JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
-
- FT English Teachers for Kids - Osaka
- Kohgakusha Co., Ltd. （株式会社興学社）, Osaka
- Salary: ¥255,000 ~ ¥275,000 / Month Travel Expenses, Encouragement of Japanese learning*
-
- Translator
- ZAIHON, Inc. (日本財務翻訳株式会社), Tokyo
- Salary: ¥6.0M / Year Negotiable
-1
davidattokyo
If I'm not mistaken, former All Blacks captain Tana Umaga played for Manu Samoa a few times himself before switching allegiances.
Posted in: Japan names squad for rugby World Cup; 10 foreign imports included
1
davidattokyo
The Bernank is possibly going to hint at QE3 at Jackson Hole on Aug 26, if so there's a high probability that this would see the US dollar drop further against the yen (break 70 maybe). Even if he doesn't hint at QE3 there's still no reason to buy dollars (as of today anyway - things can change quickly).
Posted in: Dollar gets boost as a safer bet; drops vs yen
0
davidattokyo
The DPJ "Manifesto" was just a big bribe to score votes in the first place. They only got voted in because many people wanted to give them a chance rather than let stale old LDP keep the reins forever. Well Gee Hatoyama and Kan have been fantastic haven't they!
What most voters want and would be happy with (even if they are unable to articulate it) is, I believe, policy that will get Japan's state of affairs sorted out. That requires a bit of leadership and realistic policy (for a change). Write it in a "Manifesto" if you must, but the substance is more important than keeping daft promises that shouldn't have been made in the first instance. Alas, no idea where such leadership might come from...
Posted in: Ozawa criticizes DPJ for making concessions to opposition
1
davidattokyo
Should have been: Regulations where necessary - but NOT to discriminate for, or against, any particular group.
Posted in: Rice futures trading suspended after price soars on nuclear fears
1
davidattokyo
smithinjapan,
Oh no! Arrrgh! Heh.
Well you know, I'm a "freedom" guy. Free markets, free people, protection of people's rights. Regulations where necessary - but to to discriminate for, or against, any particular group. That's my basic philosophy and I apply it consistently even when - shock - whales are concerned.
More precisely, some Japanese politicians will want to protect the votes they get from farmers. But this may be changing. See DPJ's ideas on joining the trans-pacific trade talks for example.
Posted in: Rice futures trading suspended after price soars on nuclear fears
0
davidattokyo
tkoind2,
This current bout of market turmoil has been brought on by insolvent governments. Governments run by politicians more interested in garnering votes by spending and squandering other people's moneys than running their countries in responsible ways.
The blame for the current debacle lies with the politicians and the people who vote for these clowns rather than the market system.
Where is Obama's plan? The man goes on TV last night and all he has to say is that he inherited the debt problems, yadda yadda yadda. No wonder the markets sold off in response - he is supposed to be the world's most powerful leader!
Fact is the US government has suddenly increased it's spending something like 30% in recent times and people are waking up to the reality that this is nuts - no wonder the markets are panicked. No normal household increases spending 30% without some plan to actually pay for it all. Of course that household will suffer some stress when they wake up after the binge.
E.g. you want to have more government regulation of markets and economic activity, right? We need some regulation. But we need good regulation, not just lots and lots of it that creates more problems than it solves. And markets aren't the problem here - they are expressing the symptoms of the mess that politicians in various nations have got their countries into. And democratic nations at that!
An international agreement among first world countries about sustainable ways to manage spending without becoming slave to the short-term goals of politicians seeking re-election would be a good first step in the right direction, IMO. At least the leadership needs to show some recognition of the real problem and the path forward to solving it.
Posted in: Dealers expect volatility in Japanese stock market this week
1
davidattokyo
tkoind2, the government already has massive tariffs on rice imports which artificially keeps the price of rice higher than it needs to be (in the name of protecting Japanese farmers).
If one is concerned about struggling families, then IMO one should be in favour of deregulation. It may not be good for the farmers but why should they get a free ride while the rest of the world is struggling. The market can decide the price. If the price goes up - people will produce more rice in response. The futures market is a good idea because it will enable farmers to reduce the risk of fluctuations in price hurting their incomes. The speculators are buying the risk / reward that comes with the price fluctuations of their own volition, more power to them.
