Note to myself for an article of the Economist about Japan's diplomacy.
On the surface, it appears hard to see an improvement in strained relationship between Japan and other East Asian countries. This week, over 150 politicians showed their respect to Yasukuni shrine during the spring festival, where Japan's war dead and convicted war criminal are honoured. Barack Obama became first American president who pledged to include in it's defence obligation Senkaku which is uninhabited islands also claimed by China. But increasing diplomatic activities are implying the relationship may become constructive than others think.
There are many common things among Japan and South Korea. Both are democratic and American allies. Even Mr Abe visited Yasukuni last year with belief that Japan does not need to apologies for the past, President Park Geun-hye indicated her acceptance for meeting with Mr Abe under Obama's suggestion.
Recently Mr Abe clarified his position that he stands by Japan's past expression of remorse for the war and comfort women. Senior diplomas from both sides had meeting in Seoul for discussion of comfort women.
Japan has aimed that the South Korean government stop inflaming anti-Japan protests or anit-Japan third country such as China. Both governments are also seeking to put aside territorial dispute over Takeshima/Dokdo island. In June 2015, it is 50th anniversary of the two countries' friendship treaty. If no progress can be seen, this would be diplomatic disaster for Ms Park as it is his farther who signed the treaty as South Korea's former dictator.
Dispute between Japan and China seems less optimistic. Even though Senkaku islands have been part of Japan for over a century, China has challenged Japan's control. It also declared 'air-defence identification zone' over the East China seas.
Recently, however, China's leaders have toned down their approach. It is reported that the number of incursions by Chinese coastguard has decreased dramatically. Also Xi Jingping, general secretary of the Communist Party, visited Japan and met Mr Abe in secret. In early May, a group of Japanese lawmakers are heading to Beijing.
There is another new situation appeared. North Korea desires to get closer to Japan to gain it's sponsor under difficult circumstance that China is getting on with South Korea. The talks for abducted Japanese citizen in 1970s - 80s is priority. It is said that a number of abductees are still alive. Mr Abe will claim a breakthrough to progress in the issue of the abduction even if North Korea conducts a nuclear test.
A majority of South Korean citizen prefer better relations with Japan. Mr Abe's private side is nationalist ideologue with revisionist view, but he also understands his personal ideology is not necessarily agreed with Japan's interest. He didn't visit Yasukuni during the spring festival. Soi far Japan's leader as a prime minster is superior to his private face.
Note to myself for an article of the Economist about apprenticeship in England.
The football World Cup is approaching. In 2010, The England team miserably crashed in the last tournament. Over financial crisis in 2008, the UK was defeated by Germany. There are many things for Britons to learn from Germany. It is now common agreement that the country should move away from finance and study manufacturing systems.
British government is especially keen on their neighbour's apprenticeship system. The budget for subsidising workplace training has been doubled up and grants of £1,500 for small employers on their first apprentice was introduced. After this scheme, the number of apprentice has soared. But this is merely headline figures.
Germany apprenticeship impose the employer to give at lease one day classroom teaching per week. In the UK, this is only minority, like Jaguar Land Rover. One of the largest supermarket chain, Morrisons was utilising the subsidy by accepting apprentices and allocating them to tills role and other basic tasks. Under this programme, apprentices will hardly obtain opportunity to gain technical skills. Most of other firms are in similar situation.
This is wasting public money and not encouraging employers to invest in training. True, the total investment in training has decreased by £2.4 billion since 2011 while the number of job vacancies without qualification has rosen. The struggle faced by Britons are due to a big difference between these countries.
In Germany, there is powerful Chambers of Commerce policer watching out apprenticeships, but there is no such function in England. Under existing system, employers play with the scheme and take advantage to grab benefit from government subsidy. The subsidy can even give adverse effect. Training is bought by government at fixed price, and the provider is limited. This will discourage employers to invest in training. In addition to these, education system in England does not provide clear vocational track. The apprenticeship was often taken as a place for people who can't complete school.
The government is trying to give business association a role for upholding the scheme. Also it considers more discretionary for employers to chose their own training providers and negotiate prices. Britain has wide gap between skilled and unskilled. Good workplace based training can close the gap.
England's top universities suck up talented school-leaver and doesn't give a space for vocational scheme. And flexibility of labour market in England make harder for employers to pin down the employees for long-term training programme. These could be also strength of the country and conflict to introduction of Germany system.
The football World Cup is approaching. In 2010, The England team miserably crashed in the last tournament. Over financial crisis in 2008, the UK was defeated by Germany. There are many things for Britons to learn from Germany. It is now common agreement that the country should move away from finance and study manufacturing systems.
