From: kenw@austlcm.sps.mot.com 
Subject: Re: Most Ridiculous ? (Re: The Six-Year National Development Plan for Taiwan, "R.O.C")
Keywords: No 
Organization: Motorola Inc, Austin, Texas
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 22:30:15 GMT

In article <1992Apr14.191040.21216@news.iastate.edu> zzuo@iastate.edu (Zhiqi Zuo) writes:
>In article <1992Apr14.144828.21438@oakhill.sps.mot.com> kenw@austlcm.sps.mot.com writes:
>>In article <1992Apr14.005415.17863@news.iastate.edu> zzuo@iastate.edu (Zhiqi Zuo) writes:
>>>   Only presenting some words like above is not necessarily persuasive .
>>>   The "joke" can be understood after you answer me the following questions :
>>>
>>>  1. How many professors and engineerers had moved to Taiwan at the time ? How many
>>>universities were built after that ? How many excellent intellectuals left for
>>>Taiwan ?   
>>
>>
>>   You tell us. Give us names. You are the first person who mentions these question. 
>
>It is impossible to name thousands of them , and I am always poor at remembering other people's
>names .  For example , I only know a couple of American singers' names .
>
>>
>>
>>>  2. Do you think Taiwan had better basis to develope so fast ? ( In resourses and 
>>>geography , as well as background ) 
>> 
>>                                      
>>   How much do you know about Taiwan?  
>
>Very little .
>
>>
>>
>>>  3. How much of the gold reserve was transfered to Taiwan through warships ? 
>>>( I have werstern resources in hand , but I hope you can look for it by yourself 
>>>for more materials .)   
>>
>>
>>   I cannot deny there were those gold nuggets, I cannot prove it either. However,
>>based on the past of the KMT and its mentality, I doubt it has ever used those
>>gold nuggets to build Taiwan.
>
>I am not pro-KMTer . That is why I used " FACTUALLY".
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>PS : Give me explainations , not conclusions only .  Not all the conclusios come
>>>that easily . 
>>
>>
>>   Give me facts, but not conclusions. No conculusions can come from propaganda. 
>
>This "PS" has no need to be proved .
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>PS+ : You can mention the economic policy of Taiwan in late 1960s and 1970s . But
>>>if had not been for the accumulation of the precious " resources" , is it possible
>>>that Taiwan develop so fast ?  
>                      ^^^^^^^^^ = ??
>
>Germeny didn't recover a few yeras after WW I . But it did recover in a few years ,
>After WW II . Why so fast ? Ask both USA and Germany . The reasons are more than one . 
>
>>
>>      
>>   This is a classical example of people can connect un-related or loosely related
>>facts and ridiculous conclusions. 
>
>I respect your opinion . But you need to prove my points were wrong . 
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>PS++ : Please consider opposite opinions seriously , otherwise we can all be "media
>>>men".
>>
>>    We do, but you are not right. 
>
>Yes , many people , put themselves in a right position theses days , at the beginning .
>
>
> 

Mr. Zuo:

       You really surprise me by the way you answer my questions. Your three questions
sound like you know a lot of Taiwan and its economic achievement. Now you tell us you
know "very little" about Taiwan. You ask me to prove your points are wrong. You just
prove by yourself. 

       Just for your information. Only few engineering school or university was built 
after 1949. Majority of the faculty in the universities from '50 to '70 were not that
great. I am not saying that none of the professors were great, just not too many. The
universities in Taiwan did not have a significant number of good engineering 
professors until the visitng professors came.  

       Finally, I really don't understand what point(s) you try to make by mentioning
Germany. Do they have the gold nuggets from the mainland too?

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan