I had believed for some time that it was more likely than not that Ichiro Ozawa would bow out gracefully before the Lower House election. After all, the only DPJ Diet members speaking up for him were his diehard followers. Even faithful sidekick Yukio Hatoyama had been talking more like a captain going down with his ship than one who intended to bring it back to harbor. But I had forgotten what a contrarian Ozawa had always been; he’s the little boy who’ll do exactly the opposite of what you tell him to do. Now, the odds are surely better than even that he’ll do his damndest to stay the course. And what’s the reason for changing my mind? Because the DPJ put off the public opinion poll that the media had led the public to believe would—channeling Jason Todd—determine Ozawa’s fate.
The poll had already been postponed before in the wake of the indictment of Ozawa’s political aide in the Nishimatsu scandal—reasonable under the circumstances. Ozawa’s explanation this time around was essentially that all the media attention made a reliable poll all but impossible. Unfortunately for him, this all but guarantees that the media’s focus will pounce on the poll with increased fervor once the DPJ actually gets around to doing it. Trust me, someone in the DPJ is going to once again leak the event. Most important for the political game, it will help the LDP cast the Lower House election as a referendum on Ozawa.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
China’s Red Line on the Senkakus Drawn at the Hong Kong Border?
According to the Kyodo wire service, the Chinese authorities earlier this month stopped the China Diaoyutai Islands Defense Association (中国民間保釣連合会), a private organization of activists, from sailing a protest boat from Dalian to the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyutai Qundao to the non-Chinese world). According to the report, one of the activists was a “Chinese (華人)” living in Canada.
At this point, you might be thinking, there’s something funny about this story. First, Kyodo wires on China or North Korea can be a little dodgy, so ideally, you want a second source for the story. Second, Dalian is located on the Liaodong Peninsula, which is about as far away from the Senkakus as you can get in China and still have access to the sea. And that, if you look at a map, is a long, long way.
I can’t find a second source for this story, but there was an earlier, related Kyodo wire that cited a Hong Kong-headquartered Ming Pao Daily News report claiming that on January 10 Chinese authorities stopped that same China Diaoyutai Islands Defense Association from holding a conference in Changsha, the Hunan Provincial capital located hundreds of miles inland on a tributary of the Yangtze River. It seems to me that the Association is deliberately choosing locations where the authorities, not nearly as well coordinated across the vast Chinese expanse as Beijing would like, are least likely to notice.
From these two reports, as well as the Beijing silence (correct me if I’m wrong here; I’m writing from memory) on Hong Kong and Taiwanese activists attempting to land on the Senkakus, a picture emerges: It’s perfectly fine with the Chinese authorities to have people outside its jurisdiction forcibly dispute Japanese sovereignty over the islands; it’s another thing to have its own people do any freelancing, particularly with the Japanese Coast Guard now maintaining permanent vigil in the adjacent waters.
It’s the status quo Chinese leaders want to maintain; that must also be the explanation for the lack of further movement on “joint” development of the gas fields of the East China Sea.
ADD: Here’s another April 23 (22?) Kyodo story about a May 2 landing attempt. The Association will sail from Hong Kong, where the boat is registered. The crew will consist of five or six Hong Kong Chinese and four or five “Chinese (華人)” living in Canada. According to the Association, a Taiwanese organization with which it is coordinating the protest may be prevented by the Taiwanese authorities from taking similar action*.
Makes sense.
* I note that the current Taiwanese regime is very much pro-China and that the current Taiwanese President was something of a hardliner on the Senkaku issue as a legal scholar.
At this point, you might be thinking, there’s something funny about this story. First, Kyodo wires on China or North Korea can be a little dodgy, so ideally, you want a second source for the story. Second, Dalian is located on the Liaodong Peninsula, which is about as far away from the Senkakus as you can get in China and still have access to the sea. And that, if you look at a map, is a long, long way.
I can’t find a second source for this story, but there was an earlier, related Kyodo wire that cited a Hong Kong-headquartered Ming Pao Daily News report claiming that on January 10 Chinese authorities stopped that same China Diaoyutai Islands Defense Association from holding a conference in Changsha, the Hunan Provincial capital located hundreds of miles inland on a tributary of the Yangtze River. It seems to me that the Association is deliberately choosing locations where the authorities, not nearly as well coordinated across the vast Chinese expanse as Beijing would like, are least likely to notice.
From these two reports, as well as the Beijing silence (correct me if I’m wrong here; I’m writing from memory) on Hong Kong and Taiwanese activists attempting to land on the Senkakus, a picture emerges: It’s perfectly fine with the Chinese authorities to have people outside its jurisdiction forcibly dispute Japanese sovereignty over the islands; it’s another thing to have its own people do any freelancing, particularly with the Japanese Coast Guard now maintaining permanent vigil in the adjacent waters.
It’s the status quo Chinese leaders want to maintain; that must also be the explanation for the lack of further movement on “joint” development of the gas fields of the East China Sea.
ADD: Here’s another April 23 (22?) Kyodo story about a May 2 landing attempt. The Association will sail from Hong Kong, where the boat is registered. The crew will consist of five or six Hong Kong Chinese and four or five “Chinese (華人)” living in Canada. According to the Association, a Taiwanese organization with which it is coordinating the protest may be prevented by the Taiwanese authorities from taking similar action*.
Makes sense.
* I note that the current Taiwanese regime is very much pro-China and that the current Taiwanese President was something of a hardliner on the Senkaku issue as a legal scholar.
The Swine Flu Pan(dem)ic?
According to Mexican sources, as of Wednesday evening Japan Time, the number of suspected deaths from swine flu reached 149 (152?) out of 1,600 cases reported. Meanwhile, in the United States, 42 cases had been reported, only one of which required hospitalization. Other cases have been reported in Latin Ameerica, Canada, New Zealand, and Europe, most notably in Spain, but story remains the same: no deaths outside of Mexico.
You wonder if God has anything against Mexicans. It just doesn’t make sense to me. I can think of four plausible causes:
a) Serious underreporting of nonlethal cases in Mexico.
b) Poor treatment in Mexico.
c) Misattribution of deaths to swine flu in Mexico.
d) Misattribution of illnesses to swine flu outside of Mexico.
There must be other, equally sensible if less probable explanations. What do you think? In the meantime, if you are interested, read this. And this.
You wonder if God has anything against Mexicans. It just doesn’t make sense to me. I can think of four plausible causes:
a) Serious underreporting of nonlethal cases in Mexico.
b) Poor treatment in Mexico.
c) Misattribution of deaths to swine flu in Mexico.
d) Misattribution of illnesses to swine flu outside of Mexico.
There must be other, equally sensible if less probable explanations. What do you think? In the meantime, if you are interested, read this. And this.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Riding Out the Economic Storm in Singapore?
Is this guy trying to tell us that the Singaporean economy may contract by 9% in 2009, yet he doesn’t see any sign of a fall in consumption or housing demand? And the reason for this is Singapore’s public/private-sector social safety net that protects jobs and income?
There must be some truth to that idea. Social and legal norms do affect the way economies react in the face of an economic downturn. For example, it’s much easier to shed excess labor in the United States than it is in Japan; you only need to look at the statistics to see that. It’s probably the same thing in Singapore. But no visible change in consumer and household behavior? I’ll believe it when I see the numbers.
Incidentally, it’s interesting that writers tend to take a somewhat similar 5-6% (2009) downturn in the Japanese economy and criticize it for relying too much on exports. For those people, the parts of the Japanese economy that are not linked to exports are an inefficient, uncompetitive drag on the Japanese economy. Perhaps. But try telling that to Carrefour and Wal-Mart, whose forays into the Japanese retail sector have been less than a resounding success.
I’m not saying those critics are wrong. But they haven’t made their case either. I think they’re just doing a riff on a piece of conventional wisdom.
There must be some truth to that idea. Social and legal norms do affect the way economies react in the face of an economic downturn. For example, it’s much easier to shed excess labor in the United States than it is in Japan; you only need to look at the statistics to see that. It’s probably the same thing in Singapore. But no visible change in consumer and household behavior? I’ll believe it when I see the numbers.
Incidentally, it’s interesting that writers tend to take a somewhat similar 5-6% (2009) downturn in the Japanese economy and criticize it for relying too much on exports. For those people, the parts of the Japanese economy that are not linked to exports are an inefficient, uncompetitive drag on the Japanese economy. Perhaps. But try telling that to Carrefour and Wal-Mart, whose forays into the Japanese retail sector have been less than a resounding success.
I’m not saying those critics are wrong. But they haven’t made their case either. I think they’re just doing a riff on a piece of conventional wisdom.
A Couple of Notes on the Chinese Fleet Review
I forgot to mention there that a Russian ship was also present. So, if North Korea was invited, it means that every member of the Six-Party Talks except Japan was represented by one or more naval vessels. Frankly, I’m a little surprised that the conservative-nationalist media and the tabloids haven’t picked up on this yet, to the best of my knowledge.
When I said that the frequency of incidents were likely to increase, I did not imply any ill will on the part of Chinese authorities. Instead, it’s a matter of simple arithmetic. Still, China must walk softly if it wants to carry a big stick.
When I said that the frequency of incidents were likely to increase, I did not imply any ill will on the part of Chinese authorities. Instead, it’s a matter of simple arithmetic. Still, China must walk softly if it wants to carry a big stick.
A Workers’ Paradise Found Off Japan’s Coast?
Martin Fackler says in his NYT article entitled A Workers’ Paradise Found Off Japan’s Coast:
To the credit of Kumao and Akio Fujimoto, the father-and-son tag team who have presided as Himejima mayors for the last 49 years—uninterrupted, unlike the LDP—Himejima appears to have avoided the kind of ostentatious and/or risky building projects that have brought many a local government to grief and some to outright bankruptcy. (A statue is low-maintenance.) They also seem to have been good at milking the government subsidy cow, the right thing to do under the circumstances. And they’ve brought free cable to 97% of the island. And the weather is nice. And yet…
Paying public servants 30% less than the national average and using it to keep a few dozen more heads on the public payroll may be fine to people who are willing to settle for 30% less than the national average to become public servants, but that won’t do much for the hundreds of other people of working age not on the payroll. Unable to find gainful employment, they have to leave. And that is exactly what has happened on Himejima. For what the NYT report doesn’t tell us is that between 1975 to 2005, the Himejima population dropped 23.0%, from 3,207 to 2,469. The working-age group (15-65) fell 31.1%, from 2,027 to 1,397; while the remainder, the 0-14 age group, dropped more than half—58.4%—from 736 to 306.
By all accounts, Himejima is a nice place with nice mayors and nice people—fewer and fewer people, it turns out. Paradise obviously is not what it’s cracked up to be.
“If Marxism had ever produced a functional, prosperous society, it might have looked something like [Himejima,] this tiny southern Japanese island.”Maybe…if massive subsidies from the central government were available and the person doing the looking were a tourist—Himejima does have a thriving tourism industry—who happened to snag an interview with the mayor and talked up a few other locals. But would you want to live there?
To the credit of Kumao and Akio Fujimoto, the father-and-son tag team who have presided as Himejima mayors for the last 49 years—uninterrupted, unlike the LDP—Himejima appears to have avoided the kind of ostentatious and/or risky building projects that have brought many a local government to grief and some to outright bankruptcy. (A statue is low-maintenance.) They also seem to have been good at milking the government subsidy cow, the right thing to do under the circumstances. And they’ve brought free cable to 97% of the island. And the weather is nice. And yet…
Paying public servants 30% less than the national average and using it to keep a few dozen more heads on the public payroll may be fine to people who are willing to settle for 30% less than the national average to become public servants, but that won’t do much for the hundreds of other people of working age not on the payroll. Unable to find gainful employment, they have to leave. And that is exactly what has happened on Himejima. For what the NYT report doesn’t tell us is that between 1975 to 2005, the Himejima population dropped 23.0%, from 3,207 to 2,469. The working-age group (15-65) fell 31.1%, from 2,027 to 1,397; while the remainder, the 0-14 age group, dropped more than half—58.4%—from 736 to 306.
By all accounts, Himejima is a nice place with nice mayors and nice people—fewer and fewer people, it turns out. Paradise obviously is not what it’s cracked up to be.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Why Pirates Are Losing to Cruise Ships
My experience with cruise ships is limited. And when I say limited, I mean limited. But I do have enough experience as a human being to know that lots of strangers with too much time on their hands on one hand and lots of booze on the other is a combustible combination. Imagine spring break for grownups. Without cops. On second thought, don’t. So, unlike a cargo ship, there must be a security team on board, and since this is not Japan, it will be armed.