Regulators can not ever correctly determine how much rice should be produced - they are not so smart as to know how much rice is in demand and how much people are prepared to pay for it.
Posted in: Rice futures trading suspended after price soars on nuclear fears
2
davidattokyo
Kronos,
Those foreign currency deposits are up as compared to June, it says.
Yeah, I think people look at the rates and think "dollars are so cheap" and they assume that it'll rebound (as it often does during range bound periods), without asking why so much selling pressure has been piled on to put the price where it is now. Eventually it will get some respite, but I can't see any reason for respite right now, eh.
Posted in: Strong yen spurs int'l travel, currency trading
0
davidattokyo
octopussy
Sure. Japanese authorities have been intervening for decades, but USD/JPY has still come from 250 to 78. Last year they intervened around 84 or something like that, and USD/JPY bounced to 87 or 88, then earlier this year we hit 76.25 post earthquake. More intervention, back up to 85 very briefly, then back down again. Yesterday the intervention was apparently twice the size of last year's but it only took us as far as 80. I wouldn't take on the BOJ on an intraday basis but long term the BOJ can't fight this trend - the dollar is going down the gurgler at the moment, and talk is that the Bernank is going to print even more dollars. Given the plunge on Wall Street last night, had the BOJ not intervened yesterday I'm sure USD/JPY would already be at record lows today. But Japan does have issues staring it in the face, the markets just have worse immediate problems right now.
Once it regains it's foothold in the 80s I'll be thinking about it then for sure :) But I'd not be surprised if we see the 60s first. Only economic recovery in the US can spare it, IMO.
Posted in: Strong yen spurs int'l travel, currency trading
0
davidattokyo
When you consider that the dollar was buying more than 250 yen 30 years ago, I'm not sure why people are thinking that buying them now and putting them in a foreign currency deposit makes sense.
I'm holding on to my yen until the Japanese debt crisis really gets started.
Posted in: Strong yen spurs int'l travel, currency trading
0
davidattokyo
Serrano,
If trading foreign currency and making profits to compensate one for taking the inherent risks involved is "useless" then I wonder how you get by whenever you travel (or do business) internationally.
Posted in: Strong yen spurs int'l travel, currency trading
-1
davidattokyo
Asagao,
I can't agree that currency speculation is the domain of "the rich", and I don't see how a university student or housewife trading dollar-yen or euro-sterling leads to people in Africa suffering... (I know one currency trader who made a million yen from currency volatility in the wake of the earthquake and related disasters, and he donated the lot of it.)
When the price of a commodity rises there's normally an underlying reason for it - if not price will correct. I think new demand for bio fuels from advanced economies was possibly the main contributor to the food shortages, more so than people stating how much they are prepared to pay for something. And when the price for a commodity goes up - producers will ultimately make more of it in response. We need prices and people stating what they are prepared to pay in order for the world to function at all. Otherwise I suspect starvation would be much much worse.
Posted in: Strong yen spurs int'l travel, currency trading
0
davidattokyo
SwissToni,
Mmm, drop the IWC and whaling would be even more unregulated than it already is, so from a conservation perspective (true conservation I mean - another thing I for one care about) that would be potentially Bad.
But at least people would then be able to go about their business without the likes of you patronizing them, which would be Good.
The anti-whaling campaigners will have taken note for certain.
As for me, thanks for this little discussion. Don't let me keep you from your list of more "useful" things to do!
Posted in: Do anti-whaling campaigns backfire in Japan?
0
davidattokyo
SwissToni,
The Aussies have taken the research argument to the ICJ so "arguable" I grant you, but I doubt you'll be impressed with the ICJ's ruling.
There is no serious argument against the sustainability of any future whaling managed by the IWC, as the IWC has adopted the Revised Management Procedure as it's means to set sustainable catch limits. It's only because of political issues that it doesn't set catch limits accordingly. (To me, anyone who wants to argue along these lines is living in denial, most probably a subconscious reluctance to accept it because of perhaps cultural programming against whaling - I had this a bit too when I was growing up but unshackled my mind at some point.)
