NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/misc/consumer/21247

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-28 | 5.4 KB

Xref: sparky misc.consumers:21247 soc.culture.japan:12927
Newsgroups: misc.consumers,soc.culture.japan
Path: sparky!uunet!island!fester
From: [e-mail] (Mike Fester)
Subject: Re: America doesn't have a clue: (was DOES AMERICA SAY YES TO JAPAN? - Off track!!)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (The Usenet mail target)
Organization: /usr/local/rn/organization
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 17:06:20 GMT
Lines: 106

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Thomas W. Day) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Joshua_Putnam) writes:
>
>>As is the ongoing collapse of Japan's artifically-inflated bubble
>>economy.  Is there any reason to believe Japan will be able to
>>succeed with long-term efforts to circumvent market forces?
>
>Certainly.  There are many reasons, one is that our own government is so
>easily bought off.

Uh, reality check here, Mr Day. Ever hear of Recruit? Sagawa Kyuubin? Both
heavily implicated in buying off Japanese government members. Want an example
of an AMERICAN company doing that to the Japanese gov't? OK, ever hear of
Lockheed?

> Another is that they have long-term plans to organize
>their efforts with, unlike American companies that are unable to make any
>plans outside of their stock schedules.

These long-term plans seem to have put them in a severe cash crunch, and the
IMF predicts that the US economy will grow almost a full % more than the
Japanese economy this year. Not bad for an economy a) already twice as big and
b) supposedly unable to respond effectively.

>>>Thus the free trade model cannot be used with Japan.
>
>>This is quite a leap of logic.
>
>I don't see that.  If the Japanese don't obey the rules of free trade, using
>a free trade model is erronous.

>>>Instead a
>>>mercantilist model must be used, hence the arguments for protectionism,
>>>symmetrical barriers with respect to Japan, etc. until they sign on
>>>to the assumptions of free trade principles.
>
>>That such a program works by trampling on the moral rights of
>>people whose livelihoods depend on continued free trade with
>>Japan never seems to enter your discussions.
>
>You mean the service industry people who sell their products, or the
>government officials who live from their bribes?  The basis of a solid
>economy is still manufacturing.  Discounting the nation's future for a few,
>or a lot of, retailers is short-term thinking.  Not the kind of thinking our
>opponents will be doing.

We do seem to have jobs in the manufacturing section. We still produce more
more than anyone else. Where do you think all those Chevrolets are built?
Those 747s?

And BTW, read a little bit on the Osaka-Tokyo split of about 20-30 years
ago. Osaka put its eggs in the manufacturing basket, Tokyo in the service
sector. Tokyo did better economically than Osaka, so it seems that the
service industry has some value to the Japanese as well.

>>If the U.S.
>>government opts to destroy some of the millions of jobs created
>>by trade with Japan, what compensation do you propose to those
>>whose lives have been disrupted?  What moral justification is
>>there for interfering in their freedom of association and trade?
>
>If the "freedom of association and trade" went two ways, there would be no
>justification.  That isn't the case.  Even more important, it is a mistake
>to think that reselling their products in exchange for minimal prices on our
>natural resources is the same thing as participating in the 1st world
>economy.  We are being treated like a 3rd world, incapable of manufacturing
>our own products and we are, by your own words, liking it.

Who is treating us this way? We DO manufacture our own products.

>>>Everything else is noise and self-serving propaganda by the Japanese
>>>and their apologists.
>
>>Such mud-slinging is most unbecoming.  Many patriotic Americans
>>do not support Big Brotherish attempts to set up the government
>>as our economic nanny.  That you are comfortable letting the
>>government control your spending habits does not give the
>>government the right to control others' spending, too.

>If it were "unbecoming" enough to be important how the words were said, the
>Japanese wouldn't be slinging the word "racist" everytime someone attempts
>to control them.

I see. "They started it".

> The government "nanny" is the only protection individual
>companies and people have from Japan's industrial/government monster.  They
>have the finances to spend more on lobbying our government than any company
>in the U.S.  If you don't want to save your country, get out of the way and
>let someone who cares do the job.

Another analysis rendered invalid only if one remembers that the facts upon
which it is based are a) one-sided or b) wrong.

Again, remember Lockheed. And thank you, Mr Day, I feel at least as well-
qualified to "save my country" as you seem to imagine yourself to be.

BTW, you shouldn't be posting anymore articles here: there's a good chance many
of the parts in your computer are manufactured in Japan, and you wouldn't want
to contribute to the decline of "your country" by utilizing such products,
would you? Oh, you mean it's OK for YOU to do so? Well, never mind, then.

Mike

--
Disclaimer - Oh come on! You didn't think I was serious, did you?