But why are the pirates always losing? Two words: risk management. Pirates are businessmen, not soldiers. Their mission is to make money, not war. Taking life doesn’t make sense; losing it, even less. It is instructive that the revenge spree that some feared after the U.S. snipers shot three pirates never emerged.
But why are the pirates always losing? Two words: risk management. Pirates are businessmen, not soldiers. Their mission is to make money, not war. Taking life doesn’t make sense; losing it, even less. It is instructive that the revenge spree that some feared after the U.S. snipers shot three pirates never emerged.
DPJ Wins Nagoya Mayoral Election; Has the Tide Turned?
Not quite. The DPJ survived the 2006 Koizumi landslide to hold on to four out of the four-and-a-half Nagoya seats* in the Lower House. The DPJ also holds four out of the six Upper House seats allocated to Aichi Prefecture. Thus, fifth-term Lower House member Takashi Kawamura of the DPJ was not taking much of a risk to vacate his Aichi First District seat to run, successfully as it turned out, for mayor of Nagoya. The DPJ’s only worry was Ichiro Ozawa, whom it stashed away in the closet during the campaign.
I might have more to say after I see the final tally, but that’s what it is—nothing more, nothing less.
* The LDP has one seat that consists of two other cities and parts of Nagoya. For Aichi Prefecture as a whole, the LDP holds a nine to five edge in single-seat districts.
I might have more to say after I see the final tally, but that’s what it is—nothing more, nothing less.
* The LDP has one seat that consists of two other cities and parts of Nagoya. For Aichi Prefecture as a whole, the LDP holds a nine to five edge in single-seat districts.
Italian Cruise Ship Repels Pirates with Gunfire
That’s what the NYT headline to this Reuters wire says. Now it quotes Andrew Mwangura of the Mombasa-based East African Sea Farers Assistance Programme, whoever and whatever that is:GeorgeStephen Seagal?
The real question, of course, is: What the hell are these cruise ships and private yachts doing here? This isn’t a Disneyland theme park.
”Having weapons on a passenger or merchant ship is dangerous. They should have used other means to shake off the pirates, like a loud acoustic device," said Andrew Mwangura of the Mombasa-based East African Sea Farers Assistance Programme.”Perhaps. But wasn’t that so...Italian? And before you have time to second-guess the captain’s decision, NYT goes on to note:
“Only military ships should have weapons on board.”
It is not the first time that pirates have tried to seize a cruise ship, but they have always been fended off.It works. So who needs
The real question, of course, is: What the hell are these cruise ships and private yachts doing here? This isn’t a Disneyland theme park.
Japan Gets Message from Chinese Naval Celebration
On April 23, 21 naval vessels from 14 countries including the United States, South Korea, and India were invited to the international fleet review staged by the PLA navy on its 60th Anniversary. The Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force, however, was excluded from the show and had to content itself with watching from the wharves of Qindao Port through the eyes of its Deputy Chief of Staff Admiral Koji Kato. None of the media reports says anything about a North Korean vessel being there, but it’s hard to believe that they would have snubbed their most friendly neighbor.
I can think of two ways to understand this. First, the Chinese authorities fear that a Japanese gesture of amity and tribute—the presence of a Japanese military vessel—at a celebration of the Chinese military would infuriate a significant portion of the Chinese public. They face enough risks to China’s political stability as it is; they don’t need another irritant however minor it may be. The other possibility is that this is a probe, much like the PLA vessels popping up around Japanese waters. The Chinese authorities are pushing their Japanese counterparts to see if and how much they’ll push back. I think the first one is by far the dominant reason, though I’m sure that the second effect is not going unnoticed over there. And hardliners there would enjoy nothing more than to stick it to Japan just for the fun of it. The Chinese authorities are no more a monolith than, say, Japan’s own LDP.
The story is not without its bright side—the Chinese Communist Party may be authoritarian, but it shows that definitely not totalitarian—the constituency matters. But it does give the lie to any speculation that China will be able to pull Japan away from its alliance with the United States as the result of the pull from the Chinese economy. It does nothing to alleviate the Japanese anxiety over the steady but opaque Chinese military buildup, as well as the military incidents that seem to happen every once in a while in Japanese-controlled areas of disputed waters*.
* As the Chinese Navy grow, so will the frequency of those incidents. A goodwill gesture here, a goodwill gesture there would help build the kind of relationship that helps in minimizing the fallout. The Chinese authorities can’t be unaware of that. They just couldn’t afford the political risk.
I can think of two ways to understand this. First, the Chinese authorities fear that a Japanese gesture of amity and tribute—the presence of a Japanese military vessel—at a celebration of the Chinese military would infuriate a significant portion of the Chinese public. They face enough risks to China’s political stability as it is; they don’t need another irritant however minor it may be. The other possibility is that this is a probe, much like the PLA vessels popping up around Japanese waters. The Chinese authorities are pushing their Japanese counterparts to see if and how much they’ll push back. I think the first one is by far the dominant reason, though I’m sure that the second effect is not going unnoticed over there. And hardliners there would enjoy nothing more than to stick it to Japan just for the fun of it. The Chinese authorities are no more a monolith than, say, Japan’s own LDP.
The story is not without its bright side—the Chinese Communist Party may be authoritarian, but it shows that definitely not totalitarian—the constituency matters. But it does give the lie to any speculation that China will be able to pull Japan away from its alliance with the United States as the result of the pull from the Chinese economy. It does nothing to alleviate the Japanese anxiety over the steady but opaque Chinese military buildup, as well as the military incidents that seem to happen every once in a while in Japanese-controlled areas of disputed waters*.
* As the Chinese Navy grow, so will the frequency of those incidents. A goodwill gesture here, a goodwill gesture there would help build the kind of relationship that helps in minimizing the fallout. The Chinese authorities can’t be unaware of that. They just couldn’t afford the political risk.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Would a Preemptory Attack on the Rodong Arsenal Work?
Keiichiro Asao, Defense Minister for the DPJ’s “Next Cabinet” appeared on TV Asahi today and said something eminently sensible: “If all the [200 give or take a few dozen] Rodong Missiles that North Korea has came flying at us, we wouldn’t be able to shoot them down all of them.” So true. I suppose that is what the U.S. nuclear umbrella is there for: to act as a deterrent so that the North Korean authorities don’t start thinking that they could use the threat of a nuclear attack to wrest some serious concessions from Japan (and a nuclear Japan does not become anything more than a conservative nationalists’ pipe dream.) But then Asao went on to say: “We shouldn’t have nuclear weapons, but unless we have the capacity to strike at the other side’s bases, we won’t be able to hedge the risk.”
