JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
- Translator
- ZAIHON, Inc. (日本財務翻訳株式会社), Tokyo
- Salary: ¥6.0M / Year Negotiable
-
- Assistant Language Teacher (ALT) in Kanto region
- RCS (RCSコーポレーション), Kanto
- Salary: ¥180,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month includes performance bonus
-
- Assistant Language Teacher - TOKYO - late-March start
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥230,000 ~ ¥255,000 / Month
0
Wolfpack
It is truely amazing that they lasted for so long; a tremendous story of survival. It must have been a terrifying experience with seemingly no hope of ever being found.
Posted in: After 50 days adrift, 3 teens rescued in S Pacific
0
Wolfpack
I don't think Palin will run - but will let the speculation run rampant because it keeps her in the news and keeps her speaking fees high. However, President Obama was elected and he thinks that America has 57 states. Or should we give him (and Palin) the benefit of the doubt that they misspoke a time or two while making hundreds and hundreds of speeches or should we just say they are both dumb as a bag of hammers?
Posted in: Sarah Palin: Serious 2012 contender or pretender?
0
Wolfpack
I do think that the tendency of the Japanese to focus so much on being the victim of the two atomic bombings annoys the heck out of a lot of other Asian nations. The Japanese were very brutal in their conquest and occupations during WWII. Most Japanese would prefer to see themselves as victims and forget about all of that inconvenient raping and pillaging stuff. The Japanese have a lot of pride in their country and it's too difficult for them to be as apologetic as the Germans have been.
Posted in: Hiroshima not shy about its atomic bomb legacy
0
Wolfpack
Does every socialist/liberal/progressive in the world have to pick some cause as a requirement to join their club and then irritate the crap out of some poor working stiff who is just trying to make a living? Enough already!
Posted in: Fishermen, activists clash over tuna in Paris
0
Wolfpack
Except in the case of an abusive parent or spouse of course, I think that for a child it is important that parents have a committed relationship and not just live together. For a couple that is living together, there really isn't any significant tie that can help during the ups and downs and difficult times during a long relationship. Sometimes love just isn't enough. Many people stay married not only for the sake of their children but for fear of failing their marriage.
On the other hand, the meaning of marriage and family has been so diluted in modern culture that the level of overall instability in the lives of children has risen significantly. So much instability makes it extremely difficult to grow up with a balanced framework for dealing with life as an adult. Divorce is so much easier then in the past and moral and community standards are so much lower that even those kids in a stable two parent situation will likely have more than a few friends with a single parent, or two Daddy's, or even live with their grand-parents or other relatives.
The results of this study correlate with the decline of American society. People look to the government for guidance and assistance because religion, marriage, and family is not as important anymore. As a result, children grow up to be adults with a lessened ability to establish and maintain the relationships that they need to sustain themselves throughout their life.
Posted in: 4 in 10 say marriage is becoming obsolete in U.S.
0
Wolfpack
Why doesn't the boy wonder just give the poor the $500 million and ask them to save it. It's not that poor people don't have the common sense to save money - they just don't have it to save (that's what the whole poor thing means Billy Boy).
Posted in: Gates Foundation pledges $500 mil to encourage poor people to save money
0
Wolfpack
goodDonkey:
I urge you to go to the military times web site to see the poll about how the service members themselves about how they feel about this issue. I would post the link for you but it is being blocked by JT.
Posted in: U.S. Supreme Court allows gay military ban for now
0
Wolfpack
goodDonkey:
This isn't about me wanting to be mean to someone else for my own "pleasure" - nor is this about equality.
You have studiously avoided discussion of how it will be possible to integrate homosexuality into such a unique institution. It is my contention that is is only just that the military make separate accommodations for both heterosexuals and homosexuals just as it has been necessary to separate men and women.
Again, I think that Liberals would like to do as much damage to the military as possible and this is one way of doing it.
Posted in: U.S. Supreme Court allows gay military ban for now
0
Wolfpack
The Dems probably should have delayed the vote as Rep. Ryan suggested. The hasty vote for Pelosi for Minority Leader in the next Congress when the party will be significantly more Liberal - if that's even possible - does not do much for the party's image. The woman is so far removed from reality that she actually held a celebration right after her party suffered a huge loss at the polls and she lost her speakership. It just shows how much Liberals are in denial about the failure of their ideogy, economic policy, and about Pelosi's role in depressing the business environment. It's always difficult to beat an incumbent president but it shouldn't be too hard for Republicans to take the Senate in 2012.
Posted in: House Democrats keep Pelosi as their leader
0
Wolfpack
goodDonkey:
I agree, many Liberals have served honorably - and of course, I never said that they haven't. That's just the straw man of your imagination working overtime. However, there are Liberal colleges that will not allow military training on their campuses but take money from Arabs that execute homosexuals. Liberal organizations take out paid advertisements calling a distinguished American officer that he is a traitor. A Liberal Senator tells this same officer that his testimony under oath is not truthful. There is just too much evidence to the contrary for you to defend the strain of anti-military hatred among Liberals.
True - that's why women do not shower with men. By the way, I wasn't the one that first brought up the shower thing.
I certainly didn't like all of the rules I had to follow either. I knew that going in. I also knew that the military wasn't going to force me to sleep in close quarters with women or homosexual men. Again, it is a well known fact that most people that join the military are conservative. If the military becomes a Liberal social experiment, then there will be a lot fewer people that will be willing to serve.
You are probably right. The United States is in terrible social and financial shape right now. Divorces rampant, children born without fathers around, huge personal and public debt - I never thought I would see America in as pitiful shape as it is today. So, I wouldn't be surprised that at some point homosexuality will be completely normalized among this decline.
No, it's about politics and moral relativism. Even people who say they support homosexual groups would find it disgusting to actually have sexual intercourse with a person of the same sex. But if it is the case that homosexuals are allowed to serve in the military - then just as men and women are not forced together to the greatest exent possible, heterosexuals should also be given the same respect. If straights are not allowed the same respect as women are given, then something is seriously unequal.
Posted in: U.S. Supreme Court allows gay military ban for now
0
Wolfpack
Palin is playing the "will she or won't she run" speculation on the part of the media for all it's worth. I really don't think she is going to run - we will have to wait and see - but that's what it seems like to me. Newt Gingrich has been doing the same thing for more than a decade and is doing very well for himself. She has found her niche in American politics. She is very influential among conservatives and is making a good living for herself. If she does surprise me and run, I don't think she will last very far into the primaries in 2012. America has just elected a very inexperienced person for president, and the nation always looks for the opposite of the last unpopular president. The next Republican nominated will likely be a governor with two terms experience.
The one thing I love about Palin is how a conservative woman can drive Liberals so crazy with irrational hatred and disdain - especially female Liberals. She is a strong, independent, and successful woman and they just can't comprehend how such a woman can be conservative. They therefore heap derision upon her and declare that she should not be taken seriously.
Posted in: Palin's TV series a stage for political future?
0
Wolfpack
Good_Jorb:
You are missing the point. The don't ask don't tell compromise allows homosexuals to hide the fact that they have a sexual attraction to other of the same sex. Imagine if it were somehow possible for a man to join the military while passing himself off as a woman (or a woman passing herself off as a man). Wouldn't the women that discovered that they were living with a man in their room or barracks be justifiably upset? If this fact is hidden from them they wouldn't know that their privacy was being broached. Like a peeping Tom surreptiously watching a person through their bedroom window. Don't heterosexuals have a right to privacy also?
Not every country is the same. Do you think that Arab or African armies would allow homosexuals to openly serve in their military services? If it is the case that homosexuals should be allowed to openly serve in the military (as some are willing to die for their country) then they should be separated from heterosexuals just as men are separated from women to the greatest extent possible. The reasons for this are the same as for separating men and women. If you were to argue otherwise, then you should also insist that heterosexual men and women should be forced to shower and live together.
If homosexuals are allowed to openly serve in the military it will certainly cause problems with unit cohesion. The vast majority of those that currently serve in the military are conservative - that's no secret. These patriotic Americans - who are also willing to die for their country - have either religeous or other moral objections to homosexuality. You may not like it, but that is the way it is.
If your goal is to shrink the military and make it harder for President Obama to provide the troops needed for his surge in Afghanistan then getting rid of don't ask don't tell is a good way to do it. It is my belief that their well known animosity to the military is the principle reason for American Liberal's support for replealing don't ask, don't tell.
Posted in: U.S. Supreme Court allows gay military ban for now
0
Wolfpack
I don't believe that the Chinese government truely believes in "open trade and a stable currency". But it's a sad commentary on the state of world affaires when the communist Chinese government is more actively promoting free trade than the president of the United States. Watching the news coverage of Obama's trip to Asia and the G-20 meetings is seeing the world turned upside down.
Posted in: Chinese president vows open trade, stable currency
0
Wolfpack
MisterCreosote: "I could not agree more. Big government is evil."
You are absolutely correct, the bigger the government, the less freedom the people have. In Myanmar (Burma), you have the maximum degree of big government.
"Most bad government has grown out of too much government." -Thomas Jefferson
Posted in: Myanmar's Suu Kyi freed from house arrest
0
Wolfpack
I also agree completely with this quote that yabits has posted and attributes to Suu Kyi's son. She will not willingly leave her country. It is obvious that she believes that her fight for freedom is worth her life. So many people the world over have willingly risked their lives for their own freedom and that of their countrymen. It is a brave and inspirationally heroic act. And don't forget, just because she is out of prison it doesn't mean that her fight is any closer to reality than before.
Posted in: Myanmar's Suu Kyi freed from house arrest
0
Wolfpack
sushisake3:
I don't believe Bush purposely caused the housing bust which is at the root of the economic disaster that occurred in 2008 and that led to TARP and Obama's huge annual spending deficits since he has been in office. However, he and the Dems in Congress failed to prevent during times when both parties were in charge in the legislature. They are both culpable.
