Balefire comments

@turbostat Nope; still a ruin. Different spot:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Nishioi+Station/@35.60172,139.720848,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1spcwtLqdcVrAYEqlDiltkVg!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x60188a852b28be6b:0xe3c6193e8e8d2053?hl=en

I have no idea what the owner's situation is, but there is a small abandoned wooden single dwelling located almost directly behind Nishi-Oi Station on the Yokosuka/Shonan-Shinjuku Line (one stop from Shinagawa). It's all of one or two minutes' walk from the wicket, and the land value is presumably very high.

It is a crumbling wreck, part of the roof fallen in, entangled in overgrown plants, with a rusting bicycle sharing its gradual slide into entropy. It's picturesque if you like that sort of thing, but it looks like a serious fire risk to me. If I had children in the area, I'd be anxious about them deciding to explore the obviously unstable building, as kids are prone to do despite parental warnings.

Every so often, the plants are cut back, which I assume is being done by the ward office.

Maybe there's an issue with identifying the owner, or (given its apparent age) maybe the owner is also in an advanced state of decrepitude and can't deal with it for some reason, physical or financial.

It's not only in the countryside that one can find these ruins, unfortunately.

One of the many problems with a lot of these properties is that the property tax is far higher on an empty housing lot than on one with even a decrepit dwelling on it. Six times higher is not an exaggeration in many areas, which is likely how that new proposed tax rate was arrived at: it would remove the financial incentive for keeping the unusable building "merely" to keep property taxes affordable.

That doesn't address the additional issues of the very high costs of demolition and removal of the debris, nor does it address the issue of what comes after that outlay of two or three million (at least) yen. The "triple whammy" mentioned in the article is about the house, but in many cases even after the house is torn down, the land is essentially unsalable, and then the owner is stuck with the--very expensive--property tax, anyway. In many rural and semi-rural areas, the population is declining, and nobody wants to move/live there, so the property is more of a liability than an asset.

@sakurala has a point, but somehow I don't see local governments lowering taxes on empty housing lots. With declining populations, tax revenues are dropping, making services harder to fund, discouraging "immigrants", and casuing a downward spiral. Reducing property taxes is not going to be a popular proposal.

I've sometimes thought that it might be beneficial for the government to subsidize at least the demolition costs of such buildings whose owners can't afford it, rather than spend money on huge, mostly unnecessary, building projects. If the public's money is going to go to construction companies anyway, demolishing these buildings might be a better way to spend it than on bridges and highways to nowhere.

I've already given up hope that such money would be spent on the very necessary maintenance of infrastructure. There's money to be spread around and pocketed for building, but not for maintenance, it seems. But that's a somewhat different issue.

If this action by the government is really only out of concern for the safety of Japanese journalists in the admittedly risky area, when can we expect the many mainstream/corporate Japanese journalists already in the area to be ordered home and/or have their passports confiscated, I wonder?

Since I am unconvinced that the government has no ulterior motive(s) in this case, I won't be holding my breath waiting for the TV station or wide-circulation newspaper journalists to be recalled. Or for additional corporate journalists to be prevented from going to the area, for that matter.

Perhaps I am not understanding the logic involved here.

There are numerous Japanese reporters employed by the various TV companies, doing frequent live and recorded reports from the area to which Sugimoto apparently intended to go. I haven't heard that the Japanese government is demanding that they return, or is planning on confiscating their passports.

Is the issue that the Japanese government feels that corporate journalists are better protected/at less risk than freelancers?

Or is it that they feel they can control individuals but not corporations?

I understand the down side of having journalists in danger areas, but if the pressure and evidently extra-legal passport confiscation is selectively applied it seems like a double standard to me.

@FernGully Dental records possibly, although it could be difficult to know which dental records to check without having some idea of who the victim might be. I'm pretty certain that there isn't a national database of dental records. IMO fingerprints are unlikely because it's pretty rare for Japanese to be fingerprinted, so the chance of having prints for comparison is low.

If they have a fair idea of who the victim might be, of course it's possible to get fingerprints (or DNA, for that matter) from the suspected victim's residence.

I'm not sure about the JSDF fingerprinting policy (although it would seem reasonable to fingerprint them for identification in case of death in a dangerous profession), but the most likely people to have fingerprints on file in Japan are criminals, which is the primary reason that there was so much resistance from foreigners to being fingerprinted for the (in)famous "gaijin card": many felt that they were being treated as criminals.

@tessa Thanks for the information. I had never heard of an overnight "ningen dock" being done at a hotel; I'd only heard of them being done at hospitals or other medical centers with beds.

According to a Japanese news report yesterday, he advertised for participants in his bogus "study" by saying that it was a pleasant and easy way to make money (I believe it was 7000 yen or so) while doing nothing but relaxing and sleeping in a resort hotel/onsen. He gave the victims alcohol and sleeping pills on the pretext that the study required uninterrupted sleep, and apparently dealt with underage victims by giving them alcohol-laced cake instead of booze.

The news story said that many/most/all of the women were unaware that they had been raped, having been unconscious throughout, and gave the impression that the way in which the crime was discovered was being suppressed for privacy reasons. My guess--speculation only--is that one or more of the victims were notified when they were seen in porn clips by acquaintances.

I hope that this scumbag gets a very harsh sentence, indeed.

What is a "raised medium"? Perhaps that's supposed to be "raised median"?

If not, could someone enlighten me, please?

Moderator: Yes, that was a typo.

I've heard of this happening before, but not, IIRC, in such large numbers.

Depending on the area, crows that have been dependent on human-produced garbage might have been stymied in their scavenging by the long period with no garbage pickup over the holidays, and thus no handy food source for the numerous crows that had been supported by it.

Those who have been in the Tokyo area long enough may remember how few crows there used to be, before Tokyo performed a classic "be careful what you ask for" act and legislated translucent garbage bags to replace the previously mostly opaque ones. The crow population dramatically increased, since now they could see food and regularly rip the bags to get to it.

Previously, they mostly feasted on loose scraps and pretty much ignored sealed opaque bags, and there weren't that many crows around...not "none", but many fewer than after the bags were changed.

Parts of Saitama seem to have been having some success in changing from blue to yellow nets over the trash piles; crows apparently can't see through the yellow as well, or at least that's the theory I hear.

I don't know how long it takes a crow to starve, but in some areas nobody was putting out garbage for several days in a row, nearly a week in fact, including small restaurants that closed for the holidays.

There may not have been enough food around for the number of crows that would otherwise be supported. Why they didn't scavenge the first crows to die is a good question, but maybe the survivors did just that.

Well done for the good citizen and neighbor who acted swiftly and intelligently--calling 110 before giving chase--if a little riskily.

I, too, wondered how it was apparently so easy for a civilian to subdue a relatively young cop, but then it occurred to me that the thief cop may not have been in the best of shape after leaping from a second floor balcony. He was likely at least shaken up, if not somewhat injured. This not being the movies, and the cop not being a stuntman, I would expect at least some negative result after landing from that height (and, no, even that height isn't trivial).

In any case, it's good that he was caught, and despicable that he was a cop.

The increased police presence in stations doesn't seem to have helped, at least in this case.

I saw the door window on a Joban Line train forced out similarly, maybe 25 years ago. I imagine it happens more often than media reports would indicate. With the ubiquity of phone cameras, I expect more reports.

In Kumagaya, around 120 km ESE of Nagano, I felt the first shock strongly enough to be concerned (even if my cell phone app hadn't gone of 10 or 15 seconds before it). It was an odd, slow, back&forth motion rather than the usual faster movement, and with no discernible up&down motion, at least to me.

I didn't feel any of the aftershocks, although at least a couple of them were apparently pretty strong. I know the Hakuba area pretty well, having visited several times, and I worry about those whose houses have been destroyed, especially since it'll be snowing before long.

I'm glad that there seem to have been no fatalities. From TV reports, it seems that the local preparations, especially sharing and updating information on who/how many people live where, was of great help in locating and rescuing those trapped in their homes.

I hope that the injured recover quickly and completely, and that the damage can be repaired soon.

I've just been watching a quite long and rather detailed report on the Takata air bag issue on NHK TV news, or all places. Better late than never, I guess.

Not to excuse the lousy QA/QC, or the despicable cover-ups, but part of the reason that it hasn't been reported that much here may be that there seem to be relatively many older cars involved, and the shaken rules here tend to encourage owners to trade in fairly early in the life of their cars.

Plus, of course, the typical media reluctance to annoy prospective sponsors/advertisers.

For what it's worth, here's a list that is probably relatively reliable, and the article contains a useful link to updates:

http://blog.caranddriver.com/massive-takata-airbag-recall-everything-you-need-to-know-including-full-list-of-affected-vehicles/

@Ken Kitsune It appears that a taxi made a right turn while there was a motorcycle going straight through the intersection in the oncoming lane. This put the left side of the cab in front of the bike, and the bike slammed into that side. From the bike rider's point of view, the taxi turned from the oncoming lane, toward the road on the biker's left.

It is, unfortunately, a pretty common scenario. The car driver turning right misjudges the oncoming bike's speed and/or location, figuring he/she can finish the turn before the bike gets to the intersection. The bike rider doesn't expect the car to turn right in front of him/her, and can't stop or go around in time.

I ride a bike a lot, and drive a car a lot, too. I've seen the situation from both sides, so I'm wary of trusting the drivers/riders around me to always drive safely and react to situations appropriately. I drive/ride attentively and defensively.So far so good.

@scrote I couldn't agree more.

@MarkX Your comment reflects what I hear from the many pensioners who live around me, and from many of those still working, as well. The "pent-up demand" seems to be largely BS, for most common people. There are something like 8 million empty housing units across Japan, and while many of those are empty because of people moving from the country to the city, and others because it's too expensive to demolish a house and to keep a residential property empty (the property taxes on vacant residential land are ridiculous), that many empty units don'r indicate a huge demand for new housing. That's not surprising given the greying of society and the reduced birthrate. Anyone not worried about the future since the bubble burst would have to be in some sort of denial, unless independently wealthy like many of the politicians.

As far as I can see, the manufacturers whom the Abenomics crowd are courting and benefiting have already made their decisions, moving manufacturing offshore and hiring cheaper labor there, combined with massive "restructuring" of many employees here who were/are still of working age. The trend in hiring domestically has been to temporary and/or part-time workers. Expecting them to hire more full-time locals and increase their salaries is unrealistic in the extreme. They will continue to sit on cash and spend it, when the right time comes, on further manufacturing overseas, with cheaper costs, not on increased manufacturing plant or full-time, permanent employees here.

It seems to me that the business owners most likely to hire their fellow Japanese if they could are the very people suffering most from the effects of Abenomics: the small and medium business owners who either rely on imports or cannot move their operations offshore, or both.

The market for high-ticket items has shrunk here, predictably, and is very unlikely, IMO, to grow much. How many new TVs or cars are needed as the population ages? I suppose the posters here in JT who quickly jump on every news item about a senior in a car wreck ought to agree that a graying society needs fewer cars. Increasing the prices of and taxes on items for which there is a demand (food, for example, and utilities) is not going to magically make people buy more with their limited income and saved cash. Making cars and TVs cheaper overseas isn't going to increase Taro Suzuki's confidence in the future, either, when he's sadly looking at a cabbage or package of butter that he can no longer afford.

Even though we see entirely too many cases of police committing crimes, and often find occasion to mock police incompetence, this arresting officer deserves praise for a job very well done.

@Nessie I take it that you meant "can't stop", and in that case I agree.

I drive a car and also ride a motorcycle, and have done both here for decades. I also occasionally ride a scooter, maybe four or five times a month, from home to the station and back if I'm taking the train. Whatever I'm driving, I'm always conscious (wary, really) of the vehicles behind me, since tailgating is so prevalent here.

I always leave plenty of space between my vehicle and that in front of me while moving. This can be very difficult on the highways, since other drivers tend to rush into the opened space, regardless of speeds and stopping distances.

Even when stopped at a light, I try to leave enough space between my vehicle and the one in front, just in case some oblivious driver hits me from behind: I want to avoid being pushed into the car in front if possible. I've seen too many multiple-vehicle accidents caused by a combination of tailgating and inattention, and don't want to end up as the filling in a vehicle sandwich.

There are advantages to riding a motorbike, but one of the disadvantages is that if you get hit, it's you, not a metal box, that takes the impact, at least initially, and while pretty much everyone here wears a helmet, that won't necessarily save your life.

RIP for the scooter rider.

The article doesn't show the criteria by which the schools were selected. I hope that they erred on the side of caution, rather than making too-optimistic assumptions about likely tsunami height and how far inland they might travel.

While it's true that Japan is an archipelago and there are many communities--and thus schools--near the coast, there are also a lot of towns (and schools) up in the mountains as well, and thus presumably safe from most tsunami. They have earthquakes, and maybe volcano eruptions, to worry about, unfortunately.

There's no escaping severe penalties for killing a pedestrian, and only very rarely--almost never--are extenuating circumstances taken into account. Drivers just have to live with it, or not drive. I've never thought that's always fair or reasonable, but what I think doesn't count.

The penalties for hit and run are much more severe, and there will be no breaks in sentencing, as there might be if the driver stayed, called police, tried to render assistance, etc. (as any decent human would do, IMO, regardless of impending charges/penalties).

One big reason that hit and runs seem to be increasing these days is that the penalties for DUI were made much more severe a while back, after some high profile cases, especially one in which a family's car was knocked off a bridge. Drivers who have been drinking decide to take a chance and run instead of staying and getting charged with DUI in addition to the likely professional negligence, causing bodily harm while driving, manslaughter (if they kill the pedestrian (or cyclist, probably...they're likely to be treated as pedestrians if hit).

It sometimes happens that the hit and run drivers turn themselves in the next day, when their DUI cannot be proved, and claim that "they're not sure, but maybe they hit someone/something last night".

@jumpultimatestars Unfortunately, the driver will almost certainly be charged with at the very least professional negligence, and very likely manslaughter. It may not be fair or reasonable to many people, but the official view is that the driver, "professional" because licensed, even if not "commercial" as in a taxi driver, must drive so as to be able to avoid inflicting injury, regardless of circumstances, with very, very few exceptions or room for interpretation. "Even if the pedestrian drops from the sky", as a cop once told me.

Practical or not, you're supposed to drive in such a way as to be able to avoid people darting from between cars, or out of hedges, or lying on skateboards. You won't find many (any?) prosecutors willing to consider "extenuating circumstances" when a vehicle hits a pedestrian or (usually) a bicyclist.

I feel very sorry for the boy and his family, and for the driver as well. I personally think that the boy was too young to be skateboarding unsupervised on the street, but it's too late for his parents to be making that decision now. They, and the driver, will have to live with the aftermath of this tragedy that could probably have been avoided, but likely not by the driver.

The possibility of being held to a virtually impossible standard as a driver is always there. If you can't cope with that, it's probably best not to drive here. Drive safely if you must drive, and--as a long-term and frequent driver here--I'd advise always being alert for the worst-case, most unlikely scenarios, and try to drive to avoid them.

@FightingViking I'll keep it in mind, but going off into the hinterlands during a typhoon--even to drink beer--might not be the safest plan.

@justbcuzisay You're welcome; I mean it quite sincerely. I sympathize with your plight, too. This foreigner spent over 30+ years working as a salaryman in a major Japanese company. I'm well aware of the (often admirable) Japanese work ethic, and understand both it and also the way in which it is cynically exploited by some (not all) managers/executives, who are too often ready to sacrifice worker safety and health for profit.

To be fair, I'd bet that your among your spouse's headaches are workers who don't follow the rules even when they are aware of them, and the--probably overworked--supervisor isn't able to watch everyone, all the time, no matter how diligent he may try to be.

@FightingViking I'm glad that your son avoided injury, but disconnecting his safety belt because it got in the way was obviously a problem both in his taking a dangerous chance and in his supervisor not noticing or perhaps tacitly approving it by not enforcing the rule. As for anyone being hired, these days there's a shortage of construction workers, and I expect that we will be seeing more and more of this type of accident, as BrobaconZ suggests.

@Cricky That's not an unreasonable assumption, but FWIW I've seen the "no fixed address" applied to guys who are itinerant construction workers, living in prefab, temporary company dormitories on or near the construction site, moving on from one site to the next as the jobs require. I've often wondered what they do about a juminhyo.

I'm not saying that's the case with this guy, but it's a possible alternative to his being homeless in the vagrant sense (not to imply that all homeless are vagrants, since that's also not the case).

I don't stock up on food, water, and supplies for typhoons, but only because I'm already well stocked-up in case of earthquakes. I keep my vehicles filled with gas for the same reason (remember how long it took after 3/11 to get fuel?).

It's a good idea to have a look around your yard, balcony, etc., for objects/tools/potted plants/etc. that might be flung around by high winds. You don't want your stuff to be responsible for braining your neighbor...you know, the one who inevitably goes out in the middle of a typhoon to "check on" something.

I've got much more beer stocked than water (only a few days' worth of water), but I have a deep well--with a hand-operated pump in addition to the electric one--so that's not such a concern.

This last typhoon was pretty underwhelming by the time it got to where I live in the Saitama/Gunma border country, but I've known some to hang around in one area for much longer than predicted. There have also been a couple lately that spawned/encouraged tornadoes, too, so you might want to keep that potential risk in mind as well.

Stay safe, folks.

@justbcuzisay Having one (or in any case too few) people responsible for doing too much work, especially over multiple sites, and imposing burnout-causing schedules on them, instead of hiring more people to spread the work out manageably, is a recipe for this kind of tragic accident, or worse.

Adding strong pressure to get the job done faster is likely to make the situation worse in many ways, including taking shortcuts on safety and letting the workers work without adequate supervision, even if not actually ordering them to to cut corners. There's a lot of blame to go around.

I hope your spouse stays safe, avoids burnout, and isn't involved even peripherally in any accidents.

@zichi You may well be right about the immediate/direct fault. I haven't worked in the construction industry in Japan, but friends have, and many of the tales I've heard from them indicate entirely too little trained supervision and entirely too much reliance on senpai for direction when setting up and performing tasks.

In a situation where getting the job done quickly has a higher priority than safety, that can lead to deadly accidents. On the other hand, I've gotten the impression that the shortage of well-trained supervisors may well be the company's fault, trying to cut costs by having fewer expensive people managing more cheaper people That's not to say that there aren't supervisors on some sites actively encouraging their subordinates--some of whom are poorly trained and lack experience--to take risks in the name of cutting costs.

I could imagine either scenario leading to workers to use inadequate equipment: 1) insufficiently supervised workers not checking the load rating because they don't know they should and/or their senpai says it's fine, 2) supervisor who knows better taking the risk rather than spending extra time/money on getting proper gear.

Of course, indirectly either could be said to be the company's responsibility for not providing sufficient training and supervision.

As you imply in the "unless they were ordered to do so", in this case a lot depends on who made the decision to use that equipment.

@quercetum Yes, they could. However, you might want to look into the amount of the bond required for a plaintiff to pursue a civil suit (a percentage of the damages demanded), which discourages frivolous lawsuits but also discourages the poor from suing companies in such cases. Then there's the lawyer and court fees and the time required for making multiple court appearances, often over a very long time, indeed. I've known relatively straightforward civil suits to go on for years.

My guess would be that if a guy still has to work in construction at the age of 61, his family is unlikely to be rich, or even comfortably well off. They might well be unable to afford a lawsuit.

Experience suggests to me that they may be able to get a certain amount of consolation money from the company, or more likely from the company's insurer, but that they'll more than likely have to be satisfied with considerably less than they might have gotten from a suit, assuming they could afford one.

Here's an example of why out-of-court settlements are often preferred: http://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/01/world/tokyo-journal-to-be-sorely-tried-try-filing-a-lawsuit-in-japan.html