Monday, May 16, 2011
Worry Makes Us Happy!?
...worry about success causes students to study harder to gain admission to better universities. It makes assistant professors work harder to earn tenure. It leads film makers to strive harder to create the perfect scene, and songwriters to dig deeper for the most pleasing melody. In every domain, people who work harder are more likely to succeed professionally, more likely to make a difference.
Good post! If we face difficult situations to tackle, we should remember that this is the next step we should take.
Good post! If we face difficult situations to tackle, we should remember that this is the next step we should take.
自殺について
自殺についての詳細なデータである。
（１）自殺死亡率の年次推移をみると、明治32年の5,932人から昭和11年の15,423人までは増加傾向を示しているが、昭和12年から戦時中まで減少傾向となっている。戦後についてみると、ドッジライン以降のデフレ不況（1949～1950）、なべ底不況（1957～58）と第１次平成不況（1991～93）、第２次平成不況（1997～2000）では特に高い推移を示しているように見える。明治以降一貫して、自殺率は増加しているように見える。
（２）性・特定年齢別自殺死亡率をみると、自殺死亡率は男性の方が多く、男性の５０～５４歳台の自殺率の増加が目に付く。
（３）性・年齢階級別死亡数に占める自殺死亡数の割合、自殺の死因順位をみると、平成15年の自殺死亡数の総死亡数に占める割合は、男女とも「25～29歳」が最も高くなっている。
（４）死亡曜日別にみた自殺をみると、月曜日が多く、死亡時間別にみた自殺では、男は「０時台」「５時台～６時台」が多くなっており、女は「５時台～６時台」「10時台～12時台」が多い。月別にみた自殺では、多くの年で４・５月がピークになっており、配偶関係別にみた自殺では、男は平成７年・12年ともに「離別」がすべての年齢階級で高く、女は40歳以上については、「未婚」が「離別」と同程度となっている。
（５）都道府県別にみた自殺では、 最高は男女とも秋田県、手段別自殺死亡数割合では、「首吊り」が最も多く、男女ともに14大都市では「飛び降り」が多くなっており、郡部では「縊首」「薬 物」が多くなっている。
（６）職業・産業別にみた自殺では、「就業者総数」では男32.9、女8.9、「無職」では男70.8、女21.9となっており、特に男の「無職」が高くなっている。また、就業者を職業別にみると、男女ともに「第１次産業」が高くなっている。男では特に「サービス職業従事者」が高くなっている。
非常にラフなまとめであるが、「男で、２０歳代後半、未婚か離別、無職または第１次産業かサービス産業従事者、秋田県在住で、４月か５月の月曜日の明け方５時ぐらいに自殺しやすい」と言う結論が得られる。これが何を物語るのかは分からないが、傾向として見られるようだ。
（１）自殺死亡率の年次推移をみると、明治32年の5,932人から昭和11年の15,423人までは増加傾向を示しているが、昭和12年から戦時中まで減少傾向となっている。戦後についてみると、ドッジライン以降のデフレ不況（1949～1950）、なべ底不況（1957～58）と第１次平成不況（1991～93）、第２次平成不況（1997～2000）では特に高い推移を示しているように見える。明治以降一貫して、自殺率は増加しているように見える。
（２）性・特定年齢別自殺死亡率をみると、自殺死亡率は男性の方が多く、男性の５０～５４歳台の自殺率の増加が目に付く。
（３）性・年齢階級別死亡数に占める自殺死亡数の割合、自殺の死因順位をみると、平成15年の自殺死亡数の総死亡数に占める割合は、男女とも「25～29歳」が最も高くなっている。
（４）死亡曜日別にみた自殺をみると、月曜日が多く、死亡時間別にみた自殺では、男は「０時台」「５時台～６時台」が多くなっており、女は「５時台～６時台」「10時台～12時台」が多い。月別にみた自殺では、多くの年で４・５月がピークになっており、配偶関係別にみた自殺では、男は平成７年・12年ともに「離別」がすべての年齢階級で高く、女は40歳以上については、「未婚」が「離別」と同程度となっている。
（５）都道府県別にみた自殺では、 最高は男女とも秋田県、手段別自殺死亡数割合では、「首吊り」が最も多く、男女ともに14大都市では「飛び降り」が多くなっており、郡部では「縊首」「薬 物」が多くなっている。
（６）職業・産業別にみた自殺では、「就業者総数」では男32.9、女8.9、「無職」では男70.8、女21.9となっており、特に男の「無職」が高くなっている。また、就業者を職業別にみると、男女ともに「第１次産業」が高くなっている。男では特に「サービス職業従事者」が高くなっている。
非常にラフなまとめであるが、「男で、２０歳代後半、未婚か離別、無職または第１次産業かサービス産業従事者、秋田県在住で、４月か５月の月曜日の明け方５時ぐらいに自殺しやすい」と言う結論が得られる。これが何を物語るのかは分からないが、傾向として見られるようだ。
Thursday, May 12, 2011
On Suicide
I am used to watching the newspaper reporting the suicide of the well-known in Japan. I am interested in this social problem because there are some people who don't want to live longer even in one of the economically well- developed countries in the world, Japan.
The Economist seeks the cause a little bit, though it seems to be somewhat frequently pointed out by western people:
The samurai tradition views suicide as noble (though perhaps out of self-interest, since captured warriors were treated gruesomely). Japan's main religions, Buddhism and Shintoism, are neutral on suicide, unlike Abrahamic faiths that explicitly prohibit it.
As is known in Japan, Japanese people have not been more religious. Rather, that may be possible to think of as one of the causes: they are less likely to think that life is something blissful given to us from the heaven, or, that committing a suicide is morally a bad thing as the above excerpt implies.
The Economist goes, Financial concerns are cited in one-fifth of suicide notes; almost half of all suicides are unemployed.
However, the unemployment rate is much higher in France(7.4%) and Germany(7.5%) than in Japan(4.0%). (Data is as of 2008, OECD) It seems to me that unemployment is not so closely related to suicide rate. Economic reason is one of the influential, but is not most influential in the suicide behavior. Anyway, this suicide rate tells that something is wrong with the Japanese society.
The Economist seeks the cause a little bit, though it seems to be somewhat frequently pointed out by western people:
The samurai tradition views suicide as noble (though perhaps out of self-interest, since captured warriors were treated gruesomely). Japan's main religions, Buddhism and Shintoism, are neutral on suicide, unlike Abrahamic faiths that explicitly prohibit it.
As is known in Japan, Japanese people have not been more religious. Rather, that may be possible to think of as one of the causes: they are less likely to think that life is something blissful given to us from the heaven, or, that committing a suicide is morally a bad thing as the above excerpt implies.
The Economist goes, Financial concerns are cited in one-fifth of suicide notes; almost half of all suicides are unemployed.
However, the unemployment rate is much higher in France(7.4%) and Germany(7.5%) than in Japan(4.0%). (Data is as of 2008, OECD) It seems to me that unemployment is not so closely related to suicide rate. Economic reason is one of the influential, but is not most influential in the suicide behavior. Anyway, this suicide rate tells that something is wrong with the Japanese society.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Facebook, Blogger, Twitter, and Youtube
Ten years ago, we never had blog, twitter, facebook and youtube. Now we enjoy them everyday and, for many people, joining facebook has became part of their everyday life. Recently I've been busy dropping comments on the facebook and haven't updated this blog.
What does this change in informational technology bring to us?
While updating the blog, I am wondering if we've really changed the world view by using facebook, twitter, youtube and blog: We can so easily catch up with what is happening in the world by using them.
We don't necessarily need to find the people in other place. Use facebook to search whom you want to make friends with. We don't necessarily check up TV programs. Use youtube to find out what we want to watch most. We don't necessarily meet people at the cafeteria to chat. Use twitter to say something trivial. We don't necessarily opine to the press. Use blogger to write down what you have in mind.
Certainly we are now in the world that is different from the ten-year-ago world. Could we have imagined what this world is like ten years ago?
Now we spend our time on some activities that were never experienced ten years ago. Our society and economy must change in some different way. We never imagine what the end will be like. I don't have any pessimistic view on this technologically informational change.
Rather I would feel like writing that our future will be very bright: People talk to each other without any political constraint. In Egypt, people drew down Mubarak from the power. We never thought of it without having this informational change(How could a very large number of people get together immediately?). We now have a powerful tool to change the world view and the world itself.
I try to foresee what this technological change is bringing to us.
What does this change in informational technology bring to us?
While updating the blog, I am wondering if we've really changed the world view by using facebook, twitter, youtube and blog: We can so easily catch up with what is happening in the world by using them.
We don't necessarily need to find the people in other place. Use facebook to search whom you want to make friends with. We don't necessarily check up TV programs. Use youtube to find out what we want to watch most. We don't necessarily meet people at the cafeteria to chat. Use twitter to say something trivial. We don't necessarily opine to the press. Use blogger to write down what you have in mind.
Certainly we are now in the world that is different from the ten-year-ago world. Could we have imagined what this world is like ten years ago?
Now we spend our time on some activities that were never experienced ten years ago. Our society and economy must change in some different way. We never imagine what the end will be like. I don't have any pessimistic view on this technologically informational change.
Rather I would feel like writing that our future will be very bright: People talk to each other without any political constraint. In Egypt, people drew down Mubarak from the power. We never thought of it without having this informational change(How could a very large number of people get together immediately?). We now have a powerful tool to change the world view and the world itself.
I try to foresee what this technological change is bringing to us.
Monday, February 07, 2011
Rebuild the Economy
Japan is in a government-financial problem: the government tax revenue is less than the expenditure and issues a lot of bonds to meet the deficit. Japan is in a serious debt. How to solve it?
Just only three ways to have in mind:
(1) raise the tax
(2) cut the spending
(3) boost the economy as a whole
Should try all of these? Should try two of the above? Should try one of the three? Say, if you boost up the economy and raise the tax at the same time, you should spend less and the whole economy goes bad and the tax revenue decreases. So should the economy do if you cut the spending and boost the economy. We seem to have such a trilemma.
Regarding this old and new problem, Alberto Alesina of Harvard University and Roberto Perotti of IGIER might have the hint:
fiscal adjustments
(1) which rely primarily on spending cuts and cuts in government wage bill have a better chance of being successful and expansionary.
(2) which rely primarily on tax increases and cuts in public investment tend not to last and are contractionary.
The above research is empirically derived not theoretically, but (which I think Kan's advisors know) Prime Minister Kan has to know this because he tries the latter to increase the consumption tax and to cut the public spending. Pls don't miss the coming social experiment!