British government is especially keen on their neighbour's apprenticeship system. The budget for subsidising workplace training has been doubled up and grants of £1,500 for small employers on their first apprentice was introduced. After this scheme, the number of apprentice has soared. But this is merely headline figures.
Germany apprenticeship impose the employer to give at lease one day classroom teaching per week. In the UK, this is only minority, like Jaguar Land Rover. One of the largest supermarket chain, Morrisons was utilising the subsidy by accepting apprentices and allocating them to tills role and other basic tasks. Under this programme, apprentices will hardly obtain opportunity to gain technical skills. Most of other firms are in similar situation.
This is wasting public money and not encouraging employers to invest in training. True, the total investment in training has decreased by £2.4 billion since 2011 while the number of job vacancies without qualification has rosen. The struggle faced by Britons are due to a big difference between these countries.
In Germany, there is powerful Chambers of Commerce policer watching out apprenticeships, but there is no such function in England. Under existing system, employers play with the scheme and take advantage to grab benefit from government subsidy. The subsidy can even give adverse effect. Training is bought by government at fixed price, and the provider is limited. This will discourage employers to invest in training. In addition to these, education system in England does not provide clear vocational track. The apprenticeship was often taken as a place for people who can't complete school.
The government is trying to give business association a role for upholding the scheme. Also it considers more discretionary for employers to chose their own training providers and negotiate prices. Britain has wide gap between skilled and unskilled. Good workplace based training can close the gap.
England's top universities suck up talented school-leaver and doesn't give a space for vocational scheme. And flexibility of labour market in England make harder for employers to pin down the employees for long-term training programme. These could be also strength of the country and conflict to introduction of Germany system.
Note to myself for an article from the Economist about ageing society.
Warren Buffett, who is an icon of American capitalism, pointed out a demographic trend that highly skilled people keep working when they get old age. In rich world, educated high skilled worker stays longer at work than less educated or unskilled worker. The trend is deepening divide between skilled wealth and unskilled poor in all slice of ages. The highly skilled works longer hours than bottom each year, and they are extending their working lives.
Over next 20 years, global population of over 65 will become double to 1.1 billion. Back in 20th century, it was thought that longevity would be longer retired life than years at work, and slow down economic growth while swelling pension burden of government would be burst.
But the new trend of growing gap between the skilled and unskilled was seen. The old skilled people continue to work and young un skilled workforce is dropped off from labour market. This increases unemployment rate.
Many Europe countries have abolished old policies that used to encourage people to retire earlier. Defined benefit pension scheme has been replaced with defined contribution scheme. This means even better-off continue to work longer to gain more comfortable retirement. The skills held by old for management expertise and creativity don't necessarily decay with age. This trend is benefitable for society as a whole. Growth rate is less dramatically slow than expected as government budget is in better shape due to more tax income from old age.
Manual labour will see more difficulty in keeping carrying work as they get older, and will depend on more public pension rather than their lower wages. These costs are covered by tax payer as old high skilled people. Wealthy people accumulate their savings but their demand decreases. These left wealth will be transferred to the next generation by inheritence, and eventually the gap between winners and losers is expanding.
Government is to enact higher inheritance taxes to those wealthy to encourage old to spend. But the government should focus on reform of retirement and education, which can be generating more income, rather than simply trying to redistribute wealth.
Age is no longer a trigger for decision of retirement. Mandatory retirement ages and pension will be obsolete policy. The more investment in public education for all stage in life could be an answer. Old people unlikely to become computer scientist, but still they can gain new skills to obtain work opportunity such as caring for very old people.
Ageing society in rich world is hard to be optimistc. Germany plans to abolish statutory retirement age for some people. But it is crucial for government to convince old ages to take effort to obtain new skills so that they can extend their work live. Otherwise, stagnate of economy and inequality will get worse.
Warren Buffett, who is an icon of American capitalism, pointed out a demographic trend that highly skilled people keep working when they get old age. In rich world, educated high skilled worker stays longer at work than less educated or unskilled worker. The trend is deepening divide between skilled wealth and unskilled poor in all slice of ages. The highly skilled works longer hours than bottom each year, and they are extending their working lives.
Over next 20 years, global population of over 65 will become double to 1.1 billion. Back in 20th century, it was thought that longevity would be longer retired life than years at work, and slow down economic growth while swelling pension burden of government would be burst.
But the new trend of growing gap between the skilled and unskilled was seen. The old skilled people continue to work and young un skilled workforce is dropped off from labour market. This increases unemployment rate.
