taikan comments

Even if one accepts TSA's estimate that the watch list is closer in size to 450,000 than 1 million, that's still a lot of names, and it undoubtedly leads to numerous false alarms. This is illustrated by the fact that the list includes a name shared by the former head of the Department of Justice's Criminal Division (i.e., the former chief federal prosecutor).

Logically, TSA should have no need for a list identifying potentially risky travelers, unless TSA has concluded that current airport security measures are insufficient to prevent someone either from hijacking a plane or from smuggling explosives on board and causing a detonation which destroys the plane in mid-flight.

As the article clearly states, the Japanese people generally are opposed to the use of nuclear power for military purposes. That is why, at a time when the US and Russians use nuclear-powered submarines, all Japanese submarines are still powered by diesel engines. Except on the most superficial level, there is no inconsistency between opposing the use of nuclear power for military purposes and approving the use of nuclear power for other purposes, such as generation of electricity.

Historically, the US military has been sensitive to the concerns of the Japanese people in this regard, and has not stationed nuclear-powered ships in Japan. However, all US aircraft carriers now are nuclear-powered vessels. Therefore, the Japanese government either had to allow a nuclear-powered carrior to berth in Japan, or do without any US aircraft carrier in Japan. Obviously, they chose the former alternative.

So far, Al Qaeda has killed fewer Americans than the number who die in one month from automobile accidents. Nevertheless, it has managed to scare the majority of Americans, and their so-called representatives in the House and Senate, so much that they are willing to give up the freedoms that our forefathers fought and died for in the Revolutionary War and again in World War II. Amazing.

There is a certain amount of irony to this story. The history of intellectual property law is rife with examples of countries, including Japan, that either lacked patent or trademark laws, failed to enforce them, or interpreted them very loosely at a time when most domestic companies did not have significant amounts of valuable intellectual property. Then, as domestic companies developed patent portfolios and valuable brand names and other trademarks, IP enforcment would become ever more stringent. China today is similar to Japan 30-35 years ago in that respect. And, as Chinese companies begin to expand their patent portfolios and as Chinese brand names begin to achieve greater recognition as signifying quality goods that can be purchased for a reasonable price, you can expect the Chinese to begin enforcing their IP laws with much greater zeal. The Shiseido case will be a good indicator of whether the Chinese government thinks that China has gotten to the point where IP protection is more important to the success of the Chinese economy that allowing Chinese companies to violate the IP rights of foreign companies.

Ghosn acknowledged Nissan’s executive pay was far higher than the compensation at Toyota, but he said that was because Toyota executives were almost all Japanese, while a quarter of those at Nissan were non-Japanese, requiring that their pay reflect “global standards.”

Aside from the fact that Toyota is just as much a "global" company as Nissan, as reflected in its world-wide sales figures, this statement essentially is an indictment of the executive pay structures of many of the so-called "global" companies. Nissan, which is far less successful than Toyota, pays its executives far more than Toyota pays its executives. Ghosn attributes this to the need for Nissan to satisfy the demands of non-Japanese corporate executives for higher pay. Instead, he should examine whether the higher pay given by Nissan and so many other companies to their executives, compared with the executive pay given by Toyota and other highly successful Japanese companies to their executives, has resulted in commensurately higher return on investment (or, if you prefer another measure of success, profits or share price). If not, then the shareholders are being cheated as a result of the board of directors' approval of excess executive compensation.

usaexpat

what other country if they knew they had oil reserves would prevent people from drilling, certainly not the Saudi's, the Chinese or virtually any other nation

Not only does Saudi Arabia strictly control drilling, it also keeps its actual oil production at least .5 to 1.5 million barrels per day less than its production capacity. The whole purpose of the OPEC cartel is to limit, by agreement between and among its members, the amount of oil that actually is brought out of the ground on a daily basis.