Now Rodongs are land-mobile , which means that they could be stationed anywhere in North Korea. Given their use of liquid fuel, they could have fixed-location fueling stations that could be vulnerable to attack. But do the Japanese or, more likely U.S., authorities know where they are? If not, then Asao is really talking about a Japanese retaliatory capacity.
Now Rodongs are land-mobile , which means that they could be stationed anywhere in North Korea. Given their use of liquid fuel, they could have fixed-location fueling stations that could be vulnerable to attack. But do the Japanese or, more likely U.S., authorities know where they are? If not, then Asao is really talking about a Japanese retaliatory capacity.
It Looks Like the DPJ Is Setting the Stage for an Ozawa Step-Down
The four-member commission that the DPJ set up to look into the accountability of politicians, public prosecutors, and the media, as expected, is definitely not doing a whitewash job. Yesterday (April 24), Gerald Curtis reportedly gave the commission a grim assessment of the DPJ’s chances of winning with Ichiro Ozawa at the helm. This follows on the Greek chorus of the likes of Seiji Maekawa, Katsuya Okada and even the faithful deputy leader Yukio Hatayama, not to mention the lesser lights like Yoshihiko Noda and the numerous anonymous voices in the DPJ, ranging from assertions that Ozawa would do the right thing if the opinion polls told him that he would not be able to lead the DPJ to victory to outright claims that the DPJ was already in that spot.
But the real clincher for me is the latest gambit from the DPJ—more accurately the reform committee that Katsuya Okada is heading—prohibiting relatives within three degrees of a retiring DPJ Diet member from standing for election in the same electoral district as the incumbent, with the quite reasonable condition that the ban will only apply after the upcoming Lower House election. Now Ozawa has not yet determined which district he will seek election from, but as the September deadline for the election (which may be as early as sometime in June) approaches, given his Nishimatsu difficulties, it is becoming increasingly unlikely that he will be able to stand for election anywhere other than his home Iwate district that he has held in various forms for almost 40 years. The catch here is that if he does so, he will be unable to bequeath that seat to one of his sons. Perhaps more significant, the formidable political assets—both social and economic—that he has amassed over the years will leave the family. Ozawa’s son might skirt the ban by standing for election in the next year’s Upper House election, but that would require the DPJ incumbent to step down in his favor. In other words, the DPJ ban has all but set a deadline for Ozawa to pass on the family jewels.
Add to all this Ozawa’s well-documented aversion to the political limelight—none of the admittedly small group of journalists that I spoke yesterday believed that Ozawa would actually serve as Prime Minister—and I think we are witnessing the Ozawa endgame. If so, Ozawa’s loss will be the DPJ’s victory. At least that’s what the opinion polls tracked here are telling us.
Sorry for not responding to earlier comments, but I needed to get this off my chest.
But the real clincher for me is the latest gambit from the DPJ—more accurately the reform committee that Katsuya Okada is heading—prohibiting relatives within three degrees of a retiring DPJ Diet member from standing for election in the same electoral district as the incumbent, with the quite reasonable condition that the ban will only apply after the upcoming Lower House election. Now Ozawa has not yet determined which district he will seek election from, but as the September deadline for the election (which may be as early as sometime in June) approaches, given his Nishimatsu difficulties, it is becoming increasingly unlikely that he will be able to stand for election anywhere other than his home Iwate district that he has held in various forms for almost 40 years. The catch here is that if he does so, he will be unable to bequeath that seat to one of his sons. Perhaps more significant, the formidable political assets—both social and economic—that he has amassed over the years will leave the family. Ozawa’s son might skirt the ban by standing for election in the next year’s Upper House election, but that would require the DPJ incumbent to step down in his favor. In other words, the DPJ ban has all but set a deadline for Ozawa to pass on the family jewels.
Add to all this Ozawa’s well-documented aversion to the political limelight—none of the admittedly small group of journalists that I spoke yesterday believed that Ozawa would actually serve as Prime Minister—and I think we are witnessing the Ozawa endgame. If so, Ozawa’s loss will be the DPJ’s victory. At least that’s what the opinion polls tracked here are telling us.
Sorry for not responding to earlier comments, but I needed to get this off my chest.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Great Giin Senkyo Website
I’ve had too many things going on to post the last couple of days, or even to respond to comments. (Sorry). And I might not surface till the weekend. So instead, I’ll do something far more useful (if you can read Japanese) than inflict my thoughts on you and show you what I came across. It’s a no-frills website that has all sorts of useful data on Japanese politics. Sorry, it’s only in Japanese.
That’s all for now, folks.
That’s all for now, folks.
Monday, April 20, 2009
I Know, Let’s Give Up Half the Northern Territories before We Begin Negotiations…
I’ve said before how stupid I think it is to make concessions before we’ve even begun to restart negotiating with Russia on the Northern Territories, especially since there is nothing to be gained from settling the dispute beyond whatever rights we get to subsidize the Russians living on those godforsaken islands. As the Aso administration unfolded and it became clear that the Prime Minister had a tendency to say out loud the first thing that popped up in his mind, I realized that the performance had been pretty much par for the course. Still, the mystery remained: Who, or what, had put that idea there in the first place? Well, now we know, it’s the former MOFA Vice-Minister, Shotaro Yachi who put the idea in his head, as this Mainichi report shows. Yachi and MOFA have issued denials regarding the Mainichi report, but it’s clear from the half-hearted nature of Yachi and MOFA’s efforts that he did say things more or less along the lines of what was reported.
What continues to astonish me is that there are people who should know better yet still think that a peace treaty with Russia by itself brings any benefits beyond the purely psychic.
It’s interesting to note that the three major political appointments that the Prime Minister has made with regard to non-politicians—the fifth and chief administrative secretary to the Prime Minister from the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, the Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary, and now this, the Special Envoy.
What continues to astonish me is that there are people who should know better yet still think that a peace treaty with Russia by itself brings any benefits beyond the purely psychic.
It’s interesting to note that the three major political appointments that the Prime Minister has made with regard to non-politicians—the fifth and chief administrative secretary to the Prime Minister from the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, the Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary, and now this, the Special Envoy.
¿Quién Es la Política Más Linda del Mundo? Japanese Municipal Assemblyperson Yuri Fujikawa, That’s Quien!