Finally you yourself note that government meddling with whaling continues and that it is unfortunate (you think it would have died already had this not been the case).
So, I say let's stop the political meddling, have the IWC set sustainable catch limits in accordance with internationally law and the IWC's own recognised safe procedures (e.g. the Revised Management Procedure), then leave business people to decide how many whales of the quote they want to catch. It's their time and money to waste.
Problem solved. Nothing to be scared of, plus even the whalers are happy. Everyone happy, that's good right? (Or are you not so sure of your views as you make out...?)
Believing in freedom does not mean I recognise some (imaginary) "right" of people to deny the rights of others, as is happening in the case of whaling. Having opinion is not the same as having the right to deny (something that the Aussies are going to learn the hard way at the ICJ).
That's better, although it's still amusing that you actually think you know better than people who are closer to this issue. There was a story the other day about a guy in Ishinomaki who is going to start up a whale meat business again. But what would he know, right? If only he had your advice to save him from wasting his time and money...
Posted in: Do anti-whaling campaigns backfire in Japan?
-1
davidattokyo
I "should", should I. I'll not read too much into your choice of words, but it is revealing.
You feel that whaling is a waste of time, effort and money, fine. That's your opinion. What about people who feel differently?
What I am defending is the notion that people have the right to make such decisions for themselves - rather than let people like yourself do it for them.
You may see whaling as "indefensible", but that's merely your opinion. It's not a reason for people who hold different opinions to act differently. I'm sure you are intelligent yourself, but I don't think anyone can correctly claim that they know best about matters that concern people besides themselves.
If I may turn the table 180, you should stop thinking that you know what other people should do...
I notice that you said nothing of allowing commercial whaling so that it can die a death of natural capitalism. Perhaps you prefer a state controlled approach to society, where "smart" people decide everything, rather than letting free people make their own decisions and bear the consequences as well as reap the benefits, which is pretty much the standard in the developed world?
Posted in: Do anti-whaling campaigns backfire in Japan?
-2
davidattokyo
Lots of things are a waste of time, effort and money (especially depending on different people's perspective).
But the logical conclusion to be drawn from such beliefs is that the IWC should permit commercial whaling, because, if what you believe is true, commercial whaling would subsequently fail and see it come to a natural end. That's the way of capitalist ventures, is it not?
If commercial whaling failed in this manner, there would be no argument from me about it. What I care about is more due process, international laws and people's rights being honoured in good faith, than whaling per se.
But I can't see why someone would oppose it if they just thought it was useless, unless they were speaking solely from their individual perspective and failing to recognise that others may place enough value on the products of whaling to make it a worthwhile venture. But that should be their business, IMO. If you disagree then it suggests to me that there's indeed something else behind your opposition to whaling (such as you simple don't like it, for example)
Posted in: Do anti-whaling campaigns backfire in Japan?
1
davidattokyo
If you don't like whaling, just say it SwissToni. No need to dress your arguments up in anything - be proud if you simply don't like whaling. Lame excuses don't flatter you, so just be straight up - honest - you are welcome to believe whatever tripe you like.
Posted in: Do anti-whaling campaigns backfire in Japan?
0
davidattokyo
Spidapig24,
To write comments such as yours then conclude by saying I am desperate to have the last word shows you in a poor light. If you reveal misconceptions or flawed thinking in terms of conservation you can expect due response.
Japan is using a legal objection procedure that is specified as part of the whaling convention. Lots of nations have such objections in a range of conventions. Complaining about nations exercising their legal rights just sounds like sour grapes.
Australia's marine parks don't help the IUCN Red Listed "critically endangered" tuna species that Australia commercially exploits for export to the Japanese market. If you want to trumpet model nations, Australia would seem to be an unfit choice don't you think?
I suggest that you stop looking at these issues as "them and us", take a step back and look at the bigger picture - we're all humans on this earth - be consistent about what you are for and what you are against, rather than who.
As for me - I'm for sustainable fisheries.
The difference between the whale sanctuary and your fish sanctuaries is that it covers the entire whaling grounds and furthermore has nothing to do with conserving whales for us and our kids. The idea is to prevent all exploitation of whales, forever. So comparing the whale sanctuary to your fish sanctuary is apples and oranges.
