Kan vs Ozawa

noyhauser · 1 Sep 2010

I'm not sure if this was unexpected... but the DPJ has been wracked by some serious infighting over the past week between Ichiro Ozawa and the PM, Natao Kan. I'm actually somewhat happy to see this; I think Ozawa represents the "old way" of Japanese politics, where shadowy insiders and party bosses play a large role in determining policy... with the PM serving as a puppet. Hatoyama was the last to suffer this fate, and its nice to see that Kan is actually stepping up this fight. Unsurprisingly something like 80% of the Japanese populace doesn't want to see Ozawa in office. I think alot of Kan's policies are pretty good, and if he can survive this, he'll be in a much stronger position.

Any other thoughts?

Dogen Z · 2 Sep 2010

noyhauser said:
I'm not sure if this was unexpected... but the DPJ has been wracked by some serious infighting over the past week between Ichiro Ozawa and the PM, Natao Kan. I'm actually somewhat happy to see this; I think Ozawa represents the "old way" of Japanese politics, where shadowy insiders and party bosses play a large role in determining policy... with the PM serving as a puppet. Hatoyama was the last to suffer this fate, and its nice to see that Kan is actually stepping up this fight. Unsurprisingly something like 80% of the Japanese populace doesn't want to see Ozawa in office. I think alot of Kan's policies are pretty good, and if he can survive this, he'll be in a much stronger position.

Any other thoughts?

Even thought a great majority of the public prefer Kan to Ozawa, Ozawa and his buddy Hatoyama are supported by a large number of DPJ members who will vote for leadership of the party. Ozawa has amply demonstrated he is unqualified to become the head of state with his money scandal and latest public gaffe about Americans being simpleminded. He'll be, at best, no better than Aso. So this fight is kind of scarey. I don't think he has Japan's best interest at heart.

noyhauser · 2 Sep 2010

Dogen Z said:
Even thought a great majority of the public prefer Kan to Ozawa, Ozawa and his buddy Hatoyama are supported by a large number of DPJ members who will vote for leadership of the party. Ozawa has amply demonstrated he is unqualified to become the head of state with his money scandal and latest public gaffe about Americans being simpleminded. He'll be, at best, no better than Aso. So this fight is kind of scarey. I don't think he has Japan's best interest at heart.

I don't think so either: Ozawa represents the worst of machine politics which has so dogged japanese political culture. There is a clear historical parallel here; Ozawa's political maneuverings inside the LDP in 1993 helped bring down the Miyawaza government, install Morihito Hosokawa's coalition, only to burn it down several months later.

I like that Kan didn't award him anything and is standing up to fight him. That gains far more respect from me than for anybody in else in the Japanese political spectrum. I just hope the DPJ members actually realize this, because they will be thrown out the next election otherwise.

Elizabeth · 2 Sep 2010

Ozawa seemed to be not to secretly hoping for a disappointing election a few weeks ago during the campaign after openly declaring he was told to keep quiet at the behest of Kan. This after mentioning earlier that Kan didn't seem to mind an intra-party debate on the tax issue.

I personally think the endgame being worked towards here may be a resurrection of the Grand Coalition with LDP. He gets to finally run the country albeit for a short period and as a further reward from all his cronies/friends/establishment finally gets the prosecutors off his back. Although at this point in his career there is good reason to question whether Ozawa has enough pockets of support left for a viable candidacy (the media always exaggerates the number of MPs indebted to him). And it is largely the inquest committee in my opinion that is driving this timing. If not for the threat of prosecution which becoming PM would alleviate, he would be able to bide his time until Kan comes close to resignation (next Spring ?)

If by some miracle he does manage to defeat Kan and take the premiership, Kan supporters in the cabinet and government would simply either form anti-Ozawa factions or pull out of the DPJ all together. It's a horrible situation for whoever is in control and the party is already so fractured the opposition effectively has the advantage in any negotiations anyway. Bringing back the most notorious symbol of bad old politics will only make an unmanageable situation destruct completely beyond the ability of any one person to broker. The cards are on the table for the Japanese people. If a showdown of this magnitude doesn't force the public to realize what they really want I don't know what will.

noyhauser · 2 Sep 2010

Elizabeth said:
Ozawa seemed to be not to secretly hoping for a disappointing election a few weeks ago during the campaign after openly declaring he was told to keep quiet at the behest of Kan. This after mentioning earlier that Kan didn't seem to mind an intra-party debate on the tax issue.

I personally think the endgame being worked towards here may be a resurrection of the Grand Coalition with LDP. He gets to finally run the country albeit for a short period and as a further reward from all his cronies/friends/establishment finally gets the prosecutors off his back. Although at this point in his career there is good reason to question whether Ozawa has enough pockets of support left for a viable candidacy (the media always exaggerates the number of MPs indebted to him). And it is largely the inquest committee in my opinion that is driving this timing. If not for the threat of prosecution which becoming PM would alleviate, he would be able to bide his time until Kan comes close to resignation (next Spring ?)

If by some miracle he does manage to defeat Kan and take the premiership, Kan supporters in the cabinet and government would simply either form anti-Ozawa factions or pull out of the DPJ all together. It's a horrible situation for whoever is in control and the party is already so fractured the opposition effectively has the advantage in any negotiations anyway. Bringing back the most notorious symbol of bad old politics will only make an unmanageable situation destruct completely beyond the ability of any one person to broker. The cards are on the table for the Japanese people. If a showdown of this magnitude doesn't force the public to realize what they really want I don't know what will.

I agree! There is an excellent article by David Pilling of the Financial Times about Japan's "Andy Warhol politics" where everybody gets to be Prime Minister for 15 minutes. Basically the quick succession of prime ministers have led to policy paralysis in government over the past two decades, as different leaders implement new policies and rescind those of their predecessors. There is no stability, hindering investment and development.

Elizabeth · 3 Sep 2010

If Kan doesn't start to look desperate and throw out the possibility of an outright resignation, I strongly suspect that both Kan and Ozawa realize that he is going to prevail. And if the party doesn't split, there is a possibility it will come off stronger.

Whatever his reasoning, the consequences of an Ozawa victory could be dramatic. The charges will mysteriously be resolved in one of those dark, backroom deals for him to leave office unscathed. The condition of which will be that control is handed back to the LDP. When that happens, there isn't even a glimmer of hope left for the country.

Elizabeth · 3 Sep 2010

noyhauser said:
I don't think so either: Ozawa represents the worst of machine politics which has so dogged japanese political culture. There is a clear historical parallel here; Ozawa's political maneuverings inside the LDP in 1993 helped bring down the Miyawaza government, install Morihito Hosokawa's coalition, only to burn it down several months later.

Which was a good thing at the time because it included electoral reform that indirectly paved the way for a DPJ victory. And it is just as true today - greater proportional-representation, public desire for stability, and a willingness to give the DPJ another chance = more DPJ. Ozawa can't make an argument to the contrary because there is none.

noyhauser · 4 Sep 2010

Elizabeth said:
Which was a good thing at the time because it included electoral reform that indirectly paved the way for a DPJ victory. And it is just as true today - greater proportional-representation, public desire for stability, and a willingness to give the DPJ another chance = more DPJ. Ozawa can't make an argument to the contrary because there is none.

I'm not convinced of that it was entirely a good thing... though I'd completely agree that it assisted with the DPJ's rise to power in the last election. Electoral reform implemented by Hosokawa created a convoluted system that is not easily understood by many Japanese voters. That and the failure of the coalition government experiment resulted in serious voter apathy for almost a decade, illustrated by the 7% drop in participation between 1993 and 1996 elections. Only in the last election did voter participation return to the rate seen in the 1993 election (High 60%.)

