痛的不是輸日本被扣倒,而是明明在關鍵戰延長賽5比4擊敗南韓,最後仍因失分率出局。根據賽制,C組出現台灣、南韓、澳洲同為2勝2敗且彼此互咬(對戰同為1勝1敗),因此改用「每防守出局數失分(runs allowed per defensive out)」判定晉級者,南韓在此項指標勝出,台灣被淘汰。 [...]

More Info
台股312狂瀉532點失守34000點:台積電下挫55元,中東戰雲是否戳破AI泡沫?

台股312狂瀉532點失守34000點:台積電下挫55元,中東戰雲是否戳破AI泡沫?

3月12日台股開低走低,終場大跌532點,收在33,581點,失守34,000點關卡;台積電收在1,885元,下跌55元,單一檔就拖累大盤約441點,成為這波回檔的最大壓力源。中央社指出,盤面同時出現電子與多數傳產走弱,塑膠、玻璃等類股跌幅更深,市場焦點回到中東緊張升高與油價波動對全球風險偏好的衝擊。 [...]

More Info
蘇巧慧政見:新北市長選戰的「幼老福利」起手式,能否轉成治理方案?

蘇巧慧政見:新北市長選戰的「幼老福利」起手式,能否轉成治理方案?

蘇巧慧投入 2026 新北市長選戰後,最先拋出的不是交通或大型建設,而是以「幼老」為核心的福利政見組合。她公開提出「六大福利政見」:公立國中小學生免費營養午餐、0–6歲免門診與住院部分負擔、0–6歲免費接種腸病毒與輪狀病毒疫苗、早產兒3萬元照顧津貼、65歲以上假牙補助最高5萬元、敬老卡點數提高至每月1000且全年不歸零。 [...]

More Info
中東「斷氣」危機:美伊衝突如何成為台灣能源安全的生存測驗?

中東「斷氣」危機:美伊衝突如何成為台灣能源安全的生存測驗?

美伊衝突一旦把戰場推到荷姆茲海峽,對台灣而言就不再是「遠方戰火」,而是一次對能源系統的實戰壓力測試。路透指出,戰事爆發後,荷姆茲海峽油輪通行量在短時間內幾乎歸零;而這條狹窄水道承載全球約五分之一的原油與液化天然氣(LNG)運輸,一旦被封鎖或持續干擾,能源市場立刻出現劇烈波動。 [...]

More Info

搜尋

精選文章

川習會的中美矛盾是戰略,不是貿易!

2017-04-08 韓非

八仙樂園爆炸案:缺乏常識造成的災難

2015-06-28 異想

彰化縣民輪替後的哀與愁

2016-03-06 許家瑋

新文明病:儲物症(Hoarding disorder)似正在增加

2015-04-13 楊庸一

訂閱本站

輸入你的電子郵件訂閱新文章並接收新通知。

Powered by WordPress | theme Dream Way
Powered by WordPress | theme Dream Way