Just only three ways to have in mind:
(1) raise the tax
(2) cut the spending
(3) boost the economy as a whole
Should try all of these? Should try two of the above? Should try one of the three? Say, if you boost up the economy and raise the tax at the same time, you should spend less and the whole economy goes bad and the tax revenue decreases. So should the economy do if you cut the spending and boost the economy. We seem to have such a trilemma.
Regarding this old and new problem, Alberto Alesina of Harvard University and Roberto Perotti of IGIER might have the hint:
fiscal adjustments
(1) which rely primarily on spending cuts and cuts in government wage bill have a better chance of being successful and expansionary.
(2) which rely primarily on tax increases and cuts in public investment tend not to last and are contractionary.
The above research is empirically derived not theoretically, but (which I think Kan's advisors know) Prime Minister Kan has to know this because he tries the latter to increase the consumption tax and to cut the public spending. Pls don't miss the coming social experiment!
Saturday, February 05, 2011
On Growth Strategies
Takeo Hoshi of UC San Diego and Anil Kashyap of the University of Chicago give some remedies for the stagnating Japanese economy:
They say what cause the stagnation are (1) the aging of the workforce, (2) the natural limits to export-led growth, (3) the tolerance of a dysfunctional banking system that supports 'zombie firms', (4) bad fiscal and monetary policy.
They say the policies are needed to improve growth and to raise productivity.
They recommend the following policies:
(1) accepting high-skilled foreign workers to increase the labor force,
(2) promoting more research collaboration between universities, companies and government to help technological progress
(3) enhancing free trade areas to help the industries raise productivity
(4) eliminating the regulatory separation of kindergartens and nursery schools to improve child care services and to encourage more talented people.
These suggestions are very interesting, but these have been already accepted and tried(not enough now, but gradually) by some policymakers. I think these might work if more people vote for them and believe these will help the Japanese economy revive.
The resource: 26/01/2011, WSJ
They say what cause the stagnation are (1) the aging of the workforce, (2) the natural limits to export-led growth, (3) the tolerance of a dysfunctional banking system that supports 'zombie firms', (4) bad fiscal and monetary policy.
They say the policies are needed to improve growth and to raise productivity.
They recommend the following policies:
(1) accepting high-skilled foreign workers to increase the labor force,
(2) promoting more research collaboration between universities, companies and government to help technological progress
(3) enhancing free trade areas to help the industries raise productivity
(4) eliminating the regulatory separation of kindergartens and nursery schools to improve child care services and to encourage more talented people.
These suggestions are very interesting, but these have been already accepted and tried(not enough now, but gradually) by some policymakers. I think these might work if more people vote for them and believe these will help the Japanese economy revive.
The resource: 26/01/2011, WSJ
Friday, January 21, 2011
How To Read the Income Data
The elasticity of son's income with respect to father's income is about 0.5 in the United States.
Regarding this study, Mankiw says that that 0.5 estimate is roughly the correlation between father and son income, ...and that the fraction of variance of son's income explained by father's income (R-squared) is only 0.25 and is called the "heritability" of a characteristic.
...some of the heritability of income must come not from inequality of opportunity but from the genetic transmission of talent. ...it would be shocking if we did not find some significant heritability of income. And that would be true even if equality of opportunity were perfect.
Needless to say, this low income mobility observed in the United States should be (1) the result of the tax system(Americans face lower tax rate than do Europeans) and, in my conjecture, should have been (2) an Americans' motivation to get ahead and, what's more, one of the causes of the dynamism of the American society: people work harder if they can get rewarded larger and longer. If they know they should pay more tax as they earn more, they are less likely to work harder from the outset and thus are more likely to earn at least no more than they used to earn.
I am not sure whether the above data can tell us about the heritability of character or talent(it is clear that we should research more on it to make it sure), and its resource research says nothing about the difference of race, the places where they live, career and education.
At any rate, we should be careful of the income data that we can get from some academic or official researches when we talk about the recent income gap observed in several developed countries.
Regarding this study, Mankiw says that that 0.5 estimate is roughly the correlation between father and son income, ...and that the fraction of variance of son's income explained by father's income (R-squared) is only 0.25 and is called the "heritability" of a characteristic.
...some of the heritability of income must come not from inequality of opportunity but from the genetic transmission of talent. ...it would be shocking if we did not find some significant heritability of income. And that would be true even if equality of opportunity were perfect.
Needless to say, this low income mobility observed in the United States should be (1) the result of the tax system(Americans face lower tax rate than do Europeans) and, in my conjecture, should have been (2) an Americans' motivation to get ahead and, what's more, one of the causes of the dynamism of the American society: people work harder if they can get rewarded larger and longer. If they know they should pay more tax as they earn more, they are less likely to work harder from the outset and thus are more likely to earn at least no more than they used to earn.
I am not sure whether the above data can tell us about the heritability of character or talent(it is clear that we should research more on it to make it sure), and its resource research says nothing about the difference of race, the places where they live, career and education.
At any rate, we should be careful of the income data that we can get from some academic or official researches when we talk about the recent income gap observed in several developed countries.
How To Cut the Deficit
I like Mankiw because he thinks up an interesting (ironic) analogy when he talks about difficult economic issues;
Plan to reduce the budget deficit: the federal government writes me(=health care) a check for $1 billion and increases the tax(=for fiscal sustainability) by $3 billion. This means that giving me that $1 billion will reduce the budget deficit by $2 billion.
This is not about the fiscal problem that America has, but that Japan has:
Plan to reduce the budget deficit: the federal government writes me(=child care) a check for 1 billion￥ and increases the consumption tax(=for fiscal sustainability) by 3 billion￥.
Plan to reduce the budget deficit: the federal government writes me(=health care) a check for $1 billion and increases the tax(=for fiscal sustainability) by $3 billion. This means that giving me that $1 billion will reduce the budget deficit by $2 billion.
This is not about the fiscal problem that America has, but that Japan has:
Plan to reduce the budget deficit: the federal government writes me(=child care) a check for 1 billion￥ and increases the consumption tax(=for fiscal sustainability) by 3 billion￥.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
How to Tackle Your Exam
Science 14 January 2011: Vol. 331 no. 6014 pp. 211-213
DOI: 10.1126/science.1199427
Writing About Testing Worries Boosts Exam Performance in the Classroom
Gerardo Ramirez and Sian L. Beilock*
Simply writing about one’s worries before a high-stakes exam can boost test scores.
DOI: 10.1126/science.1199427
Writing About Testing Worries Boosts Exam Performance in the Classroom
Gerardo Ramirez and Sian L. Beilock*
Simply writing about one’s worries before a high-stakes exam can boost test scores.
Wednesday, December 08, 2010
Anti-Consumptionism!?
Many young Japanese has not bought goods and service recently: they cut the spending on the fashion and food, don't buy a car, don't go on a trip, and try to save money. They are about to play a big and new role in the goods market in Japan.
Last year a book titled A Study on the Generation of Anti-Consumptionism (this title is translated by Taro and this book is published from Toyokeizai and only in Japanese), and subtitled "Stupid to buy a car, isn't it?" was released and went through several printings.
Anti-consumptionists are the young people of late 20s, and they were born after the bubble economy in late 1980s burst. They have generally a trend toward or taste for less consumption even though they have regular earnings. Interestingly, some of them are low paid part-timers and others have a regular job or full-time job and thus stable earnings.
They consume much less than older generations expect: they don't go to karaoke(to enjoy singing in a room with friends) and a restaurant without coupon, prefer eating at home to eating out and don't like a drink that is harmful to their health.
I found the article on almost the same topic and it said that some of the young people have become"grass-eating men" who prefer clothes and cosmetics to cars, and avoid life in the fast lane. (The Economist, November 20th-26th 2010, special report) So they can also tend to be "grass-eaters", but the men named grass-eaters are generally the ones who don't like making or having girlfriends.
The reason they consume less is, the article says, as follows: when they were teens, they went through the Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, the subway attack in 1995, the bully in the schools and suicide, the Big Bang in Japan(the reform of financial and banking system) . Especially, they were damaged by the bully in the schools and were forced to be inconspicuous, to read the atmosphere in the schools and to make a shallow friendship with each other.
They tend to fear being made fun of and really want to look smart, which promotes buoyancy and rivalry among them, and thus makes them want to look carefully at others' face and to look nice: Such a common generational experience brings about a common generational mentality, which makes them worry about their future and thus consume less.
The above sounds reasonable, but it seems to me that it doesn't tell what makes them consume less, or what makes them worry about their future. I think there's more an economic cause behind this than a sociologistical or philosophical one.
Many business people are worried about such anti-consumptionists because they consume less and give a negative impact on the economy as a whole; They are more likely to shrink the dampening Japanese economy. However, they are reported to be attracted by the people from abroad and may turn out to be a new Japanese generation who pursues a new and different lifestyle from that of the older generations, as some optimists say.
In my view, a new generation gives a new lifestyle, and changes the structure of preference and thus of demand in the economy, say, in which they change a demand for a peaceful music to a fancy car and TV set.
But in the short term, anti-consumptionism should decrease the aggregate demand of the Japanese economy. Today's newspaper said that almost half of the child benefit offered first by the government this year goes to saving for their children. The child benefit doesn't make them save, but spend more on their children. They save more and consume less, which leads to more depressed economy which forces people to save even more and consume even less. It is called "the paradox of thrift".
Anti-consumptionism may be another or a new version of thrifty lifestyle.
We should need the policy to boost up the economic activity and to stimulate the people's spending in a weakened economy. Anyway, no wonder the Japanese economy will not soon recover from this slump. (Source: Diamond online, 08/12/2010)
Last year a book titled A Study on the Generation of Anti-Consumptionism (this title is translated by Taro and this book is published from Toyokeizai and only in Japanese), and subtitled "Stupid to buy a car, isn't it?" was released and went through several printings.
Anti-consumptionists are the young people of late 20s, and they were born after the bubble economy in late 1980s burst. They have generally a trend toward or taste for less consumption even though they have regular earnings. Interestingly, some of them are low paid part-timers and others have a regular job or full-time job and thus stable earnings.
They consume much less than older generations expect: they don't go to karaoke(to enjoy singing in a room with friends) and a restaurant without coupon, prefer eating at home to eating out and don't like a drink that is harmful to their health.
I found the article on almost the same topic and it said that some of the young people have become"grass-eating men" who prefer clothes and cosmetics to cars, and avoid life in the fast lane. (The Economist, November 20th-26th 2010, special report) So they can also tend to be "grass-eaters", but the men named grass-eaters are generally the ones who don't like making or having girlfriends.
