HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: yu@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (meng-lin.mark.yu)
Subject: Re: Thoughts after Minister Wang requested for resignation
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:29:44 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.181313.14911@netcom.com> jch@netcom.com (Jack Hwang) writes:
>I agree your points to some extent.  Since it is an investment, the capital
>gains should pay its share of taxes.  But the reality is that people
>(ordinary people) invest in land, and they should not be the victims.

	Why are they victims?  I thought that all it says was if you
make money, pay your fair share of tax.  Correct me if I am wrong,
they still make money, don't they? To achieve some fairness,
sooner or later people have to realize that if you make money,
you pay your share of tax, whether the income is from wages, land, stock, etc.

>
>One of the problem in Wang's plan is that it does not give good protection
>for middle class.  Saying that if your parents works hard for 30 years
>and earn a house.  Then you got trouble.  If they transfer to you now,
>they got to pay the appreciation tax.  If you inherit it after they passed
>away, you pay the inheritance tax.  Either way, you may probabaly get
>nothing under the reform plan.  That is, you are like your parents 30
>years ago and you have to work hard for another 30 years and this time
>you again cannot leave your children anything.

	Just raise the inheritance tax exemptions or exempt 1 house from
estate.  It should be fairly easy technically.  BTW, US laws use similar
techniques to achieve this (though the congress is trying to take it away now.)


>Moreover, some dump heads are still crying for craps like "Appreciation
>Goes to Government"(Chan3 Gia4 Gue1 Guon1).  This is a baseless claim

I thought it is "Appreciation goes to *Public* (or society).  You can argue
whether it is practical, but it seems to me to be a fairly reasonable idea.


Meng-Lin
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: shl1@crux2.cit.cornell.edu (James T. Kirk)
Subject: Re: How to give birth to a son?
Keywords: How to give birth to a son?
Organization: Cornell Information Technologies
Date:  8 Oct 92 19:50:06 GMT

wu@uranus.cerfacs.fr (Wangnan Wu) writes:

>Hi,
>I'm just thirty-two years old and I had five daughters. I am
>eager for method to give birth to a son! Do you know any method?

>I'm looking forward to hearing from you!

What's wrong with having five daughters?  Please don't be so sexist.  Trying
to have more children would only increase the burden of the parents both
financially and emotionally.  If I were you, I would concentrate on raising
the five daughters you have instead of worrying about how to give birth to
a son.  

The supposedly "male superority" in Chinese tradition is outdated in today's 
society.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: Bush or Clinton?
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 23:31:04 GMT

In article <1992Oct10.221825.1295@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> huang@mwilliams.eche.ualberta.ca () writes:

>hankwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Henry Y. Wong) writes:

>: to sell to Taiwan if he is reelected.  How can you trust a guy who gives
>: Communist China most-favored trading status?

For me, it's not as hard as trusting someone who cheated on his wife.  And
we aren't even talking about an earth-shattering beauty like Marilyn Monroe.
>
>I just want to remind folks that Bush's VP is Dan Quayle.  And Quayle, 
>like many other conservatives in GOP, is an ardent ROC supporter. He was almost 
>successful in getting enough votes to pass his amendment to the Taiwan Relation
>Act in 1979 which would have maintained formal diplomatic relationship with
>ROC.  If Clinton were elected, then expect a Secretary of State called
>Stephen Solarz, who has not been friendly to Taiwan.

But "not been friendly to the Taiwanese government" does not translate into
"not been friendly to Taiwan."

In addition, how do you know that Solarz would probably be the Secretary of
State, anyway, if Clinton is elected?

>Revoking MFN is not going to improve the human rights condition in China.  The 
>best tool is to embarass the Communist China by recalling the US diplomats
>from Peking.  This does not cost any jobs in the US or in China.

But the CCP has proven that it is not going to be swayed by embarrassment
either.  You have to take a tougher stand.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: 129.83.161.10 (H. Chao)
Subject: Re: Bush or Clinton?
Organization: MITRE
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 14:10:17 GMT

Bush?  Clinton?  Where is Ross
Perrot?
From: ericlaw@vax.muskingum.edu (Eric Law, Geology Department)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: How to give birth to a son?
Date: 15 Oct 92 14:04:19 -0600
Organization: Muskingum College

In article <1992Oct15.000249.11639@news.columbia.edu>, cwt2@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Charles W Tang) writes:
> 
> This is rather disturbing....  Do you mean men and women SHOULD
> think and behave differently, and therefore you want to teach your
> son HOW to properly be a man?