I totally accept whale sanctuaries may serve conservation purposes, but the existing Southern Ocean Sanctuary that we have been talking about precludes sustainable exploitation.
This is obvious from the boundaries and species covered by the sanctuary (e.g., the entire whaling grounds, and even abundant species).
Thus I cannot support such a sanctuary.
Sustainable exploitation under the RMP is not "take take take".
One of the scientists involved in the development of the RMP has remarked that "it is so conservative that it will waste much of a potential harvest", and that if the concepts of the RMP were applied to many US fisheries those would be shut down immediately...
Despite the exceeding conservatism of the RMP, I'm 100% for it. Your trying to paint those in favour as being all about "take take take" is entirely wrong.
You suggest whaling in places besides the sanctuary, which is designated on the whaling grounds. An alternative would be to hunt on their breeding/birthing grounds. For conservation reasons hunting whales on their breeding/birthing grounds is Bad and not done. So if you want a sanctuary, I'd be all for declaring one on the breeding/birthing grounds to preclude any such whaling there in future, in exchange for lifting the sanctuary from the whaling grounds. What do you think?
Finally, your talk of "whale waste" is an odd one, since whales don't come from the sky. Anti-whalers have many excuses, but they would be well advised to just say "we don't like whaling" rather than try to justify their position based on other more spurious grounds.
Posted in: Do anti-whaling campaigns backfire in Japan?
0
davidattokyo
Spidapig24,
On the contrary, the IWC Scientific Committee already has everything they need to set sustainable catch limits for species such as the Bryde's and minke whale in the western north pacific, and the minke and fin whale in the North Atlantic, including "rough numbers". Certainly official estimates for Antarctic minke whales are out of date as of now, but the scientific committee says these will be agreed next year, and the midpoint number looking likely to be somewhere between 500,000 and 600,000 if I am interpreting their recent report correctly.
It is only for political reasons that the IWC doesn't set catch limits, which contravenes the spirit of the whaling convention.
OK!
Currently Japan has an official IWC objection to the sanctuary with respect to Antarctic minke whales. You can read the convention to learn about those.
But I think you need to understand the reason the sanctuary was established was because at the time anti-whalers were worried the advent of the Revised Management Procedure would lead to the lifting of the "moratorium". They needed a new excuse to prevent Japanese whaling so they came up with the idea for making the entire whaling grounds of the Antarctic a "sanctuary", and were able to push the proposal through by force of numbers, despite there being no scientific committee advice in favour of having it.
So, if commercial whaling is resumed (the "moratorium" is lifted), it seems likely that the "sanctuary" would be at least modified at the same time.
There would be no point in just lifting the "moratorium" if there could still be no whaling in the Antarctic whaling grounds. The "moratorium" and "sanctuary" are both symptoms of the underlying dispute that anti-whaling nations have with the whaling convention. When the core issue is addressed both these symptoms will be resolved (or the IWC will be completely abandoned first perhaps)
At the recent IWC meeting the Japanese delegate stated that they would be continuing their research, with SS stated as their only significant obstacle. So one assumes they have plans for addressing the fuel issue excuse that anti-whalers have been trumpeting.
Posted in: Do anti-whaling campaigns backfire in Japan?
0
davidattokyo
Spidapig24,
You are incorrect to assume that "hard", or "definitive" numbers are required for sustainable management of whale stocks.
I have already suggested that you read about the Revised Management Procedure, so I'm surprised you would ask again. To "lead a horse to water": http://www.iwcoffice.org/conservation/rmp.htm If it doesn't quench your thirst see "Google" for extra details.
Under the Revised Management Procedure it is not possible to hunt until there are none left. The RMP has a feedback mechanism which prevents this from happening. E.g., if catches were running at unsustainable levels this would be detected and catch limits reduced appropriately.
One may do so by accepting that our scientific knowledge is not restricted solely to simple management based on counting "definitive", "hard" numbers, and opening one's mind to other possibilities... Or if one is determined to be against whaling, one can ignore this and stick to one's opinion no matter how untenable it might be.
Posted in: Do anti-whaling campaigns backfire in Japan?