In addition to the high price of oil, the public should be paying attention to the "refining differential," which is the difference in price between the crude oil that enters the refinery and the finished products that come out of the refinery. By blaming the high cost of gasoline on increases in the price of crude oil, the oil companies have been able to raise the amount they charge for refining, with the difference being pure bottom-line profit.

One of the true ironies of the past 50 years is the change in the definitions of "liberal" and "conservative." The very police powers that Sarge (and others who think of themselves as conservatives) support are the same police powers held by the Soviet KGB that were so strongly opposed by Barry Goldwater, William F. Buckley and others who started the "modern" conservative movement. Now, so-called conservatives argue that we should expand the powers of the government to make sure that it can peer into every aspect of our lives. And for what? Simply because of a fear that a few terrorists might do us some harm. Imagine how small the United States would be today if the early settlers had been as afraid of possible danger as Sarge and his ilk seem to be.

OssanULTRA -- The death penalty is applicable only to first-degree murder. As the article plainly states, he pleaded guilty to charges of second-degree murder, and thus the judge could not sentence him to death. One can only assume the prosecutor decided to accept the lesser plea because there were no witnesses to the crime, and therefore the prosecution could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt the elements necessary to obtain a death sentence. This is evident from the fact that the initial charges included kidnapping, but the story says she was "lured" from the path. That is a strong indication that there was no witness to contradict the guilty party's story about how the crime occurred. And, no doubt, the guilty party's story was designed to avoid conviction for first-degree murder.

a lot of federal court appointments granting judgeships for life go to prominent donors who are often undistinguished lawyers or not even lawyers

chardk1 -- I cannot disagree with your statement that many persons appointed as federal judges were not particularly distinguished lawyers, but I challenge you to name a single individual appointed to a lifetime (Article III) federal judgeship in the past 50 years (or, for that matter, the past 100 years) who was not an attorney.

As for Obama's hypocrisy in committing to accept federal funding (with its concomitant spending limits) if his opponent did so, and then reneging on that commitment, I think this displays Obama's skills as a politician. Against Hillary, he needed to portray himself as the "agent of change," and he did so quite successfully. Against McCain, he will need to retool his image in order to avoid being portrayed as being too "naive" or "idealistic" to protect America's interests as President. By showing that he is willing to take whatever advantage he can in order to beat McCain, he has shown that he is neither naive nor unrealistically idealistic.

Youdontknow -- According to MOJ, the total budget for penal systems for 2007 was approximately ¥196.4 billion. The average daily population was 80,335 inmates. If you divide ¥196.4 billion by 80,335 you get ¥2,444,763 per year as the average cost per inmate. Divide that by 365 and you ¥6698 per inmate per day as the cost of the system.

According to MOJ, the cost for an inmate is only ¥1310. However, based on other information available on the MOJ website, it appears the actual cost is closer to ¥6700 per day. Either way, that is far less than $300 per day.

Regardless of the actual cost of imprisonment, the fact that there were more than 7,000 people who could not afford to pay their fines in 2006, when the average fine was only ¥350000 (at 2006 exchange rates, less than $3,500) is evidence of serious problems with the Japanese economy and/or the Japanese social welfare structure.

Most of what McClellan has to say is self-serving and not particularly revelatory. Indeed, those who read papers published by the now defunct Knight Ridder chain were aware the administration was lying even before the attack on Iraq began. Nevertheless, McClellan's book will have served a purpose (other than enriching McClellan) if it causes people who pay attention to the news to demand that those who call themselves journalists actually investigate the facts and report the results of those investigations, rather than merely parrot the propaganda fed to them by the government.

You might as well ask whether the average JT reader is competent to judge the competence (or lack thereof) of the Japanese police. Many foreign governments have one or more law enforcement liaison officials in Japan. In addition, the respective branches of the U.S. military with bases in Japan all have CID or CIS officers/agents who work in Japan and frequently deal with the Japanese police. If JT really is interested in assessing the competence of the Japanese police, why not ask for the views of some of the non-Japanese law enforcement personnel who have either worked with the Japanese police or who have observed the Japanese police at work?