	** Yes, they SHOULD. Otherwise, you can not tell a man
	   from a woman. 
> 
> By saying that these "manly" qualities need to be shown to your
> son suggests that these aren't something men are born with, but
> something they're taught to possess.  So how are these qualities
> "manly" in the first place?
> 
	** Good point. Here we need to know what is meant by
	   "teach". In this matter, teach means "demonstrating".
	   Many people don't like Gia3 Bao3 Yu4 in Hon2 Lou2 Mon4
	   because he is always fooling around among women so
	   he is a little bit more "momanized" 

	   In teaching your son, you need to show him what a 	
	   "fathership" should be.

	   Without this demonstration at home, your boy may learn this
	   or others from other undesirable places.

	   By the way, you touch a good point. Even without teaching
	   or demonstration, you boy is still likely to think and
	   behaive like a man in the future. That proves man is man
	   and IS DIFFERENT from a woman.

> Anyway, the point is that what's "manly" and what's not is something
> human-made.  Rules like "men should never cry" or "men shouldn't
> go into the kitchen" are totally meaningless.  Do you cook?  Do you
> find yourself less of a man now that you know how to cook?  Is this
> the kind of values you want to pass onto your children?  Hmmmmm.....

	** I cook (and cook better), I saw, I clean house, I babysit
	   etc. etc. However, I am doing it like a man not like a 
	   woman.

	** The difference between a man and a woman should be one of
	   the biggest mystery of the world. They are different, however
	   the difference are mixed, tangled and are not easy to tell.
	   Fortunately, we don't have to know the difference to be
	   different. Like you said (and I said too): man and woman are
	   born different.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: huang@mwilliams.eche.ualberta.ca ()
Subject: Re: Bush or Clinton?
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 22:18:25 GMT

hankwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Henry Y. Wong) writes:
: 
: In article <ib26641@pro-amber.cts.com> rsopicki@pro-amber.cts.com (Randy Sopicki) writes:
: I think, also, that this is just a campaign ploy from Bush.  If he can break
: his promise of "no new taxes" then he can more easily break his verbal offer
: to sell to Taiwan if he is reelected.  How can you trust a guy who gives
: Communist China most-favored trading status?

I just want to remind folks that Bush's VP is Dan Quayle.  And Quayle, 
like many other conservatives in GOP, is an ardent ROC supporter. He was almost 
successful in getting enough votes to pass his amendment to the Taiwan Relation
Act in 1979 which would have maintained formal diplomatic relationship with
ROC.  If Clinton were elected, then expect a Secretary of State called
Stephen Solarz, who has not been friendly to Taiwan.
  
Also, I still don't understand the big fuss about Bush's pledge on taxes.  
He went along with the Democrats in 1990 to raise taxes and they now turn around
and accuse him of flip-flop. 

Revoking MFN is not going to improve the human rights condition in China.  The 
best tool is to embarass the Communist China by recalling the US diplomats
from Peking.  This does not cost any jobs in the US or in China.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: ykhsu@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (yung-kao.hsu)
Subject: Re: Thoughts after Minister Wang requested for resignation
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 14:03:41 GMT

In article <5355@rosie.NeXT.COM> ccliu@amy.next.com (Chang-Chi Liu) writes:
>
>not sure what the ordinary people are.  Many Taiwanese middle class  
>citizens invest in land and apartments.  Wang's proposal, although  
>definitely welcomed by the "have not", surely irritates may small  
>landlords, not to mention the tycoons.  Wang just stepped on too many  

	I thought the essence in the proposed land reform is taxing
	"real estate transactions". If you own a place for yourslef
	to live, you definitely should welcome it since it will
	probably increase tax income to the government that she may
	not increase your property tax for the next 30 years (or you
	get your tax reduced; hey, we can dream :-) And we should also
	mention the artifically high consumer goods jacked up by the
	real estate's price.

	If you invest land to make money, you should pay fair tax on the
	profit like any other business.

>Another consideration is that taxing the rich in fact transfers some of  
>the wealth to the government.ing so, we assume that the government  
>can manage the money better or more wisely than the private citizens. Is  
>it a valid assumption?

