sangetsu03's past comments

  • 1

    sangetsu03

    So Apple's response is to threaten the regulators? Rather ballsy move by Apple!

    Absolutely. The attempt by regulators to regulate Apple is to squeeze money out of the company and profit themselves, and their partners in the domestic electronics industry. The government loves to go after companies like this because they have so much money. The people are naturally offended by rich companies, and therefore don't necessarily mind when their governments try to extort money out of them.

    That Japan threatens anti-trust regulations against Apple is absurd, given that these anti-trust laws are certainly not applied to the likes of Mitsubishi or Mitsui, who own much of the Japanese economy. They own the largest banks, insurance companies, real estate, metals, materials, machinery, etc. A Mitsubishi or Mitsui makes up a far greater part of the Japanese economy than Apple does of the American economy. But once again, these are Japanese companies, and are therefore exempt. Apple is a foreign company which is infringing on Japan Inc's territory, therefor Japan Inc sent their stooges in the government after Apple.

    Posted in: Japan's antitrust watchdog considers action against Apple, carriers

  • 1

    sangetsu03

    The money doesn't "flood the market." The money is used to buy assets from commercial banks, and then is deposited in those banks as their reserves, until the banks decide how to use it. The banks' bottom line is unchanged. That's why the "flood" of "easy money" doesnt create inflation, as everyone - except me and a few others - predicted.

    It has caused inflation, you need only look at the stock market. The market doubled in value after a combination of QE, stimulus spending, and zero interest rates. The market did not double in value because companies doubled their sales, and doubled their sales-derived profits. Then you have to take into account how stocks are being driven up by the BOJ buying ETF's. At the current purchase rate, the BOJ will be the largest shareholder of Japanese stocks in 2 years or so, right?

    This is all another form of the trickle-down economics you hate. Supposedly higher stock prices would lead to to higher capital gains and market capitalization, which would lead to growth-related investment. The problem is that it was not a lack of monetary liquidity which was limiting investments or growth, the problem is an economic environment where there are no opportunities for investment or growth. If a farmer's fields are becoming smaller every year, doubling his supply of seeds is not going to result in increased crops.

    Posted in: Japan move shows limit of central bank powers

  • 3

    sangetsu03

    Japanese corporations saw record profits last year,

    They saw record capital gains last year. If you remember, GDP growth last year was essentially nil, meaning that Japanese companies did not experience any growth in sales or sales-derived profits. And growth this year is nil as well. And, once again, if you subtract the losses incurred by these companies you mention, even these paper gains which make up the majority of the cash you speak of, they will still have their heads under water. Read these companies financial reports going back as far as you can find them, as I have, and do the math yourself.

    These capital gains were enabled by the central bank flooding the market with easy money. The companies issue debt to borrow money, and use this money to buy stocks. This drives up the price of stocks. But in the absence of any growth in sales or sales-driven profits, these stock values will plummet if the central banks stop pouring money into the economy, or raise interest rates.

    And this is why the stock market now pays more attention to central bank meetings than it does to profits reports and sales figures, and why the stock market surges or falls whenever a rumor of a rate cut or rate hike is announced.

    The population of Japan will fall to under 80 million by 2050, at least according the the MITI reports that I had a hand in working on. They also predict Japan falling to the world's 5th or 6th larges economy. It is highly unlikely that any company would invest any money in such an environment, unless they are building coffins or cemeteries. Any company that has any real capital to invest will either invest it outside Japan, or sit on it in the likely event of the hard times to come.

    Posted in: Japan move shows limit of central bank powers

  • 0

    sangetsu03

    Hmmm, you need more demand and yet keep paying peanuts,,, I am probably no genius, but you need to start paying your workers, i.e., your customers, more so they can buy your stuff.

    You have the formula backwards here, and are using the same reverse logic the BOJ is using to try to generate growth. Money does not create demand for products or services, demand for products and services creates money.