The reason they consume less is, the article says, as follows: when they were teens, they went through the Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, the subway attack in 1995, the bully in the schools and suicide, the Big Bang in Japan(the reform of financial and banking system) . Especially, they were damaged by the bully in the schools and were forced to be inconspicuous, to read the atmosphere in the schools and to make a shallow friendship with each other.
They tend to fear being made fun of and really want to look smart, which promotes buoyancy and rivalry among them, and thus makes them want to look carefully at others' face and to look nice: Such a common generational experience brings about a common generational mentality, which makes them worry about their future and thus consume less.
The above sounds reasonable, but it seems to me that it doesn't tell what makes them consume less, or what makes them worry about their future. I think there's more an economic cause behind this than a sociologistical or philosophical one.
Many business people are worried about such anti-consumptionists because they consume less and give a negative impact on the economy as a whole; They are more likely to shrink the dampening Japanese economy. However, they are reported to be attracted by the people from abroad and may turn out to be a new Japanese generation who pursues a new and different lifestyle from that of the older generations, as some optimists say.
In my view, a new generation gives a new lifestyle, and changes the structure of preference and thus of demand in the economy, say, in which they change a demand for a peaceful music to a fancy car and TV set.
But in the short term, anti-consumptionism should decrease the aggregate demand of the Japanese economy. Today's newspaper said that almost half of the child benefit offered first by the government this year goes to saving for their children. The child benefit doesn't make them save, but spend more on their children. They save more and consume less, which leads to more depressed economy which forces people to save even more and consume even less. It is called "the paradox of thrift".
Anti-consumptionism may be another or a new version of thrifty lifestyle.
We should need the policy to boost up the economic activity and to stimulate the people's spending in a weakened economy. Anyway, no wonder the Japanese economy will not soon recover from this slump. (Source: Diamond online, 08/12/2010)
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Mobile phone in Chaplin's Circus (1928) ?
Many people have been surprised at the scene. I don't think she had a cell phone to make a call.
Saturday, October 23, 2010
On Marrying Self
(Reuters Life! 22/10/2010) - Chen Wei-yih will marry herself. Uninspired by the men she's met but facing social pressure to get married, the 30-year-old Taipei office worker will hold the reception next month in honor of just one person.
"Age thirty is a prime period for me. My work and experience are in good shape, but I haven't found a partner, so what can I do?" Chen said. "It's not that I'm anti-marriage. I just hope that I can express a different idea within the bounds of a tradition."
Taiwanese women are marrying later and less often as their economic status advances, fuelling government concerns about a drop in the birth rate and its impact on productivity.
Some people who firmly trust tradition may say that this is not called a wedding and marriage and that she just wanted to attract public attention; Some of them may feel bad about or resist it. Marriage should come true when men and women love and agree with each other on it; Marriage is a social union or legal contract between people that creates kinship.
"Age thirty is a prime period for me. My work and experience are in good shape, but I haven't found a partner, so what can I do?" Chen said. "It's not that I'm anti-marriage. I just hope that I can express a different idea within the bounds of a tradition."
Taiwanese women are marrying later and less often as their economic status advances, fuelling government concerns about a drop in the birth rate and its impact on productivity.
Only 40 percent of women surveyed earlier this year by the education ministry said they imagined married people could live better than singles, local media said.
But as Chen cannot officially register a marriage to herself, if she finds a man later she will wed again."If I had a steady boyfriend, I wouldn't do this," Chen said. "it would be offensive to him, anyway."
When I read the above post, it was so interesting and I was a little surprised that we could marry ourselves: I didn't have such an idea!Some people who firmly trust tradition may say that this is not called a wedding and marriage and that she just wanted to attract public attention; Some of them may feel bad about or resist it. Marriage should come true when men and women love and agree with each other on it; Marriage is a social union or legal contract between people that creates kinship.
However, recently it has not been unusual for some men/women to get married with some other men/women and it is called the same-sex marriage. I do not say that it is good or not and I have no idea about it, but I know that some people may feel bad about it and that it is open to dispute. Self marriage might also catch public attention and new discussion.
By the way, when I studied economics, my professor said that getting married is just like finding a job. Now I see. Before getting married, we have to find a good partner; We can't marry a bad partner. It's almost the same in finding a good job: we can't work for a bad company all day long.
In my opinion, if the self marriage is a good/the best choice of life for you and it doesn't violate others' interest, health and property, I believe you can do it without any other restriction /obstruction. I don't understand those who want to marry themselves though(we can't have a good night without a good partner!), but if they are satisfied and they don't disturb others' lives, I have no reason or I can't find any reason for disagreement on it. Do whatever they want and be happy!
Monday, October 11, 2010
Nobel Prize 2010
I hope the Nobel prize of economics will go to Nobuhiro Kiyotaki of Princeton as the first Japanese Nobel winner.
Saturday, October 09, 2010
Facebook Unfriending
I saw an interesting post in the newspaper. One grad student found some reasons for Facebook unfriending.
Facebook is, as you know, a worldwide social online networking where friends meet to share photos, news and gossip .
The word 'unfriend' came from Facebook and it is defined as “to remove someone as a 'friend' from a social networking site such as Facebook.”