This issue has it's roots going back to Carter and was boosted during the tech bubble boom times during the Clinton years (his aide Harold Raines made big money working for Fannie as an executive after leaving public service). Fannie and Freddie needed reform but Bush backed down in the face of attacks from Dems - most notably Barney Frank and his allies (including support from then Senator Obama). Do you remember Franks' bold statement that Fannie and Freddie were not in trouble just a few years before the banks starting failing? The Bush administration knew there was a problem and proposed changes but failed to push them through the legislative process. Congress was giving away money for mortgages that everyone with a modicum of economic sense knew were bad investments. This is a perfect example of how government intervention - in the name of social equity - caused a disaster which led to even more misery for those it was intended to help. Frank made the Bush Administration out to be terrible people who wanted to deny poor and mostly minority people the pride of homeownership. Bush and his administration utterly failed to make the argument that encouraging so many bad loans was a disaster in the making.
It's no wonder that no country will cooperate with the US at this point in time. Over the past two years, President Obama has shown the world that he is economically clueless. Obama is such a liberal ideologe that no other nation agrees with his economic thinking and will not accept his economic policies as being the right ones going forward.
Posted in: G-20 refuses to back U.S. push on China's currency
0
Wolfpack
smithinjapan: " But let's face it, globalization is a much bigger process than the activities of all the players combined." And yet people like Wolfpack blame everything in the world on Obama, and you can only comment on Sushi's post. Interesting.
Actually, I agree with you to certain extent. However, my comments were related to the current story and the G-20's reaction to Obama's policy initiatives. Republican's share plenty of blame as well. America needs to get it's own fiscal and economic house in order first - or at least going in the right direction - before other nations will take it seriously. The only way to do that is to make radical changes much like the British are attempting to do now.
Posted in: G-20 refuses to back U.S. push on China's currency
0
Wolfpack
SushiSake3:
You might want to get a bigger picture of economic history than just the eight years that GW Bush was president of America. Globlization has been going on in full force since the end of World War II. The US was just the first one at the party as it was really the only advanced industrial nation relatively untouched by the devastation of the war. Other nations have been joining the party ever since and wealth and prosperity has spread like in no other time in human history. The latest entries to come on board in a big way are India and China. Hindering world trade just makes economic conditions for people worse - study the Great Depression for a case study of this fact.
Meanwhile, President Obama is traveling overseas trying to make deals with India and other countries just as Bush tried to do. This is bi-partisan to a certain extent. However, along with make a pitiful 10 billion deal in India, Obama is peddling economic policies that have been rejected outright the the rest of the world. He is an amateur playing in the big leagues. Socialist economic theory always runs up against reality - the Chinese will tell you that.
Posted in: G-20 refuses to back U.S. push on China's currency
0
Wolfpack
Takshi89:
Except that Democrats are currently in total charge in Washington and that hasn't slowed down the "war machine" as you call it at all. There are just as many American soldiers fighting in the middle east now as when Bush was in office. Guantonamo Bay is still in business.
Obama will average over a trillion dollars in 'annual' budget deficits for each of his four years in office - three times more than Bush spent in eight years while contending with two wars, 9/11 and the resulting economic crisis, the Katrina mess, and Barney Frank's housing bust. Yes, the economy was in shambles when he took office but Bush took a huge chunk of the debt for the crisis on his balance sheet for TARP. Obama's stimulus program has been a bust. Other nations have been seeking to fix their debt problems while Obama has ignored them and kept spending - with the Fed printing money like a banana republic.
Who will buy America's debt in the future? That's a good question... at some point, other nations and investors will find that the devalued dollar isn't much of an investment. And that - as Obama's mentor Jerimiah Wright once said - is when the chickens will come home to roost. Scary times...
Posted in: G-20 refuses to back U.S. push on China's currency
0
Wolfpack
Yes, let's leave the courts out of it. The country has been getting incrementally liberal with regards to moral issues for the past 50 years - with the resulting social wreckage apparent to all. However, should the policy be repealed, then heterosexuals should be given equal treatment and be allowed separate personal space from those that are openly gay/lesbian just as women and men are. Currently, men and women are kept separate in billeting, showers, etc. The same should be the case for heterosexuals and homosexuals to the greatest extent possible. The bottom line is that men and women are kept separate due to sexual attraction. Most woman wouldn't want to be forced to shower with a man anymore than most heterosexuals would want to be forced to shower with a homosexual. Yes, there are plenty of heterosexuals who would love to be able to have coed bed rooms and wash rooms, but most everyone can agree that there is good reason to keep a separation. It's best for military cohesion and just plain common decency.
That statement doesn't make much sense at all. Most of one's time in the military isn't spent shooting at the enemy. It's going through the routine things like guard duty, training, etc. Let's apply solutions for those problems and not to this non-issue.
Posted in: U.S. Supreme Court allows gay military ban for now