I thank you all for taking to heart my exhortations and catapulting Japanese municipal assemblyperson Yuri Fujikawa to victory in the 20 Minutos online contest for “the most beautiful politician in the world”. Of course my natural modesty compels me to share some of the glory with the Japanese mass media—just because I’m a blogger doesn’t mean that I cannot give them credit where it is due—who took up the issue in print and on air, so much so that it became the subject of a 20 Minutos report just before the final results came in.
So the media (20 Minutos) begat news (the contest), the media (Japanese print and air) begat news (on media-sponsored contest), and the media (20 Minutos) begat news (on media reports on the media-sponsored contest). This cycle was completed when 20 Minutos announced the results of the contest—which in turn caused Japan to beget yet more news. There has always been an auto-generative side to the media, through sponsorship and even outright ownership of a wide variety of events and endeavors. Online contests provide a cheap and quick way to attract public attention. I wonder if Sankei, the most Internet-friendly among the major media outlets and not coincidentally giving the 20 Minutos contest the most attention, will take a cue from this.
The current example also highlights the difficulties of running online popularity contests.
One recurring stunt on The Colbert Report has the eponymous host of the comedy show encouraging viewers to vote in his name or some reasonable facsimile thereof—Stephen Colbeagle the Eagle being one such—for online naming contests including, and I am not making this up, a bridge in Hungary. Now, I suspect that the producers of the show get together with the sponsors of the contests beforehand to figure what to do if the Colbert entries wind up winning, as they usually do. That way, the show avoids trouble while the sponsors get a lot of free publicity.
But what if the attention is unwanted? To give a hypothetical example, if a marine park held a name-the-baby-dolphin contest, Greenpeace and PETA could hold a campaign to write in, say, “Free Me” and have a reasonable chance of succeeding. This will be just fine with animal-rights activists, but won’t exactly be what the marine park had hoped for.
Of course you could argue even from a value-neutral perspective that there is nothing wrong with this. To use the same example, if the public attention that the marine park receives as the result of the Greenpeace-PETA write-in campaign works against it in the court of public opinion instead of rebounding against the campaigning organizations, then maybe the marine park should admit that they do have a point. And so it goes.
So the media (20 Minutos) begat news (the contest), the media (Japanese print and air) begat news (on media-sponsored contest), and the media (20 Minutos) begat news (on media reports on the media-sponsored contest). This cycle was completed when 20 Minutos announced the results of the contest—which in turn caused Japan to beget yet more news. There has always been an auto-generative side to the media, through sponsorship and even outright ownership of a wide variety of events and endeavors. Online contests provide a cheap and quick way to attract public attention. I wonder if Sankei, the most Internet-friendly among the major media outlets and not coincidentally giving the 20 Minutos contest the most attention, will take a cue from this.
The current example also highlights the difficulties of running online popularity contests.
One recurring stunt on The Colbert Report has the eponymous host of the comedy show encouraging viewers to vote in his name or some reasonable facsimile thereof—Stephen Colbeagle the Eagle being one such—for online naming contests including, and I am not making this up, a bridge in Hungary. Now, I suspect that the producers of the show get together with the sponsors of the contests beforehand to figure what to do if the Colbert entries wind up winning, as they usually do. That way, the show avoids trouble while the sponsors get a lot of free publicity.
But what if the attention is unwanted? To give a hypothetical example, if a marine park held a name-the-baby-dolphin contest, Greenpeace and PETA could hold a campaign to write in, say, “Free Me” and have a reasonable chance of succeeding. This will be just fine with animal-rights activists, but won’t exactly be what the marine park had hoped for.
Of course you could argue even from a value-neutral perspective that there is nothing wrong with this. To use the same example, if the public attention that the marine park receives as the result of the Greenpeace-PETA write-in campaign works against it in the court of public opinion instead of rebounding against the campaigning organizations, then maybe the marine park should admit that they do have a point. And so it goes.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Ask the Un-Economist: Should You Be Afraid of Catching Cancer (and Heart Disease) in Japan?
Dear Un-Economist: I’m a permanent resident of Japan and I’m worried because more and more people are dying in Japan every year, and cancer death rates in particular are going through the roof. So I guess my question is: Should I go back to the EU and its socialized medicine・America with its guns, or should I try to brave it out here? I don’t want to give up my Charisma-man status.
Dear permanent resident: How old are you? I’m asking you this because Japan is a rapidly aging society and old people have a way of, you Know, dying. And the older you get, the more you tend to die from the inside out, with cancer, cardiovascular diseases, and an assortment of organ failures as they break down; instead of from the outside, from (alcohol-fueled) car accidents and gunshot wounds (one thing we have little cause to worry about in Japan statistically speaking) and the like. So yes, death, and more specifically cancer and cardiovascular disease are on the up and up, both in absolute terms and relative to the overall population. But I’d still put my money on Japan if I were you. Fewer and fewer people are dying here in every age group since 1965, as this Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry table shows. I’m betting that cancer and heart disease deaths also went down from 2005 to 2007, the years for which the table displays annual figures.
Dear permanent resident: How old are you? I’m asking you this because Japan is a rapidly aging society and old people have a way of, you Know, dying. And the older you get, the more you tend to die from the inside out, with cancer, cardiovascular diseases, and an assortment of organ failures as they break down; instead of from the outside, from (alcohol-fueled) car accidents and gunshot wounds (one thing we have little cause to worry about in Japan statistically speaking) and the like. So yes, death, and more specifically cancer and cardiovascular disease are on the up and up, both in absolute terms and relative to the overall population. But I’d still put my money on Japan if I were you. Fewer and fewer people are dying here in every age group since 1965, as this Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry table shows. I’m betting that cancer and heart disease deaths also went down from 2005 to 2007, the years for which the table displays annual figures.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
…and Then the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Arrested Him…
Yesterday, Canada granted citizenship to some people who had lost their Canadian citizenship or never had had it in the first place. Watch this video clip, then get the details here, courtesy of Citizenship and Immigration Canada*. My heartfelt congratulations to the law-abiding readers of this blog who are the beneficiaries of this boon. After all, it’s not for nothing that they say, Canada is the United States…without the crime.