The reasons for Facebook unfriending are as follows:
No.1: frequent, unimportant posts.
No2: posting about polarizing topics like religion and politics.
Moreover, the research found that those making friend requests stood a much higher chance of being abruptly unfriended and that at the same time, those doing the unfriending seemed to hold the upper hand in the relationship.
I think this may be something helpful for some other research on how to keep better relationship between, say, employees and employers in the labor market, men and women in the marriage market, and so on.
At any rate, Facebook itself is UNIMPORTANT. People just enjoy unimportant posts, don't they? They just break boring time. I believe in our life we sometimes need unimportant things as well as important things.
Facebook is, as you know, a worldwide social online networking where friends meet to share photos, news and gossip .
The word 'unfriend' came from Facebook and it is defined as “to remove someone as a 'friend' from a social networking site such as Facebook.”
The reasons for Facebook unfriending are as follows:
No.1: frequent, unimportant posts.
No2: posting about polarizing topics like religion and politics.
Moreover, the research found that those making friend requests stood a much higher chance of being abruptly unfriended and that at the same time, those doing the unfriending seemed to hold the upper hand in the relationship.
I think this may be something helpful for some other research on how to keep better relationship between, say, employees and employers in the labor market, men and women in the marriage market, and so on.
At any rate, Facebook itself is UNIMPORTANT. People just enjoy unimportant posts, don't they? They just break boring time. I believe in our life we sometimes need unimportant things as well as important things.
Tuesday, October 05, 2010
BOJ Follows Roger Farmer?
NY times(05/10/2010);TOKYO — In a surprise move Tuesday, the Japanese central bank lowered its benchmark interest rate to a range of 0 percent to 0.1 percent, a tiny change from its previous target of 0.1 percent but a symbolic shift back into an age of zero interest rates.
The Bank of Japan (BOJ) also said it would set up a fund of ¥5 trillion, or $60 billion, to buy Japanese government bonds, commercial paper and other asset-backed securities amid concerns about weakening growth in the economy, the world’s third largest, after those of the United States and China. The bank also kept its credit facility for banks at ¥30 trillion.According to the one book written by Roger E. A. Farmer of UCLA, How the economy works,Oxford University Press, Roger says in this book,
"Control of an index fund(=mutual fund*) is the ideal way to implement this idea(=stabilizing stock market movements and preventing them from devastating the real economy),..."pp.159
*mutual fund : a basket with some stocks, bonds and other assets
"To maintain the interest rate, Fed(=US central bank) intervenes in the market by buying and selling Treasury bills(liabilities issued by government) in exchange for money,... (and at the same time) announces a price path for index funds and stands ready to buy and sell these funds each day at the announced price." pp.160
However, BOJ didn't announce the purchase of index funds/mutual funds and didn't say it follows Prof Farmer, but when I heard this news tonight I recalled Farmer; it seems to me that BOJ's announcement of purchase of Japanese government bonds, commercial paper and other asset-backed securities will have similar effects on the economy to what Prof Farmer's suggested.
I am not sure what Farmer says is going to happen in the Japanese economy when BOJ seeks the above new policy measures, but I would like to watch what's going on.
By the way, the press seemed surprised at the BOJ announcement, as Hirokata Kusaba of Mizuho Research Institute says, “The latest move gives off a much more powerful impression than past, incremental measures, which had sparked market disillusionment”
“Though there will be debate over the effects of the monetary loosening, I believe the Bank of Japan has done all it can at this time”
“despite the (BOJ's) exaggerated language claiming that this is radical,...BOJ is apparently acting reluctantly and de-emphasizing the temporary nature of the measures, which is likely to limit the impact" and “There is a stark contrast with the Fed’s ‘whatever is necessary’ approach.” **The parentheses are added by Taro.
At any rate I am sure that this BOJ's action will soon lead to a widespread debate among economists and policymakers all over the world.
Saturday, October 02, 2010
Behind the Boom of Brain Training
What is called 'brain training' or 'logical thinking' is booming among the people in Japan.
I don't know whether I should say 'brain training' and 'logical thinking' in the same context (these words may be quite different to some people), but anyway I can see many books titled 'brain training' and 'logical thinking' in the amazon.com.
It shows that many people want to become more brainy/smarter than ever, doesn't it? I try questioning myself about it and it seems to me that many people, especially business people as well, think that they should be smarter on their own in their everyday life.
I don't know if it is good for them to become brainy. Let me assume some situation of chat: while we are chatting, I always try asking, "what is it?", "what do you mean by this?", "it doesn't make sense", "that part of your tale sounds illogical", and so on. It is as if we were always in a discussion/meeting in class at school. I would get tired if I were always asking and questioning while chatting.
The issue I would raise is," do we really have to be smarter/thinking logically everywhere and every time in our life?" To be honest, I am not sure if we should do.
I don't always respect people trying to be rational or logical: I would like to ask such a king of people, "what part inside you do you defend?" It seems to me that they are likely to care themselves only, or that they just try to look nice and smart. It is just as if I dressed up.
This effort for trying to be smart is a kind of the waste of the time and money. Anyway it doesn't always help.
I don't know whether I should say 'brain training' and 'logical thinking' in the same context (these words may be quite different to some people), but anyway I can see many books titled 'brain training' and 'logical thinking' in the amazon.com.
