Taiwan’s political and business circles are deeply intertwined, with interest exchanges between corporations and the government becoming an open secret. From land development to government procurement, many policy decisions have turned into tools for big corporations, leading to market imbalances and widening wealth gaps.

1. Elections and Corporate Sponsorship: Who Funds Politicians?

Elections require massive funding, and politicians often rely on corporate donations, repaying them with favorable policies after winning. In The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith warned that when markets are controlled by a privileged few, the economy shifts towards monopolization, leading to unfair resource distribution. Taiwan’s real estate policies illustrate this perfectly—developers heavily fund elections, ensuring lax government regulations that drive housing prices sky-high, making homeownership unattainable for young people.

2. Classic Cases of Government-Business Collusion

• Taipei Dome Scandal: Far Glory Group secured a highly profitable contract with minimal government fees, yet construction delays persisted due to lax oversight, demonstrating corporate influence over policy decisions.
• Neihu Land Zoning Changes: Certain corporations leveraged political connections to alter land-use regulations, significantly increasing property values while pricing out average citizens.
• TRA Train Procurement Case: A supplier with subpar technical qualifications won a government contract, not due to merit but because of its close ties with officials.

3. Consequences: Market Distortion and Social Inequality

Economist Mancur Olson argued that when special interest groups can manipulate policies over time, market competition is stifled, economic efficiency declines, and inequality grows. Taiwan’s economic model heavily favors large conglomerates, making it difficult for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to thrive. With stagnant wages and skyrocketing living costs, young professionals are trapped in an environment of high housing prices and long working hours.

4. The Path to Reform

The first step is transparency in political donations to prevent corporate influence on policymaking. Strengthening oversight of government contracts can help curb favoritism and corruption. Encouraging market competition will reduce monopolistic control by powerful conglomerates. If politics continues to be controlled by corporations, democracy will become a game for the few, with the general public ultimately bearing the consequences.

台灣的政商關係盤根錯節，政府決策往往服務財團利益，而非人民需求。亞當·斯密在《國富論》中提到，市場應由競爭驅動，而非權力操控，否則經濟將向壟斷傾斜，影響公平正義。

大巨蛋案是典型例子，遠雄集團以低廉條件取得合約，政府監管卻極為寬鬆，導致公共利益受損。內湖土地變更案則顯示，特定企業可透過政治影響土地用途調整，使資產價值暴漲，普通市民卻買不起房。政府標案同樣淪為利益輸送的工具，台鐵列車採購案中，技術不符標準的廠商竟得標，原因與政商關係密切相關。

公共政策若受資本控制，民主制度將逐步瓦解。經濟學家曼瑟·奧爾森指出，利益集團若能長期影響政策，市場競爭將受阻，導致經濟低效率與社會不公擴大。當政治變成生意，財團賺錢，人民卻要承擔後果。