Astroboy · 6 Sep 2010

Kan, Ozawa Discuss DPJ Policies In TV Debates
http://e.nikkei.com/e/fr/tnks/Nni20100905D05JF384.htm

The nation is closely following the race, because the winner of the Democratic Party of Japan's Sept. 14 leadership election will almost automatically become the next prime minister.

But it doesn't matter so much as DPJ does not have majority seats in Upper House and it does not have more than 2/3 seats in Lower House, either. In short, nothing except fiscal budget will pass Congress unless DPJ makes concession against opposition parties.

In the debates, Ozawa also tried to underplay Kan's performance as prime minister by arguing that some of the changes he has made so far are only superficial and don't represent any true departure from the old bureaucracy-led politics that Kan is claiming to be replacing.

But without help of bureaucrats, DPJ politicians (aka amature politicians) cannot do anything. It has already been proved.

Ozawa reiterated his view that the government can cut back on enough spending by changing the way it hands out subsidies to municipal governments. Instead of giving grants with strings attached, he said, the central government should give the money in one package and let each municipality have complete control, noting that bureaucracy's involvement in how local governments use their grants has resulted in many unnecessary expenses.

Ozawa does not understand economics. It doesn't matter whether bureaucracy's involvement or not, but government expenditure itself is important as Japan is suffering from deflationary economy.

," Kan said. "We need to carefully assess the impact on people's lives before concluding whether any drastic cuts are possible."

Kan does not know economics, either. Politicians are always telling "We need to cut spending" as voters are concerned about future tax. But it's wrong. Japan is not being in Inflation, But in Deflation.

One of the reasons the DPJ performed poorly in the Upper House elections in July was Kan's earlier call for discussion on a consumption tax hike. Kan has since toned down his pitch.

His understanding is again wrong. voters are angry about poor performance since they took power last summer. DPJ did nothing so far, but caused troubles only.
After watching TV debates, I am very much depressed with these 2 politicians. Both Kan and Ozawa are really amature, and things will get worse after one of two take PM position.
Either way, life of ordinary citizens in Japan must continue their everyday life, and let's concentrate on daily things, neglecing TV game of politicians.

Elizabeth · 7 Sep 2010

noyhauser said:
I'm not convinced of that it was entirely a good thing... though I'd completely agree that it assisted with the DPJ's rise to power in the last election. Electoral reform implemented by Hosokawa created a convoluted system that is not easily understood by many Japanese voters. That and the failure of the coalition government experiment resulted in serious voter apathy for almost a decade, illustrated by the 7% drop in participation between 1993 and 1996 elections. Only in the last election did voter participation return to the rate seen in the 1993 election (High 60%.)

Well, positive in the sense that the 1994 electoral reform law diminished the power of the factions and rural areas. Obviously if the opposition wanted to enhance policy-oriented and party-centered competition which works in favor of minor coalition partners, they should have gone to a pure proportional representation system for Lower House elections. (My books which no doubt explain why this wasn't the outcome are still sitting on the shelf. :sorry. But I don't think the political turmoil and rapid disintegration of alliances which came out of it was necessarily caused solely by the political reform itself. Almost certainly having unpopular leaders (Ozawa) as head of Shinshinto without basic policy differences from the LDP didn't help voter apathy or party identification.

noyhauser · 7 Sep 2010

Astroboy said:
Kan, Ozawa Discuss DPJ Policies In TV Debates
http://e.nikkei.com/e/fr/tnks/Nni20100905D05JF384.htm
But it doesn't matter so much as DPJ does not have majority seats in Upper House and it does not have more than 2/3 seats in Lower House, either. In short, nothing except fiscal budget will pass Congress unless DPJ makes concession against opposition parties.
But without help of bureaucrats, DPJ politicians (aka amature politicians) cannot do anything. It has already been proved.

No party can do anything without the bureaucrats, LDP included. That's the point of the DPJ's platform and efforts to reform government. With few prime ministers remaining in office for more than a year, the bureaucracy has been able to get almost all of its policy wishes. As an LDP Cabinet member said during a private interview in the late 1990s: "I argue with them, and they have an argument for everything I say, and I have nobody on my side." This has been true for the past forty years… at least the DPJ has started to address it.

Astroboy said:
Ozawa does not understand economics. It doesn't matter whether bureaucracy's involvement or not, but government expenditure itself is important as Japan is suffering from deflationary economy.

Thats Ozawa's platform; he wants a major increase in funding.

Astroboy said:
Kan does not know economics, either. Politicians are always telling "We need to cut spending" as voters are concerned about future tax. But it's wrong. Japan is not being in Inflation, But in Deflation.

I think you either underestimate or do not understand the problem. The real issue right now is the massive debt Japan faces. With government debt sitting at 200 percent of GDP, 48 percent of the government budget goes to service the debt. Do nothing and Japan will default, and then you'll see a massive spike in interest rates. This means that the government won't be able to borrow money or continue funding the interest rates. And this isn't some sort of "possible" threat. Rating agencies have already warned about degrading Japanese Government Bonds. If action isn't taken soon, a confidence crisis in government bonds will occur and the economy will suffer immensely.

Astroboy said:
His understanding is again wrong. voters are angry about poor performance since they took power last summer. DPJ did nothing so far, but caused troubles only.

And in the past 15 years what has the LDP accomplished domestically beyond tripling the country's debt? The only serious policy of note is Koizumi's privatization of the postal service and bank reform. Besides Koizumi there has been nothing. If you look at individual wealth and social indicators, they have stagnated or fallen.

Elizabeth said:
Well, positive in the sense that the 1994 electoral reform law diminished the power of the factions and rural areas. Obviously if the opposition wanted to enhance policy-oriented and party-centered competition which works in favor of minor coalition partners, they should have gone to a pure proportional representation system for Lower House elections. (My books which no doubt explain why this wasn't the outcome are still sitting on the shelf. :sorry. But I don't think the political turmoil and rapid disintegration of alliances which came out of it was necessarily caused solely by the political reform itself. Almost certainly having unpopular leaders (Ozawa) as head of Shinshinto without basic policy differences from the LDP didn't help voter apathy or party identification.

Oh I didn't say it was the only factor, rather one of many. It certainly didn't help matters though. I agree that it was a problem borne of many different issues, one of which was a lack of leadership by any one party.

Elizabeth · 7 Sep 2010

noyhauser said:
No party can do anything without the bureaucrats, LDP included. That's the point of the DPJ's platform and efforts to reform government. With few prime ministers remaining in office for more than a year, the bureaucracy has been able to get almost all of its policy wishes. As an LDP Cabinet member said during a private interview in the late 1990s: "I argue with them, and they have an argument for everything I say, and I have nobody on my side.ﾂ" This has been true for the past forty yearsﾂ… at least the DPJ has started to address it.

I agree. The most effective administrative reform of the DPJ thus far has been limiting the ability of bureaucrats to mediate policy disputes as (not so honest) brokers between junior MPs and cabinet ministers. Under the LDP there was such a symbiotic relationship that the bureaucrats were basically rewarded with lifetime perks for bypassing the executive branch and directing government resources through the backbenchers that had no other end but to preserve support for the party.

Want to build a neutral civil service that is not both not beholden to policymakers and does not take on the role of policy staff but offers frank, expert advice to party and cabinet members with impartial consideration of the national interest and broader public good ? Make a reasonable expectation that there will be regular alterations in power with authority centered at the highest levels. It's absolutely the only way to avoid the chaos of Structural Corruption where parliamentarians and bureaucrats distribute favors to their friends and patronage is rampant.

noyhauser · 8 Sep 2010

Elizabeth said:
I agree. The most effective administrative reform of the DPJ thus far has been limiting the ability of bureaucrats to mediate policy disputes as (not so honest) brokers between junior MPs and cabinet ministers. Under the LDP there was such a symbiotic relationship that the bureaucrats were basically rewarded with lifetime perks for bypassing the executive branch and directing government resources through the backbenchers that had no other end but to preserve support for the party.
Want to build a neutral civil service that is not both not beholden to policymakers and does not take on the role of policy staff but offers frank, expert advice to party and cabinet members with impartial consideration of the national interest and broader public good ? Make a reasonable expectation that there will be regular alterations in power with authority centered at the highest levels. It's absolutely the only way to avoid the chaos of Structural Corruption where parliamentarians and bureaucrats distribute favors to their friends and patronage is rampant.