Many Europe countries have abolished old policies that used to encourage people to retire earlier. Defined benefit pension scheme has been replaced with defined contribution scheme. This means even better-off continue to work longer to gain more comfortable retirement. The skills held by old for management expertise and creativity don't necessarily decay with age. This trend is benefitable for society as a whole. Growth rate is less dramatically slow than expected as government budget is in better shape due to more tax income from old age.
Manual labour will see more difficulty in keeping carrying work as they get older, and will depend on more public pension rather than their lower wages. These costs are covered by tax payer as old high skilled people. Wealthy people accumulate their savings but their demand decreases. These left wealth will be transferred to the next generation by inheritence, and eventually the gap between winners and losers is expanding.
Government is to enact higher inheritance taxes to those wealthy to encourage old to spend. But the government should focus on reform of retirement and education, which can be generating more income, rather than simply trying to redistribute wealth.
Age is no longer a trigger for decision of retirement. Mandatory retirement ages and pension will be obsolete policy. The more investment in public education for all stage in life could be an answer. Old people unlikely to become computer scientist, but still they can gain new skills to obtain work opportunity such as caring for very old people.
Ageing society in rich world is hard to be optimistc. Germany plans to abolish statutory retirement age for some people. But it is crucial for government to convince old ages to take effort to obtain new skills so that they can extend their work live. Otherwise, stagnate of economy and inequality will get worse.
Note to myself for an article of the Economist about urbanisation in China.
Great cities have their own great idea. Rome represents coquests, Athens is a symbol of antique art, but China's cities have had only one great idea, which is growth. As liberalisation began, urban population in China has increased by over 500m, the equivalent of the total of America and tree Britains. By 2030, the cities absorb a billion people, which covers 70% of China's population. Now the Communist Party considers the country's fate is depends on the stability of cities.
Chengdu, where the population jumped up by 50% since 2000, boast the world's largest building which contains shopping mall and 300m indoor artificial beach. A bullet trains network is now longer than all of Europe's trains network, even though this had not existed 8 years ago. The network is are under construction to expand by another 7,000km.
This urbanisation is breaking down. The warning against the blind development model was reported in the World Bank and a Chinese government think-tank. According to the report, 'strains are starting to show' and this dangerous growth model is 'running out of steam'.
There are two main issues causing such strains. First, in China, farmers doesn't have their property and wrights for land. Officials can grab agricultural land from them and gain money by selling it to urban developers. Unplanned development of town remains empty and become ghost cities. Over provided buildings increase foreign worries about the country's economy in future. Also China's cities are biggest emitter of carbon dioxide and dirtiest air on the plannet.
Second, social problem is growing. China's cities are made up by two classes. The one is middle class who has property and enjoy their holidays in Europe. The other is migrant underclass, who doesn't have property, works in factory and they are not entitle to receive public services as their registration remains countryside.
The government pledged to manage these urbanisation issues. Under new approach, more than 100m migrants will be granted their urban registration so that they can access to full public services. But still 200m will be unregistered. Tax reform is also planned to provide more source of income in local government from middle class.
Real challenge for Xi Jinping, China's president, is getting tougher. There should be two steps to tackle this. First step is that the government should give farmers the rights of land and property, which enable them to sell their assets. China has less habitable area than America as the most of country is occupied by dessert or mountains. This shortage of space will pushes up the prices of land, then developers will start design carefully due to the scarce resource.
Second step is opening decision-making to citizens. Chinese citizens have little space to say or participate in planning of city development. If they can elect their own mayors and local governments, development plan will improve environment. If China's government wants to avoid further conflict and chaos, they should address the challenge of new phase.
Great cities have their own great idea. Rome represents coquests, Athens is a symbol of antique art, but China's cities have had only one great idea, which is growth. As liberalisation began, urban population in China has increased by over 500m, the equivalent of the total of America and tree Britains. By 2030, the cities absorb a billion people, which covers 70% of China's population. Now the Communist Party considers the country's fate is depends on the stability of cities.
Chengdu, where the population jumped up by 50% since 2000, boast the world's largest building which contains shopping mall and 300m indoor artificial beach. A bullet trains network is now longer than all of Europe's trains network, even though this had not existed 8 years ago. The network is are under construction to expand by another 7,000km.
This urbanisation is breaking down. The warning against the blind development model was reported in the World Bank and a Chinese government think-tank. According to the report, 'strains are starting to show' and this dangerous growth model is 'running out of steam'.
There are two main issues causing such strains. First, in China, farmers doesn't have their property and wrights for land. Officials can grab agricultural land from them and gain money by selling it to urban developers. Unplanned development of town remains empty and become ghost cities. Over provided buildings increase foreign worries about the country's economy in future. Also China's cities are biggest emitter of carbon dioxide and dirtiest air on the plannet.