It shows that many people want to become more brainy/smarter than ever, doesn't it? I try questioning myself about it and it seems to me that many people, especially business people as well, think that they should be smarter on their own in their everyday life.
I don't know if it is good for them to become brainy. Let me assume some situation of chat: while we are chatting, I always try asking, "what is it?", "what do you mean by this?", "it doesn't make sense", "that part of your tale sounds illogical", and so on. It is as if we were always in a discussion/meeting in class at school. I would get tired if I were always asking and questioning while chatting.
The issue I would raise is," do we really have to be smarter/thinking logically everywhere and every time in our life?" To be honest, I am not sure if we should do.
I don't always respect people trying to be rational or logical: I would like to ask such a king of people, "what part inside you do you defend?" It seems to me that they are likely to care themselves only, or that they just try to look nice and smart. It is just as if I dressed up.
This effort for trying to be smart is a kind of the waste of the time and money. Anyway it doesn't always help.
Friday, October 01, 2010
What 'efficiency' means?
In bookstores, I can always see some books on 'an efficient resource management' or 'efficient corporate governance' or 'efficient blah blah blah'.
By the way, what do you mean by 'efficient blah blah blah'? I don't understand it at all! What is efficient? Are you efficient? Hmm...I have no idea.
My English dictionary tells me that it means 'working well'. It's a good answer and most people who say 'efficient blah blah blah' probably may mean so by it.
However, economics tells me somewhat different definition of it: efficient means 'happier'. It's a little ambiguous and it sounds subjective although economics deals with objective social problems, but for me it is rather a correct way of using this word.
When I think of what to change in my life, say, what to cut down on in my spending, what to throw away in my bookshelf and how much to drink in this bar and so on, I usually think of 'the Pareto-efficient' and it means 'happier', say, "if I drink a little more, to what extent will I be happier?".
Usually this word is used on the public policy conducted by policymakers and the effects on the economy and the people's lives: Assume there are two people, A and B and they try to trade each other. If A can't be better off/happier than ever unless A tries to make B worse off/less happier, A is in the 'Pareto-optimal/efficient' condition and vice versa.
Pareto is an Italian sociologist in the 19th century and the Pareto efficiency is used when economists think about the deals between some people, that is, an 'inter-personal' trades, but it's not the wrong usage when I talk of an 'intra-personal' trades between today's Taro and tomorrow's Taro on what or how much to choose to eat/drink*.
Anyway in terms of economic thinking, an 'efficient resource management' should be the one that makes the people related to it happier/more satisfied, rather than that reduces the cost and raises the profit.
*Some alert readers may say, "if you want to talk about Pareto-optimum/efficiency, you should touch on the Edgeworth box, contract curves, core and the first/second theorem of welfare economics". I know I should use these ideas if I talk about it formally.
By the way, what do you mean by 'efficient blah blah blah'? I don't understand it at all! What is efficient? Are you efficient? Hmm...I have no idea.
My English dictionary tells me that it means 'working well'. It's a good answer and most people who say 'efficient blah blah blah' probably may mean so by it.
However, economics tells me somewhat different definition of it: efficient means 'happier'. It's a little ambiguous and it sounds subjective although economics deals with objective social problems, but for me it is rather a correct way of using this word.
When I think of what to change in my life, say, what to cut down on in my spending, what to throw away in my bookshelf and how much to drink in this bar and so on, I usually think of 'the Pareto-efficient' and it means 'happier', say, "if I drink a little more, to what extent will I be happier?".
Usually this word is used on the public policy conducted by policymakers and the effects on the economy and the people's lives: Assume there are two people, A and B and they try to trade each other. If A can't be better off/happier than ever unless A tries to make B worse off/less happier, A is in the 'Pareto-optimal/efficient' condition and vice versa.
Pareto is an Italian sociologist in the 19th century and the Pareto efficiency is used when economists think about the deals between some people, that is, an 'inter-personal' trades, but it's not the wrong usage when I talk of an 'intra-personal' trades between today's Taro and tomorrow's Taro on what or how much to choose to eat/drink*.
Anyway in terms of economic thinking, an 'efficient resource management' should be the one that makes the people related to it happier/more satisfied, rather than that reduces the cost and raises the profit.
*Some alert readers may say, "if you want to talk about Pareto-optimum/efficiency, you should touch on the Edgeworth box, contract curves, core and the first/second theorem of welfare economics". I know I should use these ideas if I talk about it formally.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
The Fall Comes
Looking at the above picture, I feel the fall has come. The man in the picture who harvests rice for a festival is, with all due respect, our emperor. (The picture is from Jiji press.)
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Money is Important, But...
In some major countries like the US, Germany and here Japan, it is not easy to get a new and good job. Many people fear that they will have no job and lower pay. Some of them may also fear that they will have no more moderate and stable life.
Everyone hopes that he or she will have a good job. What I mean by 'a good job' is, of course, high-paid job.
However, some people may say that money is not so important as we expect in our life. There are many different views on that, but to live a healthy life in our modern society, making money should be considered first like this, "how much can I earn by working for your company?"
Here in Japan, maybe, in some other countries, there's a saying: "well fed, well bred". When surfing the web, I found another saying, "manners and money makes a gentleman", "poverty is an enemy to good manners."
Our job or career should be always our major concern in our life and when thinking about living a good life not to feel poverty, we must rethink of our current job and career, "will we be able to keep it for long?".