I;m not entirely sure whether reform along these lines is possible.

To be perfectly honest I've had a five year hiatus into reading about Japanese politics. But reimmersing myself in the material recently I've been struck by some things. One of them is how closely the Japanese system of governance reflects the models identified by Max Weber, which was one of the first great studies of bureaucracy and political behavior. He posits that because the bureaucracy possesses access to all the critical information and instruments of power, they can overwhelm politicians and get their positions. According to Weber, the main means by which the political class can defend against their views is the development of independent policymaking apparatuses that inform politicians decision-making process (His example at the time was the Privy Council office.) In reality Japanese political parties do not possess a strong policy analysis wing, leaving them at the bureaucracy's mercy. What political policy-making structures that do exist (the LDP Policy bureau) are highly beholden to the bureaucrats as well.

This is the exact opposite problem faced by most other western democracies. For example in Canada and the United States (at least until the Obama administration) all the actions of government were strongly controlled by the Prime Minister's or President's immediate advisors. The dramatic use of executive power by Dick Cheney is a good example of an politician who was able to determine and implement major policy decisions outside of the normal structure of government. Thats not the case in Japan where that role is played by the bureaucracy, which often have very different interests from them.

If we believe that bureaucracies will always possess interest divergent from the political masters, then it requires the development of new structures that can effectively take on the bureaucrats. I think part of the reason why the DPJ has seemed so weak is that the bureaucracy hasn't supported their position, which leaves the politicians in a very tenuous position. They need support to help push their policies through.

Astroboy · 9 Sep 2010

noyhauser said:
This is the exact opposite problem faced by most other western democracies.

Intresting point of view. I would say that Japanese bureaucracy system may be different from US/Canada, but not so different from continental European. French bureaucrats are more powerful than Japanese.

Elizabeth · 9 Sep 2010

noyhauser said:
I;m not entirely sure whether reform along these lines is possible.

To be perfectly honest I've had a five year hiatus into reading about Japanese politics. But reimmersing myself in the material recently I've been struck by some things. One of them is how closely the Japanese system of governance reflects the models identified by Max Weber, which was one of the first great studies of bureaucracy and political behavior. He posits that because the bureaucracy possesses access to all the critical information and instruments of power, they can overwhelm politicians and get their positions. According to Weber, the main means by which the political class can defend against their views is the development of independent policymaking apparatuses that inform politicians decision-making process (His example at the time was the Privy Council office.) In reality Japanese political parties do not possess a strong policy analysis wing, leaving them at the bureaucracy's mercy. What political policy-making structures that do exist (the LDP Policy bureau) are highly beholden to the bureaucrats as well.

The LDP's Policy (Affairs) Research Council WAS a sprawling bottom-up policymaking network of councils in which party members, working through bureaucrats, were able to wield a veto at several points in the process over every government decision. The streamlined, centralized PRC under Kan is directly linked to the Cabinet and thus a much more limited forum for explaining Cabinet decisions to and exchanging ideas with MPs and party members and basically facilitating debate among lower ranking Diet members.

The problem is that every leader has a slightly different model of how this balance of power should be expressed in practice. Ozawa and Hatoyama were working towards a highly "top-down" approach to power. Ozawa in particular would concentrate power in the Secretary-Generals (DPJ) office and ensure that the Cabinet has the confidence of the party, through which it controls Parliament. The role of Junior members is take take orders from the executive branch to ensure their re-election and so preserve the government's majority with very little if any interference from them on the policy level. Hatoyama believed in a Cabinet-led approach to policy with a relatively weak PM but likewise very little if any input from the lower ranks of Parliament. The DPJ under Kan has made some concessions to MPs by soliciting full participation in policy debates from all ranks of elected officials while strengthening the function of his own office relative to Hatoyama.