	Other's money is easy to spend; so the assumption is valid in
	almost everywhere in the world. We have two choices here: one
	is to give money to the government and hope to control her by
	elected official, the other is just let those money fall into
	the pockets of big "business" and have no control over it.
	Granted, both choices are not desirable :-(

Yung-Kao Hsu	


Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: cwt2@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Charles W Tang)
Subject: Re: How to give birth to a son?
Reply-To: cwt2@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Charles W Tang)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 21:36:49 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.140419.3843@vax.muskingum.edu>
ericlaw@vax.muskingum.edu (Eric Law, Geology Department) writes:

>	** I cook (and cook better), I saw, I clean house, I babysit
>	   etc. etc. However, I am doing it like a man not like a 
>	   woman.

How should a man cook, saw, clean house, babysit...etc.??  How is it
different from a women doing them?  Could you tell us what's the
correct, "manly" way to perform these tasks?  You know, I could
have been cooking in a womenly fashion for all those years....

:-)

-Charles


*** Om Ma-Ni Pad-Me Hung *** | "Hey, Charles, have you been 'waiting' all
============================ |  your life?" -- Thao D. "the creature" Vo
   Charles Wei-Ting Tang     | ===========================================
cwt2@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu  | 201 W.72nd St.,#8J, NYC 10023  212/580-5609
From: mcyang@pollux.usc.edu (Bien-Chao Iunn)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Republic of Taiwan Resolution passed
Date: 7 Oct 1992 12:53:55 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: pollux.usc.edu

I read a report on last week's Independent Weekly News.  It mentioned
that the city council of Tainan just passed a resolution which
urges the central government to join the United Nations using the 
name "Republic of Taiwan".

This is an interesting story regarding that the majority of
the city council members belong to KMT and the city Tainan
one of the most important political platforms in southern
Taiwan.

Is there anybody out there can provide us more information about
this interesting development, such as the name of the person who
proposed the resolution, the reaction from local and central KMT
officials both during the discussion/debate period and after the
resolution was passed ?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: wung@puttgen.ee.gatech.edu (Peter Wung)
Subject: Re: Oct. 1 or Oct. 10, which is the more important day for China?
Reply-To: wung@puttgen.ee.gatech.edu
Organization: Sun Microsystems
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 21:34:09 GMT

In article 10018@zip.eecs.umich.edu, cyc@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes:
>|>> 	But I think the old Chiang is still to be blamed for the bad
>|>> name KMT has today.  KMT was a good party with good intension and 
>|>> has a strong intellectual following.  That is before Dr. Sun Yat Sen
>|>> passed away.  After that.  Well... it's history. 
>|>
>|>
>|>	** Is it fair to criticize emperors of Ching Dynasty being
>|>	   not democracy? It think it is not fair to judge Old Chiang
>|>	   by modern political standard either. 
>|>
>|
>|I didn't blame Old Chiang for what he has done, but I hate that he viewed
>|himself as democracy for what he has done. Every one can choose what he 
>|want to be, but he must be honest. If old Chiag can openly admit he is a 
>|dictator and an emperor. I would have nothing to say about him. But, he lied.
>|
>|>	   I would say, if it was not Old Chiang, Taiwan would not exist
>|>	   as she is today. 
>|
>|It is true that without Old Chiang, Taiwan  won't be the same as she is
>|now. But, the real question is will Taiwan be better off or worse ?
>|Two possibities, if Taiwan was ruled by Japanese after WWII, Taiwan will be
>|close to what Japan is now, or if Taiwan was governed by U.S., Taiwan will
>|close to what U.S. is now. Both possibilities are much better off than
>|what Taiwan is now.  So, what is the point to thank old Chiang ?
>|
>|Yi-Chieh


Either way, the people on Taiwan would be speaking a foreign language, 
living as second class citizens in a society where their needs are NOT 
the primary concerns of the government, and any chinese heritage that 
people on Taiwan has ever claimed would be forever lost.  The situation 
is bad enough as it is, and you want it to be even worse?

Don't forget that in either scenario, the people on Taiwan would be 
colonized.  Ansd that certainly does not sit well with me.