Good job depends on what we think as a good job, but how much we earn is always first concern and we can't tell a lie on it like,"money is not important, but happiness is always important." Happiness and money must be closely connected each other(and some research prove it) and needless to say, there's no happiness in a one-dollar-in-a-day life.
However, at the same time, there's happiness in a one-million-dollar-in-a-day life, isn't there? That should be another question to think of. Personally I can't imagine what it is like to be such a life, but there may be another problem, say, on how to manage to choose what kind of assets or how to inherit their property to whom.
In my opinion, I am happy that I can eat, read and sleep in a house with a well-built roof. I don't hope too much that I will live in luxury (I would like to live in luxury, having nice dinner and drink and bedroom), but I actually hope I will live a simple and stable life. If I can't live such a life now, then I should take some action to better it and that time should make me think money important in my present life. (No inflation is considered now. If there's the fear of inflation, my above view will be quite different. Behind my view the value of money, the purchasing power of money is important, not money itself when considering what kind of life we would like to lead.)
I believe that saving money doesn't mean just cutting down on our expenditure(cutting down on our standard of living makes no sense!), but thinking carefully of what to buy.
Some commentators on TV or in today's newspapers suggest that we should save money for our uncertain future life, but our future is always uncertain and the most certain thing on the future is that the future is always uncertain. And that's why we should think carefully of what we need most in today's life.
Don't be afraid of our future life too much, yes of course, we need to think of it, but thinking too much is not so helpful when we face some difficulties in our career. We should think of what we can do now because it is clear that we can't do what we can't do now.
If we think that we need something for our current or future job, we should now be studying or preparing for it(there's no money but there's much time! Time is also as important as money in our life), and if we need higher paid job to keep our current life stable, we should be looking for it in the job advertisement on the Internet or in the newspapers.
Please don't be influenced by someone near us(otherwise, you will be hurt!), just listen to or sometimes pretend to listen to what other people mean. However, some advise should be listened to. We remember they don't always think of us or they don't always try to be helpful to us. They just talk about what they want to talk(they just break time!). We should keep in mind that finally"do it yourself". Don't take too much time to talk about ourselves to someone, take time for us to prepare for another chance in the future.
Money is important but it doesn't choose our life. Moreover other people don't choose our life at least here in Japan and in some developed and democratic countries where the law protects our freedom to choose our career. Our life chooses our money.
Everyone hopes that he or she will have a good job. What I mean by 'a good job' is, of course, high-paid job.
However, some people may say that money is not so important as we expect in our life. There are many different views on that, but to live a healthy life in our modern society, making money should be considered first like this, "how much can I earn by working for your company?"
Here in Japan, maybe, in some other countries, there's a saying: "well fed, well bred". When surfing the web, I found another saying, "manners and money makes a gentleman", "poverty is an enemy to good manners."
Our job or career should be always our major concern in our life and when thinking about living a good life not to feel poverty, we must rethink of our current job and career, "will we be able to keep it for long?".
Good job depends on what we think as a good job, but how much we earn is always first concern and we can't tell a lie on it like,"money is not important, but happiness is always important." Happiness and money must be closely connected each other(and some research prove it) and needless to say, there's no happiness in a one-dollar-in-a-day life.
However, at the same time, there's happiness in a one-million-dollar-in-a-day life, isn't there? That should be another question to think of. Personally I can't imagine what it is like to be such a life, but there may be another problem, say, on how to manage to choose what kind of assets or how to inherit their property to whom.
In my opinion, I am happy that I can eat, read and sleep in a house with a well-built roof. I don't hope too much that I will live in luxury (I would like to live in luxury, having nice dinner and drink and bedroom), but I actually hope I will live a simple and stable life. If I can't live such a life now, then I should take some action to better it and that time should make me think money important in my present life. (No inflation is considered now. If there's the fear of inflation, my above view will be quite different. Behind my view the value of money, the purchasing power of money is important, not money itself when considering what kind of life we would like to lead.)
I believe that saving money doesn't mean just cutting down on our expenditure(cutting down on our standard of living makes no sense!), but thinking carefully of what to buy.
Some commentators on TV or in today's newspapers suggest that we should save money for our uncertain future life, but our future is always uncertain and the most certain thing on the future is that the future is always uncertain. And that's why we should think carefully of what we need most in today's life.
Don't be afraid of our future life too much, yes of course, we need to think of it, but thinking too much is not so helpful when we face some difficulties in our career. We should think of what we can do now because it is clear that we can't do what we can't do now.
If we think that we need something for our current or future job, we should now be studying or preparing for it(there's no money but there's much time! Time is also as important as money in our life), and if we need higher paid job to keep our current life stable, we should be looking for it in the job advertisement on the Internet or in the newspapers.
Please don't be influenced by someone near us(otherwise, you will be hurt!), just listen to or sometimes pretend to listen to what other people mean. However, some advise should be listened to. We remember they don't always think of us or they don't always try to be helpful to us. They just talk about what they want to talk(they just break time!). We should keep in mind that finally"do it yourself". Don't take too much time to talk about ourselves to someone, take time for us to prepare for another chance in the future.
Money is important but it doesn't choose our life. Moreover other people don't choose our life at least here in Japan and in some developed and democratic countries where the law protects our freedom to choose our career. Our life chooses our money.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)