Unfortunately none of these modifications are going to bring substantial change to how Japan is governed if it continues lurching from weak government to weak government or even worse back to the old style of collusion behind closed doors between politicians, bureaucrats, and private interests.

noyhauser · 9 Sep 2010

Elizabeth said:
The LDP's Policy (Affairs) Research Council WAS a sprawling bottom-up policymaking network of councils in which party members, working through bureaucrats, were able to wield a veto at several points in the process over every government decision. The streamlined, centralized PRC under Kan is directly linked to the Cabinet and thus a much more limited forum for explaining Cabinet decisions to and exchanging ideas with MPs and party members and basically facilitating debate among lower ranking Diet members.

The problem is that every leader has a slightly different model of how this balance of power should be expressed in practice. Ozawa and Hatoyama were working towards a highly "top-down" approach to power. Ozawa in particular would concentrate power in the Secretary-Generals (DPJ) office and ensure that the Cabinet has the confidence of the party, through which it controls Parliament. The role of Junior members is take take orders from the executive branch to ensure their re-election and so preserve the government's majority with very little if any interference from them on the policy level. Hatoyama believed in a Cabinet-led approach to policy with a relatively weak PM but likewise very little if any input from the lower ranks of Parliament. The DPJ under Kan has made some concessions to MPs by soliciting full participation in policy debates from all ranks of elected officials while strengthening the function of his own office relative to Hatoyama.

Unfortunately none of these modifications are going to bring substantial change to how Japan is governed if it continues lurching from weak government to weak government or even worse back to the old style of collusion behind closed doors between politicians, bureaucrats, and private interests.

Hey thanks for the update on the new developments; I've not kept up with the modern stuff as well as I did the LDP prior to 2004ish. Its fascinating to hear the nuts and bolts of the DPJ's efforts.The LDP policy council was large but heavily penetrated by the bureaucracy, which was almost always consulted about any new policy idea... it does not reflect the reality of an independent arm that only supports the politicians.

Astroboy: France's bureaucracy is powerful at times... particularly in foreign affairs. However its nowhere near as strong as in Japan. The Fifth Republic constitution gave the Politicians an extremely strong powers, greater than in most countries. Where the civil service gets their strength is mostly due to the French belief in government, which translates into support for public services. So the civil service enjoys support for its activities, it doesn't really have the same strength in policymaking as other countries.

Elizabeth · 9 Sep 2010

noyhauser said:
Astroboy: France's bureaucracy is powerful at times... particularly in foreign affairs. However its nowhere near as strong as in Japan. The Fifth Republic constitution gave the Politicians an extremely strong powers, greater than in most countries. Where the civil service gets their strength is mostly due to the French belief in government, which translates into support for public services. So the civil service enjoys support for its activities, it doesn't really have the same strength in policymaking as other countries.

The DPJ is trying to model themselves on Britain's parliamentary cabinet Westminister style system of government (strong Cabinet = strong, top-down parties). Right now on civil service reform they are about where Britain was in the early-mid 19th Century.

Elizabeth · 14 Sep 2010

Astroboy said:
Either way, life of ordinary citizens in Japan must continue their everyday life, and let's concentrate on daily things, neglecing TV game of politicians.

(*My fearless prediction...*) ↑ Have they ever done otherwise ?