    If you raise salaries to your workers, i.e., your customers so they can buy your stuff, you have to raise the prices of the stuff you sell, which causes customers to buy less of it, which in turn negates the value of the increased wages. You need to remember that 70% of domestic Japanese companies earn no profit, and those who do don't make that much. 99% of businesses in Japan are not major car companies, they are smaller factories, stores, shop, and restaurants. And you'll find that in some of these shops the owners earn less than their staff, and many cannot afford to pay any staff at all. These businesses cannot simply raise wages without losing or earning less money than they already are.

    Posted in: Japan move shows limit of central bank powers

  • 3

    sangetsu03

    Companies are not going to start spending their cash piles—either by investing or boosting wages—until they think there are consumers willing to buy the goods and services they are selling.

    These "cash piles" companies are sitting on are almost entirely derived from capital gains created by the current QE driven stock bubble. And when this bubble pops, those gains will be wiped out, leaving nothing to invest or boost wages with.

    And it doesn't matter if customers want to buy goods or services or not, because the dwindling pool of customers from the current free fall in population guarantees a negative return on domestic investment. And vastly increased competition from aggressive competitors for the export market are not going to guarantee returns from that quarter either.

    The structure of the Japanese economy needs to be rebuilt, as it is in the slow process of collapse. But the central bank and Abe aren't doing anything to rebuild the structure, it is simply whitewashing it.

    Posted in: Japan move shows limit of central bank powers

  • 5

    sangetsu03

    Central banks cannot generate growth. They can only print money and regulate interest rates.

    The only part of the economy which can create net growth is the private sector. But as long as the government consumes too much of what the private sector produces, and in the process devalues the money the private sector uses to do business, growth will not occur.

    We need some kind of prize which is 180 degrees different from the Nobel Prize. A prize for fools and foolish acts to shame the fools and those who act foolishly. Most of the winners would be central bankers and the so-called economists whom they employ.

    Posted in: Japan move shows limit of central bank powers

  • 1

    sangetsu03

    as long as taxes are low the destabilizing effects of globalization will continue to cause people to suffer

    Were it not for globalization, where would Japan be now? Japan has no energy or materials resources, and limited agricultural resources. Were it not for globalization, the standard of living in Japan would be the same as in the Edo period, would it not?

    And who exactly is suffering? As I mentioned, since globalization has expanded, fully one-fifth of the world's population has been pulled out of poverty, and the number of people living on a dollar or less per day has decreased from 40% of the world's population to only 14%. No government social program or wealth redistribution policy has done more to ease the suffering of the people, or reduce income inequality than globalization. And anyone who argues otherwise is either a politician pandering for votes, or a fool.

    Posted in: OECD sees growth flounder as globalization stalls

  • 1

    sangetsu03

    The ironic thing is that these younger workers who are doing the complaining will be exactly like the older workers they are complaining about.

    The will be like them because the seniority-based promotion systems they work in will not reward them for any additional value they might add to their companies. Like the engineer who invented the blue LED, and received a 10,000 yen bonus for an invention worth billions of dollars and a Nobel Prize. Since no one is recognized for performance, or rewarded for it, no on will bother to perform, and all will become deadwood salarymen who do little more than keep their seats warm for 10 or 12 hours per day.

    These deadwood workers cannot be fired, they cannot be demoted, and, crazily enough, they must continue to be promoted up the ranks, even if they are incapable or unwilling to do the work, which is why so man companies have two, or even three managers doing the job that a single manager could do in any other developed country.

    The deadwood workers created deadwood companies, and deadwood companies create a deadwood national economy.

    Posted in: Unable to keep pace with change, salarymen over 50 'destroying their companies'

  • -1

    sangetsu03

    If you want to see such assets "inflated above any real sense of their worth," go to Vancouver, London, Hong Kong and a host of other "free market" cities, where middle-income earners doing essential jobs simply cannot afford to live in.

    Have you stopped to think why these cities are so expensive?

    Middle-income earners live where they can afford to live, top income earners live where they can afford to live, low income earners live where they can afford to live. Since feudalism was abolished, and people were given the freedom to go where they want, they go where they can find the most opportunities. And when there is high demand for anything, the price goes up. London, Hong Kong, and Vancouver are expensive because these places offer the most potential for economic success, and success is not a bad thing.

    Middle-income earners could live like kings in developing countries, where the cost of living is low. But because there are no opportunities for success, there are no middle-income jobs. A part-time cashier at a London McDonald's earns more in a day than a surgeon in Cuba earns in a month. Which is why hundreds of thousands of Cubans have fled Cuba at the risk of their lives to reach a horrible, oppressive, free-market country like America, and why many millions of others from other countries have done the same.

    Posted in: Japan logs surprise trade deficit in August

  • 1

    sangetsu03

    And most of us never see the benefits of globalisation;whatever that really is

    Everything you own is a benefit of globalization. The computer or phone you wrote your post on was made with materials and technology that came from a long list of countries. If you live in Japan, the fact that you can eat a wide variety of fruits and vegetables any month of the year is a benefit of globalization. If you are using electricity for your lights and to charge your phone, that is also a benefit of globalization.

    Every single one of us sees the benefits of globalization in everything we wear, eat, drive, ride, or read. But few of us stop to think about it.

    Posted in: OECD sees growth flounder as globalization stalls

  • 3

    sangetsu03

    Of course they will blame globalization, as if global trade is a recent thing, and has not been going on for more than a thousand years. They will overlook that globalization has lifted billions out of poverty over the past decade in a half, and reduced by half the numbers of people around the world who live on one dollar or less per day.

    What they won't blame are their own free-spending policies, which consume ever greater amounts of their GDP, leaving less for the private sector to use for starting businesses, paying salaries, and creating economic growth. Nor will they blame their crushing government debts, which are the main reasons they have embarked on endless bouts of QE, stimulus spending, and zero or negative rates.

    But by blaming globalization, they can bind up more of their economies in red tape, giving them more power to coerce favors, campaign contributions, and to give them the authority to spend even more of our money.

    Posted in: OECD sees growth flounder as globalization stalls

  • 6

    sangetsu03

    Demanding that "the world do something" means that no one will do anything. No one has done anything so far, and nothing will be done until North Korean bombs hit Seoul or Japan, or America.

    Posted in: Abe demands world find new way to stop N Korean nuclear threat

  • 6

    sangetsu03

    Who comes up with these articles?

    These articles are derived from the predictions of leading economists, of course. The same economists who believe that down is up, up is down. and that the sun sets in the east. The same economists that the government pays to provide whatever figures are necessary to justify more government spending.

    Posted in: Japan logs surprise trade deficit in August

  • 2

    sangetsu03

    The right gave him the nomination. As far as I know, it's only registered Republicans who vote in the primaries (someone correct me if I'm wrong). There was no 'robbing' about it. He put himself up to be chosen, and they chose him.

    You have a short memory. The "right" as you called it first poured their money and support into Jeb Bush. And when Jeb sank in the polls, they diverted this money and support into Ted Cruz (who was the candidate the "right" wanted). And despite their best efforts, none of it worked. Trump still managed to beat them, with none of the considerable financial resources they had. Of course he "robbed" them, the party didn't want him as their candidate, they tried everything they could to prevent him from being their candidate. But he is their candidate now, and now they have to play along.

    The people who chose Trump are not all republicans, a considerable amount are independents, and there are more than a few democrats as well. Trump does not belong to the right, and he is not a product of it, as you probably already know. Trump's supporters are not ideologues who belong to the right. They are people who are pissed off at the current system. And no one can honestly say that the system hasn't done anything to piss people off.

    He is the chosen leader of the Republicans, the party of the right. And he's a direct result of the hatred they've been pushing for years.

    Think for a moment, what are republicans? What are democrats? Why are there two parties? What kind of people make up each party? In reality, the people are very much alike. They all do more or less the same things to get by, they are for the most part honest and hardworking people. What makes them identify with one party or the other? What drives them to believe so fervently in their party, and causes them to utterly hate the other party?

    Hate is one of the oldest tools in politics. You are expressing it yourself in your posts. Where does that hatred come from? Has a republican robbed your house? Stolen your girlfriend? Called you names on the train? And the same is true for republicans, no democrat has personally done anything to them to cause hatred.

    The hatred comes not from the people, but from the politicians who exploit small differences in belief or ideals. These small differences are enlarged, using a mixture of lies and half-truths. Politicians take small issues of a usually personal nature, and try to create policies with these issues. In this way they stir up controversy, anger, hate, and loyalty. This political practice of "divide and rule" has existed as long as there have been people. But despite thousands of years of being manipulated by this strategy, people continue to be manipulated by it.

    You and the other posters above are the products of this manipulation, anyone who identifies with a political party has been manipulated to do so. You are lied to on a daily basis, your independence and freedom are reduced on a daily basis. Every day they take a little more of your money, be it through direct taxation, indirect taxation, or, with their favorite method, inflation. Each year you are a little worse off financially, and your opportunities are being gradually reduced. All of what is being taken away from you is going to those whom you voted for because they promised to give you more. But the more authority you give them to take from the haves to give to the have nots, the more they keep for themselves.

    In Washington parties are irrelevant. The party system is simply a tool to distract the people, and to manipulate the people into giving their leaders more money and power. If you look at the governments of developed countries around the world today, you will see the same thing. They may have many parties, but the main power is always divided among the two largest parties, universally described as right and left.

    The saddest part is that the corruption of this system has led to the point where we are forced to choose between the likes of Hillary and Trump to be president. Of all the millions of people in America, many of whom are truly outstanding, we are reduced to a carnival barker showman with orange skin and orange hair, and a... Well, I don't have enough vocabulary to adequately describe Hillary.

    But keep believing, even though your beliefs are the product of lies, deceit, and personal ignorance. It's a free country, though it gets a little less free each day.

    Posted in: Clinton says Trump gives 'aid, comfort' to ISIS recruiters

  • 0

    sangetsu03

    The 'right' as I call it voted Trump as their candidate, and the huge majority of them are supporting him.

    No, the traditional "right" does not support Trump. Religious conservatives cannot stand the thought of a candidate as colorful as Trump is, and hate the thought of voting for a man who does not say his prayers at meals. Businessmen are leery of Trump's economic and trade ideas, companies and corporations are even less supportive of him. The banking sector doesn't look upon him kindly either, which is why they have paid Hillary so much in the past.

    Since Trump managed to rob the right of the nomination, and become the republican candidate, he will naturally get most of the votes of the fools who vote along party lines. These voters don't see past the "r" next to his name on the ballot, just like those in the opposing party can't see past the "d" in front of the names of the candidates they will vote for. People are fools.

    The funniest thing is if that Trump were the democrat candidate, the majority of democrat voters would vote for him. Of course he would have to stop lying about what he would to about immigration, trade, and national defense, and start lying about what he would to do fight income inequality and climate change. And you would believe him, because you know nothing at all about the nature of these people, and you would give him your vote.

    It's all too funny.

    Posted in: Clinton says Trump gives 'aid, comfort' to ISIS recruiters

  • 9

    sangetsu03

    I don't think the LDP can find anyone else who wants the job. No one wants to be the guy behind the wheel when the economy sinks. Abe and his advisers have painted the economy into a corner, and no one is going to want to change places with Abe, and catch the $hit when the end results of Abe's policies come home to roost.

    Posted in: LDP moves closer to extending Abe's term as party head

  • 2

    sangetsu03

    Nope. The right has run an amazing smear campaign against her. If they had put up a decent candidate as part of a one-two punch, they'd be destroying the democrats.

    Honestly? I mean really? The "right" as you call it, does not support Trump. We have Bush Sr coming out to vote for Hillary, the republican speaker of the house, numerous senators and others do not support Trump. They support their own, and Hillary is one of their own. You still don't understand that in Washington there is no left or right, that is garbage fed to the sheep to keep them bleating at each other. The only party in Washington is the party of power, and it exists neither on the left or the right, it consists of all parties.

    As for business and politics, politics is business. No one becomes a politician for any other reason than to exercise political power to accumulate wealth. It doesn't matter which side you support or believe in, because they are both the same. They lie to you, manipulate you, empty your pockets, and they can still count on your vote.

    You are probably not aware that I caucused for Hillary back in 2008. I was a supporter of her at the time. It was an interested experience to see how the political machine works, and how utterly brainwashed many people are. You would be amazed at how much people can be made to believe, and how easily they can be manipulated. Hillary was robbed in 2008, she should have won the nomination back then. The nomination was stolen from her, and given to Obama. Why? Because Obama was a weak, inexperienced, and ineffective nobody whom could be easily manipulated. Hillary was not. The party did not want Hillary as the candidate back then because they knew she would win. And the last thing the party wanted was Hillary as president, because she would be the master of the party, and not the other way around.

    The experience was enlightening, and disillusioning. The party still does not want Hillary as president, but they are much more afraid of Trump. And that goes for the republican party in Washington as well. That Trump does well in the polls despite opposition from both left and right doesn't show much other than a lot of people are pissed off at both parties. And I am one of those.

    I don't believe Trump will build a wall on the border, nor will he restrict trade, or greatly increase military spending. I believe nothing any politician says, and when someone runs for public office, they become politicians, whether they win or not. But I do believe that Trump will be a hair in the backside of the party of power in Washington, which has long been able to keep out anyone but those whom they select to be president.

    All I can do when I see Trump tell another big one, with his orange face and orange hair, is laugh. And I know that this drives typical politicians crazy, because they wish they could lie as obviously as Trump does and get away with it. They all lie, as the old saying goes "how can you tell when a polticidal lies? When his lips move." But it is not about lies or the truth, it is about disgust and distrust, which are both the result of the party politics for the past several decades. People are tired of the system as it is, and even Lassie would put in a strong run against Hillary. And if Lassie were running against Hillary, I would vote for Lassie in a heartbeat. But since it is Trump, I like him less than Lassie, but more than Hillary, so he gets my vote.

    Posted in: Clinton says Trump gives 'aid, comfort' to ISIS recruiters

  • 0

    sangetsu03

    (he'd be absolutely destroying her if he didn't say so much stupid stuff),

    This is so funny. That a reality tv personality and colorful tabloid character can give Clinton a run for her money says less about about how good a candidate he is than about how lousy a candidate she is.

    The funniest thing is that Hillary was never supposed to be the winning candidate. The democrat party (that which exists in Washington) does not like Clinton. They want Elizabeth Warren to be their candidate. Hillary was supposed to be the sacrificial lamb in this election, and the election was to be won by another republican puppet. And after the puppet was defeated in 4 or 8 years, Warren would be the democrat party's first female president. But neither of the puppets Washington wanted to run were nominated. Now the democrat party has no choice but to support Hillary as much as possible. Worse yet, should Hillary win, it means Warren will likely never get a chance to run.

    Posted in: Clinton says Trump gives 'aid, comfort' to ISIS recruiters

  • -2

    sangetsu03

    Few people in Washington today bear as much responsibility for the bloodshed in the middle east and the rise of ISIS as Hillary herself. She was one of the architects of the Iraq war, and has held a high position in the current administration as the middle east has deteriorated.

    To hear her criticize Trump or anyone else about giving aid and comfort to terrorists is the heigh of hypocrisy.

    To run for president, you need to show your skill sets. Not pander.

    You need to have skill sets before you can show them off. In her case, pandering is the only thing she can do to get elected. She certainly can't run on her past record of accomplishments, can she? Anyone here care to make a list of the positive things which Hillary has done? Anyone care to make a list of the campaign promises she has kept?

    Posted in: Clinton says Trump gives 'aid, comfort' to ISIS recruiters

  • 4

Work
in
Japan

Search the Largest English Job Board in Japan.

Find a Job Now!

View all

Find Your
Apartment
in Japan

10,000’s of properties available today!

Search