********************************************************************
*Peter Wung			Email:wung@ee.gatech.edu	   * 
*Electric Power Laboratory	Snail mail: 33787 Ga. Tech Station * 
*School of Electrical Engineering	    Atlanta, GA 30332      *
*Georgia Institute of Technology			    	   *
*Atlanta, Georgia						   *
*   	"Pass, Set, CRUSH!"...					   * 
*  	Well, 2 out of 3 ain't bad for a short, fat guy. 	   *
*								   *
********************************************************************

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: ychen@sp1.csrd.uiuc.edu (Yung-Chin Chen)
Subject: Re: Bush or Clinton?
Organization: /homes/ychen/.organization
	<1992Oct13.015325.20291@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>
Distribution: na
Date: 13 Oct 92 12:15:55

In article <1992Oct13.015325.20291@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> huang@mwilliams.eche.ualberta.ca () writes:

>   How about Walter Mondale?  Dan Quayle's approval rating has been consistently
>   higher than Carter's VP.  For more info, read "The Man Who Would be the 
>   President," by Bob Woodward and David Broder, published this year.  They are
>   reporters from The Washington Post.  Most idiotic?  Based on what?  Media like
>   to take his quotes out of context.  Everyone can be made a fool out of that.

Just take a look how American friends thought think Dan Quayle:

1) read rec.humor everyday to see how many jokes for Dan. I believe he
   has more than Bush and Clinton.
2) there is a PC video game, a spelling game, with Dan's name on the title.
3) When Bush fainted in Japan, see how media and American people reacted
   when it was possile that Dan had a chance to take over the White House.
4) Dan believed that there are canals in Mar and there must be Mars.
   (read from Newsweek)
5) Numerous spelling errors and fantastic ideas from Dan......

ps. IMHO, idiot is not the right word to describe him.
From: ccliu@amy.next.com (Chang-Chi Liu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Thoughts after Minister Wang requested for resignation
Date: 8 Oct 92 20:56:46 GMT

In article <BvsIAs.78D@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> jclei@sage.cc.purdue.edu  
(Jason Lei) writes:<< land reform stuff>>

I only want to point out that a society without government intervention  
tends to polarize in terms of wealth distribution. In the land issue, I am  
not sure what the ordinary people are.  Many Taiwanese middle class  
citizens invest in land and apartments.  Wang's proposal, although  
definitely welcomed by the "have not", surely irritates may small  
landlords, not to mention the tycoons.  Wang just stepped on too many  
toes, especiallly some of the very fat toes.

Another consideration is that taxing the rich in fact transfers some of  
the wealth to the government.  By doing so, we assume that the government  
can manage the money better or more wisely than the private citizens.  Is  
it a valid assumption?


                  
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li)
Subject: My opinion on Wang's land appreciation tax plan
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:08:04 GMT


From what I read about Finance Minister, Wang's new land appreciation tax 
proposal, following is my impression/opinion:

Finance Minister, Wang did not invent new land appreciation tax plan, this
plan was resulted from last year's Taiwan economic conference. During the 
conference, attendees, were made up of scholars, entrepreneurs, government 
officials, concluded that the current land appreciation tax code is unfair 
and is one of causes for the land speculation. Therefore, in the beginning 
of this year, Interior Minister, Wu worked with Wang on the new land 
appreciation tax proposal. But this plan was opposed by some members of 
provincal parliament and Legislative Yuan, so Wu backed down but Wang still 
"naively" fight for it. In the meantime, the plan was appluded by ordinary 
Taiwan people, no matter WSRs and BSRs and backed by more than five hundred 
college professors and scholars. Two main opposition groups against the plan 
are DDP and those land manipulators and their "gold cow" representatives for 
different political motivations. DPP wants to get rid of Wang to discredit 
and weaken Premier Hau's Cabinet. The land manipulators want to get rid of 
Wang to protect their hefty profits. Therefore, there were nasty attacks on 
Wang, for example, "WSR minister is robbing BSR landlords", "Wang should hold 
the responsibility if KMT loses the coming election" etc to force Wang out. 
Wang has resigned, those people can celebrate now. 

When the Legistative Yuan was occupied by so-called "old thief" now by "gold 
cow". Some people may blame KMT for this but when there is one KMTer has 
courage to clean the house sadly because of his WSR status and he was 
hand-picked by Premier Hau, just can not do the work. Some people may argue 
that Wang's plan is not feasible, but Wang has said his plan is negotiable. 
Unfortunately, different political motivations have killed the plan.

Talking about "WSR minister robbed BSR landlords". For the record, Wang also 
proposed to cancel the free-income-tax benefits for the military personnels 
(many of them are WSRs) and teachers.