If Ozawa places a strong enough second finish, he will get some Cabinet posts and lay in wait for the Kan government to come to a complete standstill. And no one is leaving the party in the short term whoever wins tomorrow so Hatoyama can still claim his reelection came in a way that would strengthen the party's unity...☝

Astroboy · 14 Sep 2010

Elizabeth said:
If Ozawa places a strong enough second finish, he will get some Cabinet posts and lay in wait for the Kan government to come to a complete standstill. And no one is leaving the party in the short term whoever wins tomorrow so Hatoyama can still claim his reelection came in a way that would strengthen the party's unity...☝

If Ozawa win tomorrow, Ozawa-led cabinet will face immediate trouble in managing Diet matters because public support will not be big enough.

If Kan win tomorrow, his cabinet will seek austerity and then further doom-and-gloom economy, and lose public support, and then difficulty in managing Diet matters.

Either way, doesn't make any difference. In other words, Japan's continuity remain rockbottom.

Astroboy · 14 Sep 2010

Kan Wins DPJ Vote, Stays On As Premier
Prime Minister Naoto Kan defeated Ichiro Ozawa in the Democratic Party of Japan's presidential election Tuesday, retaining his post as head of the ruling party and seeing off the challenge to his prime ministership by the former secretary-general of the party. Kan won 721 points out of 1,222.
http://e.nikkei.com/e/ac/regtop.aspx

This means JPY will soar and stock market will plunge as Kan aim to go fiscal austerity.

Elizabeth · 15 Sep 2010

Astroboy said:
Kan Wins DPJ Vote, Stays On As Premier
Prime Minister Naoto Kan defeated Ichiro Ozawa in the Democratic Party of Japan's presidential election Tuesday, retaining his post as head of the ruling party and seeing off the challenge to his prime ministership by the former secretary-general of the party. Kan won 721 points out of 1,222.
http://e.nikkei.com/e/ac/regtop.aspx
This means JPY will soar and stock market will plunge as Kan aim to go fiscal austerity.

We'll see after Kan takes a few weeks to reshuffle his cabinet. It's going on over a year now and after tackling child allowances, an apology to Korea and speeches on cleanliness and transparency....the party may be slowly working up to their central mandate.

Ewok85 · 15 Sep 2010

I look forward to another 12 months of fumbling around, base lies, chest beating and then a major-minor scandal so we get 4-6 months of shuffling as the PM is dethroned and the vultures swoop in and a rush for the best seats.

I've managed to drastically reduce my tax spendings and it'll only go down more over time. I feel physically sick thinking that these idiots get even one yen of my income since I'm yet to see even the slightest bit of competence from any level of the government in recent years.

Lets face it - everyone in Japan knows that public service is the local equivalent of welfare - you get paid well to do nothing, and you get paid for life.

Elizabeth · 15 Sep 2010

I don't even live there and can see that things won't change unless there is great social upheaval. Which is unlikely in the short term because the average citizen is so uninvolved in public life. Politics in Japan is for bureaucrats and vested interest groups, that's all.

Elizabeth · 19 Sep 2010

Astroboy said:
If Ozawa win tomorrow, Ozawa-led cabinet will face immediate trouble in managing Diet matters because public support will not be big enough.
If Kan win tomorrow, his cabinet will seek austerity and then further doom-and-gloom economy, and lose public support, and then difficulty in managing Diet matters.
Either way, doesn't make any difference. In other words, Japan's continuity remain rockbottom.

Kan has been brainwashed. And now a supplementary budget worth several trillion yen is on the way to stimulate the economy instead of jobs. This is how Japan's economy became so pathetic it cannot keep up if the yen stays at around 85.

Astroboy · 19 Sep 2010

Elizabeth said:
Kan has been brainwashed. And now a supplementary budget worth several trillion yen is on the way to stimulate the economy instead of jobs. This is how Japan's economy became so pathetic it cannot keep up if the yen stays at around 85.

Government expenditure is usually aimed to stimulate economy (or job creation), while kids allowance is not.

Government role is to provide its people with relief of life, not to let specific group of people become super-rich. In addition, Pathetic is better than Disaster.

And I don't stop USA to go Disaster.

Kan vs Ozawa

先輩

aka YOSUQUE

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

先輩

Similar threads