Second, social problem is growing. China's cities are made up by two classes. The one is middle class who has property and enjoy their holidays in Europe. The other is migrant underclass, who doesn't have property, works in factory and they are not entitle to receive public services as their registration remains countryside.
The government pledged to manage these urbanisation issues. Under new approach, more than 100m migrants will be granted their urban registration so that they can access to full public services. But still 200m will be unregistered. Tax reform is also planned to provide more source of income in local government from middle class.
Real challenge for Xi Jinping, China's president, is getting tougher. There should be two steps to tackle this. First step is that the government should give farmers the rights of land and property, which enable them to sell their assets. China has less habitable area than America as the most of country is occupied by dessert or mountains. This shortage of space will pushes up the prices of land, then developers will start design carefully due to the scarce resource.
Second step is opening decision-making to citizens. Chinese citizens have little space to say or participate in planning of city development. If they can elect their own mayors and local governments, development plan will improve environment. If China's government wants to avoid further conflict and chaos, they should address the challenge of new phase.
A note to myself for an article of the Economist about Mr Abe's recent approach.
Mr Abe invited Caroline Kennedy, who is ambassador of America, to lobby for US to use Japanese technology of maglev systems. This was also aimed to show off the alliance between Japan and US before Barack Obama's visit scheduled from 23 to 25 April.
He experienced difficult time after his visit to the Yasukuni Shrine, where hight ranking war criminals are honoured. He faced protests from neighbour countries and a statement of disappointment by US. A series of revisionist comment against Japan's wartime atrocities fueled condemnation.
After the series of right wing fuss, Mr Abe pledged he would not revise the official apology to 'comfort women'. Washington was relieved at his action. Now it appears that Mr Abe understand he must stop damaging relationship with his neighbours.
He also revised his approach to Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Initially he was rushing to reach agreement with America on reducing tariffs. But recently Japan seems to backslide on emphasising protection of their agriculture and autos.
Mr Abe declared his government would utilise more 'foreign human resources'. Historically, Japanese government has never accepted large scale of immigrations, this will be tough challenge for him and Japan. He will implement further difficult reforms. The next round of judgement will be due in the summer.
A pressure to his far-right stance is not only from outside but also from his colleagues in his Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). He aimed to change the interpretation of constitution for collective self defence to allow the country's armed forces. Substantial part of party is resisting to his way. This approach will also undermine America's solid backs. Now he watered down his proposal.
The future direction will be depends on his first cabinet shuffle later in the year. A coalition of right-wings and anti-reformists will be designed and the departure of Yoshihide Suga, who is powerful cabinet secretary is expected.
However, Yasukuni Shrine's annual spring festival is scheduled in the day bofore Mr Obama's visit in untimely moment. This week, one of his reformist will turn up and flow of government members to follow him is expected but high-ranking cabinet members will not be included. Mr Abe's change of his approach will make a difference.
Mr Abe invited Caroline Kennedy, who is ambassador of America, to lobby for US to use Japanese technology of maglev systems. This was also aimed to show off the alliance between Japan and US before Barack Obama's visit scheduled from 23 to 25 April.
He experienced difficult time after his visit to the Yasukuni Shrine, where hight ranking war criminals are honoured. He faced protests from neighbour countries and a statement of disappointment by US. A series of revisionist comment against Japan's wartime atrocities fueled condemnation.
After the series of right wing fuss, Mr Abe pledged he would not revise the official apology to 'comfort women'. Washington was relieved at his action. Now it appears that Mr Abe understand he must stop damaging relationship with his neighbours.
He also revised his approach to Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Initially he was rushing to reach agreement with America on reducing tariffs. But recently Japan seems to backslide on emphasising protection of their agriculture and autos.
Mr Abe declared his government would utilise more 'foreign human resources'. Historically, Japanese government has never accepted large scale of immigrations, this will be tough challenge for him and Japan. He will implement further difficult reforms. The next round of judgement will be due in the summer.
A pressure to his far-right stance is not only from outside but also from his colleagues in his Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). He aimed to change the interpretation of constitution for collective self defence to allow the country's armed forces. Substantial part of party is resisting to his way. This approach will also undermine America's solid backs. Now he watered down his proposal.
The future direction will be depends on his first cabinet shuffle later in the year. A coalition of right-wings and anti-reformists will be designed and the departure of Yoshihide Suga, who is powerful cabinet secretary is expected.
However, Yasukuni Shrine's annual spring festival is scheduled in the day bofore Mr Obama's visit in untimely moment. This week, one of his reformist will turn up and flow of government members to follow him is expected but high-ranking cabinet members will not be included. Mr Abe's change of his approach will make a difference.