Seriously, who are you?
The major problem Japan is facing is demographics... They need to do everything they can to encourage fertility...
Like for example giving a substantial amount of money for people when they marry - only first marriage so people can't abuse it - and giving a 5 or 10% tax break per child.
Let's suppose the income tax there is 25% (probably is more) and with 5 kids someone has zero taxes. A five kids family will buy much more products than a childless one,
So even though they don't pay income taxes, they will pay much more sales taxes - this could be increased for a little - and that way the government would have more revenue.
In everything else, Japan seems to be doing very, very well. Just look at their Quality of Human Conditions index:
Their PPP GNI is 4.812 trillion PPP dollars (2013);
Literacy rate 99%;
Tertiary Enrollment Ratio 87.87 (2012);
Life Expectancy 83.10 years (2012), the highest in the world;
Democracy Index 8.08;
And national IQ of 105, the third highest in the world.
The only real problem Japan faces is demographics. Provided they had enough people to keep the cogs spinning and to sustain the old people, also that they axe the old restrictions they have in their Army and...
I guarantee Japan would be a very stable major player in the planet. Never a super-power (they don't have enough people, resources or geographical space for that) but certainly a world power.
Seriously, who are you?
You make some valid -- if obvious -- points, and the only serious disagreement would be on emphasis. After the September 1985 Plaza Accords, Japan's zaibatzu model couldn't cope with the combination of a rapidly appreciating Yen (+50% in a year, more than once), a deflating real economy and the mother of all asset bubbles.
More, the many efforts to reflate the economy since 1990 have all failed due to bureaucratic infighting and political machinations within the LDP.
Horrible. My girlfriend and I went from eating at a nice restaurant at least twice a week to maybe going to a noodle shop every other week.
Its called Tourist Season. So why can't we shoot them?
For Gallifrey! For Victory! For the end of time itself!!
are nationalist and have a very strong identity that they are proud of. They tried to get Japanese or people of Japanese ancestry back to Japan from Brazil and it was a disaster. They only took people who had at least one grandfather Japanese (usually they were fully Asian, even if only the grandfather was actually Japanese). The plan backfired enormously, to the point that the returning Japanese got segregated and totally marginalized from society. Very few intermarried, a lot returned to Brazil and the native Japanese complained that they were culturally Brazilian, not good workers, not loyal to their employers, too "party like", didn't learned Japanese well enough and alien to the society. Even though they were of Japanese blood, frequently entirely Japanese, culturally they were alien and refused to assimilate. The result was that the GOVERNMENT of Japan PAYED each person to return to Brazil. The condition was that if they get payed they should not return to Japan again. There were close to 400 thousand people born in Brazil that immigrated to Japan in the 90s. By now, 2015, less than half of these people are still there. And again, most of them were fully Asian, second, at most third generation living in Brazil and their parents or at least grandparents came from Japan.
Now imagine that if 400 thousand mostly Japanese people of Brazilian culture caused that huge problem in Japan, what people from all over the world would do? Specially if they all arrived in one year?
The thing is that United States is very big, so people self-segregate a lot and have a lot of land to move too. It is not like Japan or England. Also, United States is much easier to assimilate to if you are white or Caucasian (Jews, or non-Muslim/moderate Muslim Iranians or Arabs). And that does not happen because Americans are evil or racist. It is just like that because Europeans are the majority of the country, until recently very overwhelmingly so and they build the culture to reflect their heritage, values and ideals. If you go to almost any big city in United States it seems like a "no-mans land". There is people from all over the world, is completely multicultural and people are more blend in together out of necessity. However if you go to suburban areas - where most Americans live - it is very, very segregated and more monolithic.
As an example, the state I live, Maryland, is 58% white or so, but in most of the suburban areas, outside of D.C or Baltimore there are still a lot of virtually all white communities, even in counties that are multicultural or multiracial outside of the towns. Today I went to a lecture about the Jewish immigration to Argentina. (My wife is Jewish and I love Argentina so we decided to go). It was in Howard County, where there is a very significant population of Asians and blacks.
And the lecture was in a public school. Every single person in the room (there were like 40) were Caucasians and everybody felt connected and comfortable with each other, Jews and non-Jews, Americans, Argentinians, Israelis, Germans...
But I guarantee to you, that if it was a more mainstream topic and the room wasn't homogeneous (if there were a significant amount of Asians, Indians, blacks, Mexicans or others), people would be much more careful with their language, would not have talked about some topics that they did there, or at least not in the same way. For example, they talked about white slavery there: Jewish women immigrating to Argentina who ended up obliged to work with prostitution upon arrival. It is a terrible topic, but at that room, people were comfortable enough to talk about this topic. If there were blacks there for example, probably they would't talk much about the topic at all, would use a different term, or if they did, would be apologizing for black slavery constantly and deviating from the topic at hand. My point is that massive immigration for any society: Japan, America, England, Israel, Indonesia... Always bring conflict. It does not even need to be cross-racial. If you import a lot of Englishman to France there will be conflict. A lot of Chinese to Japan there will be conflict. And the more diverse and different from the majority population they are, the more conflict and division there will be. Limited and spread out immigration - as opposed to big and concentrated immigration - can work and leads to assimilation. At the Reformation, a significant number of people from France immigrated to England and were spread out there. They assimilated very well, to the point they see themselves as English men and women. General Montgomery and Nigel Farage are the first who pop up in my head right now. But then again. If instead of Frenchman or Sephardi Jews from Spain, it was Indians, Mexicans or blacks, it could still work if in limited numbers, but would take much, much more effort to assimilate them and if successful enough they would eventually disappear due to intermarriage and differential birthrates.
Unfortunately the melting pot of the United States is broken for a long time now due to massive immigration from people who were never assimilated before and with the progressive left and government encouraging them to keep their culture instead of assimilating. Instead of encouraging and working towards assimilation now the Western governments try to assimilate to their immigrants and not the other way around.
Last edited by Vargas; 12 Apr 15, at 20:54.
Last edited by cataphract; 12 Apr 15, at 21:39.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)