But speaking of crime, if you are a criminal and are living in or traveling to a country that has an extradition treaty with Canada, watch out. According to Article 4777.1 of the Canadian Criminal Code, “[e]very person who commits an act or omission that, if it occurred in Canada, would be an offence under a federal law, within the meaning of section 2 of the Oceans Act, is deemed to have committed that act or omission in Canada if it is an act or omission…that is committed outside the territory of any state by a Canadian citizen.” And don’t think you can get out of it by renouncing your new-found Canadian citizenship. The website warns you that to be able to deny your new Mother Country’s gift, “you must…not be a threat to Canada’s security or part of a pattern of criminal activity”.
Now aren’t you glad you read this blog?
* In an apparent fit of attempted coolness, Canada took the Ministry out of all their ministries and renamed them XXX Canada.
But speaking of crime, if you are a criminal and are living in or traveling to a country that has an extradition treaty with Canada, watch out. According to Article 4777.1 of the Canadian Criminal Code, “[e]very person who commits an act or omission that, if it occurred in Canada, would be an offence under a federal law, within the meaning of section 2 of the Oceans Act, is deemed to have committed that act or omission in Canada if it is an act or omission…that is committed outside the territory of any state by a Canadian citizen.” And don’t think you can get out of it by renouncing your new-found Canadian citizenship. The website warns you that to be able to deny your new Mother Country’s gift, “you must…not be a threat to Canada’s security or part of a pattern of criminal activity”.
Now aren’t you glad you read this blog?
* In an apparent fit of attempted coolness, Canada took the Ministry out of all their ministries and renamed them XXX Canada.
Ask The Un-Economist: Waiting Lines in Hospitals
Dear Un-Economist: I am sick and tired of waiting three hours just to see the doctor for three minutes. Frankly, I have better things to do with my time.
Dear Sick and Tired: Perhaps you should use some of that time to make an appointment. That way, it’s probably a ten-minute wait at most for, say, five minutes of examination, prescription, and maybe a little doctorly advice. Still, sitting around in those dreary hospital lobbies with all those other harried, germy patients can be a real drag. But what if I told you that much of what looks like an interminable waiting line is a mirage, and that, more importantly, forcing patients to wait actually makes economic sense?
First of all, the line is usually not as long as it looks, since the patients waiting in a single lobby will be called into any one of many rooms that line the lobby and adjacent corridors, each room holding a doctor*. Divide the number of patients in the lobby by the number of active booths, and you get the true length of the average “waiting” line**. In short, it’s never as bad as it looks. With that, let’s move on to what I think is the more important part of my argument: waiting lines make economic sense.
Let’s say that a hospital doctor has an eight-hour working day. Of that, let’s say that she uses half that time for other chores and toilet breaks and whatnot, so she has four hours to actually treat patients. Let’s now assume that she takes ten minutes on average to treat a patient, five minutes of face time and five more to prepare and process the case. This means that she can treat 60÷10×4=24 patients per day. Now at one end, the hospital can have all the patients seeking treatment from her line up in the morning, let her go through as many as she can, then have her come back the next day and repeat the sequence, and so on. This would not pose much of a problem if the patients were like damaged autos brought in for repair, but they have a life. At the other end, the hospital could employ enough comparable doctors to ensure that no patient has to wait at any time, but that would leave many doctors idle for much if not most of the time, sending the cost of the treatment through the roof.
What hospitals (and individual doctors) can and apparently do is something that falls between those two extremes. They take appointments and squeeze in patients without appointments where sufficient slack arises. Another option would be to allocate certain hours to patients without an appointment on a first-come-first-served basis. Either way, waiting lines will not be eliminated for patients without an appointment. Moreover, given the variance in the time required to treat individual patients, even patients with appointments will often have to wait in line. But something or other along these lines should go a long ways in easing the waiting line problem, as this real-life example shows.
Now some patients will say, wait a minute, I’m a lawyer, my opportunity cost is $500 an hour, I can’t afford to wait. These people can take their business out of the public healthcare system (although they will still have to pay into one or other public healthcare system) by paying for the full cost of a pricey on-demand service. I suspect that this is the kind of clientele that those extravagant Ginza clinics cater to. And if you’re really, really wealthy, I suppose that you can employ a personal physician, or even furnish a personal clinic, if you wish. These are also perfectly sensible market solutions.
In sum, it is clear that the waiting line is an economically rational means that ordinary hospitals use to maximize efficiency on the supply side by imposing opportunity costs on the demand side, but that the opportunity costs can be reduced by using an appointment system. So is it functioning? Well, to the best of my knowledge, hospitals do manage to clear their waiting lines by the end of the working day. So I can’t say that it’s broken by any means.
* If you’re a guy and this reminds you of what I think it reminds you of, then I think you need to take a cold shower.
** Note that a large number of those patients may have already seen the doctor and are waiting for their documents to be processed. But this is the same waiting line problem being replicated at the administrative level, so it poses the same resource allocation issues. Accordingly, it can be left out of this particular argument without any significant loss.
Still can’t say that I’ve 100% nailed it, so it should be going to Globaltalk 21 Raw for more polishing, but what can you expect from an Un-Economist?
There is an oft-repeated argument that old people visiting hospitals because there is no place else to go. Some people believe that this problem has eased considerably since co-payment requirements were reintroduced for the elderly. I may come back to this point on a later occasion.
Dear Sick and Tired: Perhaps you should use some of that time to make an appointment. That way, it’s probably a ten-minute wait at most for, say, five minutes of examination, prescription, and maybe a little doctorly advice. Still, sitting around in those dreary hospital lobbies with all those other harried, germy patients can be a real drag. But what if I told you that much of what looks like an interminable waiting line is a mirage, and that, more importantly, forcing patients to wait actually makes economic sense?
First of all, the line is usually not as long as it looks, since the patients waiting in a single lobby will be called into any one of many rooms that line the lobby and adjacent corridors, each room holding a doctor*. Divide the number of patients in the lobby by the number of active booths, and you get the true length of the average “waiting” line**. In short, it’s never as bad as it looks. With that, let’s move on to what I think is the more important part of my argument: waiting lines make economic sense.
Let’s say that a hospital doctor has an eight-hour working day. Of that, let’s say that she uses half that time for other chores and toilet breaks and whatnot, so she has four hours to actually treat patients. Let’s now assume that she takes ten minutes on average to treat a patient, five minutes of face time and five more to prepare and process the case. This means that she can treat 60÷10×4=24 patients per day. Now at one end, the hospital can have all the patients seeking treatment from her line up in the morning, let her go through as many as she can, then have her come back the next day and repeat the sequence, and so on. This would not pose much of a problem if the patients were like damaged autos brought in for repair, but they have a life. At the other end, the hospital could employ enough comparable doctors to ensure that no patient has to wait at any time, but that would leave many doctors idle for much if not most of the time, sending the cost of the treatment through the roof.
What hospitals (and individual doctors) can and apparently do is something that falls between those two extremes. They take appointments and squeeze in patients without appointments where sufficient slack arises. Another option would be to allocate certain hours to patients without an appointment on a first-come-first-served basis. Either way, waiting lines will not be eliminated for patients without an appointment. Moreover, given the variance in the time required to treat individual patients, even patients with appointments will often have to wait in line. But something or other along these lines should go a long ways in easing the waiting line problem, as this real-life example shows.
Now some patients will say, wait a minute, I’m a lawyer, my opportunity cost is $500 an hour, I can’t afford to wait. These people can take their business out of the public healthcare system (although they will still have to pay into one or other public healthcare system) by paying for the full cost of a pricey on-demand service. I suspect that this is the kind of clientele that those extravagant Ginza clinics cater to. And if you’re really, really wealthy, I suppose that you can employ a personal physician, or even furnish a personal clinic, if you wish. These are also perfectly sensible market solutions.
In sum, it is clear that the waiting line is an economically rational means that ordinary hospitals use to maximize efficiency on the supply side by imposing opportunity costs on the demand side, but that the opportunity costs can be reduced by using an appointment system. So is it functioning? Well, to the best of my knowledge, hospitals do manage to clear their waiting lines by the end of the working day. So I can’t say that it’s broken by any means.
* If you’re a guy and this reminds you of what I think it reminds you of, then I think you need to take a cold shower.
** Note that a large number of those patients may have already seen the doctor and are waiting for their documents to be processed. But this is the same waiting line problem being replicated at the administrative level, so it poses the same resource allocation issues. Accordingly, it can be left out of this particular argument without any significant loss.
Still can’t say that I’ve 100% nailed it, so it should be going to Globaltalk 21 Raw for more polishing, but what can you expect from an Un-Economist?
There is an oft-repeated argument that old people visiting hospitals because there is no place else to go. Some people believe that this problem has eased considerably since co-payment requirements were reintroduced for the elderly. I may come back to this point on a later occasion.
Defendant Tells Judge Where to Blow His Toke
A 20 year-old former tobishoku—a skilled construction worker somewhat similar to a “spiderman”—was brought before the Gifu District Court on charges of theft. The defendant was alleged to have gone on a two-day shoplifting spree, taking 229 manga comic books worth roughly 110,000 yen in order to repay loans and finance a marijuana habit. When the judge* asked, “Do you understand that marijuana is bad for your health?”, the defendant replied, “I don’t think it’s bad for my health. I did research on the Internet, and it said that marijuana was less harmful than tobacco and alcohol.” The judge responded to this in a voice that was audible to the three people who had come to watch the proceedings, “You’re being deceived, because you’re a fool (ばか).”
Leaving aside for the moment the undeniable fact that the defendant was a fool for challenging the judge, it is safe to say on the basis of 100% hearsay evidence—that marijuana is less harmful to the health of the user than tobacco and less harmful to everyone than alcohol—you rarely if ever hear of a marijuana-fueled shooting binge or a driver high on marijuana piling into a row of schoolchildren. I suspect that the Japanese media is aware that the defendant’s logic cannot be totally denied. It’s a debate that will start in earnest here in future years, as the U.S. and Western Europe gradually move towards further decriminalization. But I digress.
Asahi, Yomiuri, and Sankei have seized on this incident, considering the matter noteworthy enough to post on their websites, unusual treatment for such a trivial case not involving policemen, prosecutors, judges, other public servants, and educators. For the moment, they appear to be focusing on the fact that the judge called the defendant a fool, presumably a breach of decorum and detrimental to the court’s dignity. As evidence of this interpretation, unusually for a criminal case, the name of the defendant—not a minor—(as well as the judge’s) have been withheld from publication.
However, if the language went beyond the narrow, acceptable boundaries of behavior that the Japanese media demands of the judiciary, the sentiment itself was not unexpected, coming as it did in a criminal case. Various memoirs by ex-judges as well as more impersonal reports indicate that the judiciary shares a common belief that the role of the courts goes beyond upholding the law itself to restoring and improving the moral rectitude of society at large and specifically criminal miscreants. Thus, it is not that unusual for judges during the course of proceedings to admonish, chastise, or even commiserate with defendants for their admitted behavior and/or their lack/expressions/of remorse. This behavior reaches its peak in a guilty verdict and the concomitant sentencing, where the judge apparently feels a professional obligation to offer what amounts to a lengthy sermon to the understandably pensive defender. The verdict itself is typically studded with judgmental, exhortatory, and emotive language, such as “coldblooded” and “utterly depraved” nature of the crime and the “utterly depraved”, as well as the ubiquitous reference to the defendant’s sense of remorse or lack thereof.
It is important in this context to note that the degree of remorse expressed by the defendant through the course of the proceedings can materially and explicitly affect the severity of the eventual sentence. Thus, the comportment of the defendant with regard to this point may be more the outcome of self-interested calculations than any genuine change of heart. This process is not limited to the judiciary, but extends to the prosecutors—remember the Public Prosecutors Office’s near unlimited discretion over the decision to pursue a case in court—and the police, where intimations of severe sentences have apparently led on rare occasions to suspects confessing to crimes that they did not actually commit.
All the more astounding then, to find the defendant in this case ambushing the judge on what was only a little more than a rhetorical question (as a clever schoolboy would have ambushed his schoolmaster upon being told that he would suffer brain damage if he continued to indulge himself). His rash action certainly did not help him in the criminal proceedings, but it did get him case (if not his name) in the papers.
* In Japan, there are no juries. Minor cases are presided over by a single judge; more serious cases require three judges, with a majority required to convict. Starting this July, laypersons will join the judge of judges in sitting on cases and deciding the verdict and sentence if required.
Leaving aside for the moment the undeniable fact that the defendant was a fool for challenging the judge, it is safe to say on the basis of 100% hearsay evidence—that marijuana is less harmful to the health of the user than tobacco and less harmful to everyone than alcohol—you rarely if ever hear of a marijuana-fueled shooting binge or a driver high on marijuana piling into a row of schoolchildren. I suspect that the Japanese media is aware that the defendant’s logic cannot be totally denied. It’s a debate that will start in earnest here in future years, as the U.S. and Western Europe gradually move towards further decriminalization. But I digress.