DPP proposed Wang should go to Monitor Yuan. I think Wang should not go there 
if he wants to live longer, that place is full of "gold cow" too, 
Deputy-Premier of Monitor Yuan is a big land manipulator and everyone knows how 
he was elected last year. Instead, Wang should come to the US to talk to Walter
Mondale and George Bush to learn the cost to personal political career when 
raising the tax (even with good motivation).

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: chuan@stein.u.washington.edu (Chuan Lee)
Subject: Re: How to give birth to a son?
Keywords: How to give birth to a son?
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 05:39:43 GMT

In article <23582@optima.cs.arizona.edu> bsou@cs.arizona.edu (Brandon S. Ou) writes:
>In article <shl1.718573806@crux1.cit.cornell.edu> shl1@crux2.cit.cornell.edu (James T. Kirk) writes:
>
>>What's wrong with having five daughters?  Please don't be so sexist.  Trying
>>to have more children would only increase the burden of the parents both
>>financially and emotionally.  If I were you, I would concentrate on raising
>>the five daughters you have instead of worrying about how to give birth to
>>a son.  
>>The supposedly "male superority" in Chinese tradition is outdated in today's 
>>society.
>
>I think you're right.  But here's something interesting:
>You work, you sweat, you argue (with your wife?), you worry sick of them,
>you go through all the hardships to raise your daughter, and finally
>having the joy of seeing them grow up... only to give them away to 
>someone else...

Give me a break!  I just happen to know more parents living with
their daughters than with their sons.  So, let me finish your
paragraph above as, "And heartbroken to see your beloved son moving
out to live with his girl friend."

Chuan Lee
U of Washington, Seattle.
From: lmh@LCS.MIT.Edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Republic of Taiwan Resolution passed
Date: 9 Oct 92 04:25:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: luke.LMH.92Oct8232551
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science

>>>>> On 8 Oct 92 11:33:26 -0600, ericlaw@vax.muskingum.edu (Eric Law, Geology Department) said:

Eric> In article <1avf8jINN836@pollux.usc.edu>, mcyang@pollux.usc.edu (Bien-Chao Iunn) writes:
> I read a report on last week's Independent Weekly News.  It mentioned
> that the city council of Tainan just passed a resolution which
> urges the central government to join the United Nations using the 
> name "Republic of Taiwan".

Eric> 	** You read the wrong newspaper. Just like what you think
Eric> 	   about KMT's paper is, The IWN reports are SERIOUSLY biased
Eric> 	   and should not be trusted.

huh?

Could someone elaborate on that?  I can understand biases in
editorials but in factual reporting...well..I guess it can certainly
happen.  So what is exactly the resolution about?

Anyone in NCKU reading this group?

- Minghsun Liu
  lmh@MedG.LCS.MIT.Edu
  lmh@Genome.WI.Edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: dht@cs.mu.OZ.AU (Joyous Dave baby)
Subject: Re: Happy Birthday ROC
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 06:11:22 GMT

K. H. Hwang <U34654@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:

>Happy birthday Republic of China.

>I love ROC. I also love Taiwan.

>         +++++       +++++
>         +   +       +   +
>    ++++++   +++++++++   ++++++
>    +                         +
>    ++++++   +++++++++   ++++++
>         +   +       +   +
>         +++++       +++++

Happy Birthday Republic of China; hope everyone in Taiwan and
HongKong (and Chinese all around the world) are enjoying their
celebration.

10-10
10-10
10-10
10-10
10-10
10-10
10-10
10-10
10-10

Nine of them symbolizes forever-ness.

-- 
1)-----------------------Rev 6:8 "... They were given authority over a quarter
of the Earth, to kill by the sword, by famine, by plague, and wild beasts."
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: ykhsu@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (yung-kao.hsu)
Subject: Re: A Survey of Taiwan
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 12:55:54 GMT

In article <Bw3B9p.2Dv@acsu.buffalo.edu> stsai@acsu.buffalo.edu (Shuoh-Ren Tsai) writes:
>tsai@tecrus.enet.dec.com (Kuo-Yeang Tsai) writes:
> 
>>The Economist of the October 10th issue has a 18 pages special report
>>of Taiwan.
> 
>Would someone out there describe this report briefly? 18 pages are really
>too much!

	Even though I have not seen that "report", I think you may better
	prepare yourself for disappointments. Taiwan, like many countries,
	once a while would buy "commercial for their countries" into one of
	the major magazines and make them look like "reports".
	Certainly, it may be a real report.

Yung-Kao Hsu

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan