This article did not mention the fact that the two Bulgarians went to the police station themselves and admitted to the crime voluntarily. They surrendered volunetarily. I think that's important to be noted. The police said that this is the first time a foreigner commits a crime and surrenders on their own.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Critics have argued that the government is pushing for the legal revision without fully preparing social security and Japanese language education systems.
Why do they need Japanese language education system? Why not let the businesses take care of that? Japan is the same as Europe, trying to forcefuly integrate new people into their culture through social programs. Europe has proven beyond any reasonable doubt that forceful integration DOES - NOT - WORK. You cannot forcefully integrate people, you can LET THEM integrate THEMSELVES through the labor market. America is a land of immigrants, and America has never had any English language classes for new immigrants, yet somehow immigrants manage to integrate into the American society better than the immigrants in Europe. Stop trying to HELP immigrants, LEAVE THEM ALONE.
Also, when it comes to ''social security''. I have a better idea, how about you privatize it, and let people PAY when they want to use it? How about that? The subway is private in Japan, and the highways are private. When you want to use the roads, you pay for it. The system works well. Do the same for social security too.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
public works spending plan
Isn't that what they have been doing for the past 30/40 years also known as ''lost decades''?
5 ( +5 / -0 )
politically sensitive farm products
Which is another term fo Clientism and Cronyism.
-5 ( +1 / -6 )
You just admitted that there wasn't any victim compensation, and then you contradicted yourself by saying that they have already been compensated for.
I have explained to you that the offer Japan made to give money to individuals was not a victim compensation, it was for war damages. Your whole argument is based on false premise. I have explained to you about 5 times already that the money Japan gave to Korea was for economic cooperation and aid, NOT victim compensation. They offered to give the money to individuals instead of the government, SK refused, because the govt. would have better redistribute the money. Again, this is economic aid NOT compensation for the victims. You have not yet addressed this basic fact which renders your whole argument invalid.
-5 ( +0 / -5 )
Again with the twisting of words. I have already addressed what you said. Read the treaty more closely in detail, i am sure you haven't done that. Japan did proposed to give the money to individuals as opposed to the government ,but like i have said 3 times already -- the money -- refers to ECONOMIC AID -- grants and loans -- NOT -- victim compensation. That is the huge difference you are omiting for reasons one might only speculate. It is explicitly stated in the treaty that the money Japan is giving is for ''economic aid'' and ''economic contribution'' NOT compensation for the suffering of the victims. Trying to twist the definition of words to encompasses the compensation for the suffering of the victims into a broad ''war damages'' for which Japan gave economic aid is nothing but a disingenuous travesty.
-10 ( +0 / -10 )
The High Contracting Parties confirm that the problems concerning property, rights, and interests of the two High Contracting Parties and their peoples (including juridical persons) and the claims between the High Contracting Parties and between their peoples, including those stipulated in Article IV(a) of the Peace Treaty with Japan signed at the city of San Francisco on September 8, 1951, have been settled completely and finally.
Why did you omit the previous part, which i cited above, in which it is explicitly stated by Japan that the money they are giving is for ECONOMIC AID -- loans and grants. Property, rights and interest -- is about the country and infrastructure. Nowhere in the treaty does it say that the money is for compensating the forced laborers, or the damages suffered by the victims. The damages they are talking about are to the economy and country. The court order is about compensation of the forced laborers, something not covered by the economic aid and loans Japan gave to Korea for the rebuilding of the country. Can you honestly not understand the difference between economic compensation and victim compensation, or are you just being intellectually dishonest?
Basically this minister is disregarding his job in not mediating the situation through DIPLOMATIC CHANNELS FIRST by appealing to the press.
Huh? What are you talking about? The SK minister RESPONDED to what the Japanese minister had said in Bloomberg. You weabos and Japanophiles are in the twilight zone. You seem to be incapable of making the connection between Action and Reaction.
-20 ( +1 / -21 )
South Korea says there were nearly 150,000 victims of wartime forced labor, 5,000 of whom are alive. Japan says the compensation issue was settled by the 1965 treaty normalizing ties.
The 1965 treaty is about Economic Aid, not compensation for forced labor. The money Japan gave to Korea was an economic aid in forms of grands and loans. Quote from the treaty: Japan provided South Korea with $300 million grant in economic aid and $200 million in loans together with $300 million in loans for private trust, a total of $800 million as "economic cooperation". The court decision is about COMPENSATION for forced labor, NOT economic aid or loans. Can you not understand the difference?
-20 ( +3 / -23 )
Japan's Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Corp must compensate four South Koreans for their forced labour during the war, which Japan has denounced as "unthinkable."
Why would it be ''unthinkable''? Isn't that what Mitsubishi just did with the Chinese forced laborers?
-19 ( +3 / -22 )
She was not prevented from getting a job because she is a woman. Where did you get that idea from? Being harassed is not the same as not promoting someone. I don't even take that as a harassment, telling someone that they are pushing their opinion is not a harassment, it's rather an explanation for why they are not being promoted.
1 ( +4 / -3 )
and deny then jobs. How dare women demand equality?
She is not entitled to a promotion just for being a woman. You have to EARN your position. Not being promoted does not mean you are not treated equaly. I can't believe how self-entitled way of thinking some people have. As if they DESERVE and are ENTITLED to a promotion, and if they don't get it, it's because of sexism. If anything, she is the one harassing the university and demanding unequal treatment. She didn't get the job because she is incompetent, or for whatever reason, the university is not obligated to give an explanation, it's a private institution they can deny you promotion or fire you for whatever reason they want. If you don't like you, you are free to seek employment someplace else. If anything, this lawsuit is doing a diservice to all women in Japan, because they will now be seen as a liability to their employers who will feel reluctant to hire woman out of fear of being sued when they don't promote them.
2 ( +7 / -5 )
professors criticized her at a faculty meeting, saying she is "high-handed" and "presses her opinion on others,"
She sure proved them wrong.
So, let me guess this straight. The two professors did not gave her a promotion, and accused her of ''prsessing her opinion on others'', and now she is suing the university for not firing them, and for preventing her being promoted? But it is them who decide who will get promoted, so how was she being prevented? Even if they didn't make those remarks, she would've still not be promoted. Sounds like a self-entitled woman.
-2 ( +7 / -9 )
The way this ''issue'' is portrayed and viewed is wrong and misleading. I will give you another perspective.
The government ''allowing'' more foreign workers to come to Japan is like the government allowing Japanese people to have more property rights. This is a property rights issue, and should be viewed as such. If i am an employer, and i want to hire someone from Indonesia, but the govt. tells me i can't do that, and i MUST instead hire someone from Japan, that is a violation of my property rights. It's my property, i built it, it's my business, i own the land, i ought to have the right to hire whoever i want from wherever i want. I pay the wages, it's my property. This is akin to the Tokyo government saying i can't hire people from Osaka, i must hire only people from Tokyo. That would be a clear violation of my rights, but it's the same when the central government says i must only hire people from Japan, and i am not allowed to hire people from foreign countries. They are violating my property rights. And what this bill is saying is that i am now ''allowed'' (mind you) to excersise my property rights a little bit more. That's like saying, i am allowed to have human rights on Monday and Tuesday, but not on Wednesday and Friday.
Same goes for international trade by the way. I want to buy something from Vietnam, but the government says - no, you must buy only from Japan, and if you want to buy from Vietnam, we will punish you by taxing you more for your item. Again, imagine the Tokyo government taxing people who buy from Osaka or Hokkaido, it's the same for people buying from foreign countries. The misconception is that nations trade with each other, and therefore this is a us-vs-them issue, and WE must protect OUR team by forcing OUR people to buy from US in order to support OUR country. But that is all false, because nations do not trade, only PEOPLE trade. Me buying the same item on a lower cost from other countries HELPS ME, i am better off, and that is a good thing for ME, it helps ME have a better life and a higher standards of living, same goes for ME hiring people from foreign countries on a lower cost, I BENEFIT, and my customers benefit, that's good for ME.
People need to start thinking in terms of INDIVIDUAL STANDARDS OF LIVING, and not this collective group image BS nonsense.
0 ( +2 / -2 )
If that was the purpose of the economy, why not order 1 million people to dig a hole with a spoon, and then 1 more million to fill up the hole again? That would create 2 million jobs instantly, but is the standards of living going to rise? Are people's lives going to be better off just by doing that pointless job and providing no services and products to others? The answer is no.
You don't want jobs, you want goods and services that people value. Working on a job that creates no value for others does not raise the standards of living in a society.
Consumption does not drive the economy, production and productivity does. You need to first produce something in order to consume it. Anyone can consume, but not everyone can produce. It's when there is an abudance of goods and services on a lower price that people have high standards of living.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
The purpose of the economy is not to create jobs, but to produce goods and services that people want. How many new jobs have been created is irrelvant to people's standards of living. What matters is the productivity, capital investment, savings, and production of goods and services people value. You should publish the productivity numbers, savings and investment in capital formation ratings, and the value of the currency. Those are the only numbers that matter to standards of living.
-4 ( +0 / -4 )
This verdict is a decision that is impossible in light of international law
You mean like the ICJ decision that ordered Japan to stop its whaling hunting, and then Japan ignoring it? Japan seems to care about international law only when its in their favor, if not ,they ignore it.
-3 ( +6 / -9 )
Good decision. Japan should stop denying and trying to bury their history. SK has made it clear to Japan that they're not going to let it rest until Japan takes responsibility for what they did.
-17 ( +6 / -23 )
When I first came here I thought it was the modernest first world country in the world. After a long time here it is just another Asian country like Cambodia or Vietnam.
In what way is Japan like Cambodia or Vietnam? Japan is the 3rd largest economy in the world, and among the top richest nations on per capita basis. Tokyo alone has bigger GDP than the entire country of UK. Corporate corruption is the norm in every nation where the corporations can get away with it. Japan having a massive bureaucracy makes it easy for big CEOs to get away with corruption and bribary. They definitely have a problem with the rule of law, but to put them in the same category as Cambodia or Vietnam is ridiculous. You don't become an economic superpower if you don't have good property rules and more or less stable rule of law.
By the way, ''modernest'' is not a word.
-3 ( +0 / -3 )
To summarize Japan in 3 words: Reform Without Change.
21 ( +24 / -3 )
How could they all have the same views ? Men's point of view and experience of having to wearing a skirt uniform, of getting pregnant and of being the only minister of their gender is similar to women's ?
Well apparently they can, since apart from the ultra conservative two women i listed above, i remember seeing other women from the government who made equally worse statements on other social issues regarding man-female relationship. Being pregnant is of no concern to anybody, i am more talking about policies regarding social norms and expectations.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
Diversity of ideas is good, and should be advocated for. Diversity of gender is pointless, especially if these people have the same views and ideas. You could have 10 females and 10 males, but if they all have the same ideas and views, you would see the same policies and results. You could have 10 males, but if every one of them has their own different opinions and ideas, you would get much more different policies and outcomes. Competition of political ideas is just as important as competition of businesses in the market.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
What difference does it make if a cabinet minister is a female or a male? Do you think just because an MP is a female, she will be a tolerant liberal angel? Remember Mio Sugita who said that gay people are unproductive? Or the mayor of Tokyo Yuriko Koike who a vicious self-described right wing nationalist?
People need to stop associating gender with particular social positions or policies.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
It's a private university, they can do whatever they want. Women should just boycott it.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
I usually use the words 貴様、己 and てめぇ when addressing people. For some reason nobody wants to hang out with me.
2 ( +3 / -1 )
You don't reduce the debt by increasing taxes, you reduce it by cutting spending.
7 ( +7 / -0 )
Best city for what?
6 ( +6 / -0 )
The medicine prize has been dominated by US and European researchers for most of the history of the prize.
That's because the Nobel Prize was established in 1895, and for the next 50+ years only Europeans and North Americans were participating. Non-European scholars were evaluated and taken into consideration only after the end of WW2, and since it takes a lot of money and political stability to have research institutions and higher education institutions for people to produce good research, it makes sense why Japan is the only Asian nation with a lot of laureates, and it also explains why they gained recognition only after the 70s and 80s, which is when Japan became a high-income nation.
Of course there is a massive bias in all this. Imagine if i suggest the Nobel Prize was moved to China and Chinese academics were evaluating candidates. Most people would say that that would be biased, and that the Chinese would be biased towards themselves.. well if that is the case, then isn't it logical to then assume the same for Europeans? Double standards are at the center-core of discrimination and hypocrisy.
In any case, i personally think these awards have very little merit, and they are all BS and political. There are thousands of researchers and people who have came up with revolutionary new ideas and innovations for which they are not recognized, not even acknowledged. Remember, Obama won the Peace Prize for literally just getting elected. If this isn't enough to tell you how political and BS these awards are, i don't know what will.
-2 ( +3 / -5 )
Yeah, what person in their right mind would not choose slave-labor over a decent paying job! The audacity of these ungrateful foreigners.
Why do you call it ''slave labor''? Slave Labor is when you are forced and coerced into doing something for no or little reward. Nobody is forcing these people to do anything, they chose to come to Japan and do that job. They are free to quit anytime they want. Yes, it would've better if they were free to choose among better alternatives, but this is not ''slave labor''. You are distorting the meaning of this word. Blacks in America were Slave Laborers, they were not free to quit and go back home.
-6 ( +3 / -9 )
I guess i can sort of see some connection and relation for the Japanese involvement in the South China Sea, but i struggle to understand what exactly is little England doing there, and what are they hoping to achieve exactly?
-5 ( +0 / -5 )