Asahi, Yomiuri, and Sankei have seized on this incident, considering the matter noteworthy enough to post on their websites, unusual treatment for such a trivial case not involving policemen, prosecutors, judges, other public servants, and educators. For the moment, they appear to be focusing on the fact that the judge called the defendant a fool, presumably a breach of decorum and detrimental to the court’s dignity. As evidence of this interpretation, unusually for a criminal case, the name of the defendant—not a minor—(as well as the judge’s) have been withheld from publication.
However, if the language went beyond the narrow, acceptable boundaries of behavior that the Japanese media demands of the judiciary, the sentiment itself was not unexpected, coming as it did in a criminal case. Various memoirs by ex-judges as well as more impersonal reports indicate that the judiciary shares a common belief that the role of the courts goes beyond upholding the law itself to restoring and improving the moral rectitude of society at large and specifically criminal miscreants. Thus, it is not that unusual for judges during the course of proceedings to admonish, chastise, or even commiserate with defendants for their admitted behavior and/or their lack/expressions/of remorse. This behavior reaches its peak in a guilty verdict and the concomitant sentencing, where the judge apparently feels a professional obligation to offer what amounts to a lengthy sermon to the understandably pensive defender. The verdict itself is typically studded with judgmental, exhortatory, and emotive language, such as “coldblooded” and “utterly depraved” nature of the crime and the “utterly depraved”, as well as the ubiquitous reference to the defendant’s sense of remorse or lack thereof.
It is important in this context to note that the degree of remorse expressed by the defendant through the course of the proceedings can materially and explicitly affect the severity of the eventual sentence. Thus, the comportment of the defendant with regard to this point may be more the outcome of self-interested calculations than any genuine change of heart. This process is not limited to the judiciary, but extends to the prosecutors—remember the Public Prosecutors Office’s near unlimited discretion over the decision to pursue a case in court—and the police, where intimations of severe sentences have apparently led on rare occasions to suspects confessing to crimes that they did not actually commit.
All the more astounding then, to find the defendant in this case ambushing the judge on what was only a little more than a rhetorical question (as a clever schoolboy would have ambushed his schoolmaster upon being told that he would suffer brain damage if he continued to indulge himself). His rash action certainly did not help him in the criminal proceedings, but it did get him case (if not his name) in the papers.
* In Japan, there are no juries. Minor cases are presided over by a single judge; more serious cases require three judges, with a majority required to convict. Starting this July, laypersons will join the judge of judges in sitting on cases and deciding the verdict and sentence if required.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Ozawa and the DPJ Stimulus Package
Ichiro Ozawa makes what would be a good debating point with regard to the DPJ emergency package in his latest press conference here and here. He is essentially claiming that the DPJ’s package is for the ages while the coalition is merely touting one-off expenditures that the bureaucracy has slapped together. He’s mostly sound bites, but then, Koizumi was even more so. One problem is, the media don’t seem ready to match the DPJ proposal up against the coalition package.
One reason for the media neglect is that—I know I’m repeating myself here—the DPJ package is basically a 21-trillion retread of the primary phase of its 2007 Manifesto plus—most of it is not really news. The proposal does suspend for the first year the cost-cutting measures that are supposed to accompany additional expenditures, so there would be genuine “freshwater”, or net fiscal outlay, at least for FY2009. Unfortunately, the media are simply consumed by the Ozawa/Nishimatsu Construction affair—it’s apparently hard to pay attention to two things at the same time. The media also do not think that the DPJ can win under Ozawa. So, for the economic and financial reporters who would normally be expected to report on the issue, the ruling coalition’s package is the only real game in town and the heavy lifting necessary to analyze the DPJ proposal and match them up isn’t worth the trouble.
As if that weren’t enough, the head of the Policy Research Council that put the package together is Yoshihito Sengoku, the eminence grise of Yukio Edano and other next-generation figures who can barely contain their contempt for the old-school ways of Ozawa and his people. So policy wonks who could serve as Ozawa’s surrogates on the substance—and help with the media—are not being lined up to do service. (I think I’ve touched on this before too—you don’t want to grow old.) Add to this Ozawa’s admission that the DPJ is unlikely to submit its own alternative bills to the Diet, and it’s hard to see the media finding reason to get worked up about the DPJ proposal.
All this is a shame, because—to repeat (again!)—the DPJ could say, We’ll stick with the program; the short-term fix will come from a one-year cost-cutting suspension; what have you guys got to say for yourself? That’s a debate that deserves to be heard.
On security issues, I find Ozawa’s press conference a little alarming with regard to U.S. troops in Japan, frivolous with regard to Somali pirates, and resigned with regard to Taepodong 2.
One reason for the media neglect is that—I know I’m repeating myself here—the DPJ package is basically a 21-trillion retread of the primary phase of its 2007 Manifesto plus—most of it is not really news. The proposal does suspend for the first year the cost-cutting measures that are supposed to accompany additional expenditures, so there would be genuine “freshwater”, or net fiscal outlay, at least for FY2009. Unfortunately, the media are simply consumed by the Ozawa/Nishimatsu Construction affair—it’s apparently hard to pay attention to two things at the same time. The media also do not think that the DPJ can win under Ozawa. So, for the economic and financial reporters who would normally be expected to report on the issue, the ruling coalition’s package is the only real game in town and the heavy lifting necessary to analyze the DPJ proposal and match them up isn’t worth the trouble.
As if that weren’t enough, the head of the Policy Research Council that put the package together is Yoshihito Sengoku, the eminence grise of Yukio Edano and other next-generation figures who can barely contain their contempt for the old-school ways of Ozawa and his people. So policy wonks who could serve as Ozawa’s surrogates on the substance—and help with the media—are not being lined up to do service. (I think I’ve touched on this before too—you don’t want to grow old.) Add to this Ozawa’s admission that the DPJ is unlikely to submit its own alternative bills to the Diet, and it’s hard to see the media finding reason to get worked up about the DPJ proposal.
All this is a shame, because—to repeat (again!)—the DPJ could say, We’ll stick with the program; the short-term fix will come from a one-year cost-cutting suspension; what have you guys got to say for yourself? That’s a debate that deserves to be heard.
On security issues, I find Ozawa’s press conference a little alarming with regard to U.S. troops in Japan, frivolous with regard to Somali pirates, and resigned with regard to Taepodong 2.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)