Japan’s labor market is tight, and higher wages may be needed to retain workers(bloomberg.com)
bloomberg.com
Japan’s labor market is tight, and higher wages may be needed to retain workers
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-08-02/japan-inc-may-finally-have-to-fatten-paychecks
142 comments
>[+] One of my first conversations with a boss at a traditionally managed Japanese company involved my expected timeline to get married and what the company's role in that process would be; my boss assumed that it would be sourcing the bride.
This was the example I was thinking of when reading the first part of your message. I'm glad you said it because I feared it would've been seen as an exaggeration if I added it as an example I've heard of.
So to anyone who is reading about this and doesn't trust a single anonymous source, let this second anonymous source add on that I've read about the same behavior, and even more disturbing behavior happening to unmarried female employees (where do you think they source the brides from?).
That said, I've heard about these cases at a few companies. I do not have sufficient evidence to generalize beyond that, only to point out that it does happen (and is tolerated by the legal system, no chance of that in the US), not the rate at which it happens nor if it is a fair generalization of Japanese companies in general.
This was the example I was thinking of when reading the first part of your message. I'm glad you said it because I feared it would've been seen as an exaggeration if I added it as an example I've heard of.
So to anyone who is reading about this and doesn't trust a single anonymous source, let this second anonymous source add on that I've read about the same behavior, and even more disturbing behavior happening to unmarried female employees (where do you think they source the brides from?).
That said, I've heard about these cases at a few companies. I do not have sufficient evidence to generalize beyond that, only to point out that it does happen (and is tolerated by the legal system, no chance of that in the US), not the rate at which it happens nor if it is a fair generalization of Japanese companies in general.
Not to trivialize real gender prejudice, but there is no shortage of Japanese women who are in a dire search for a convenient marriage to a busy man who can give her children, financial support, and otherwise leave her alone. Even among my friends, whom I consider to be highly intelligent and evolved people, this is a perfectly normal aspiration.
Is this a cultural thing? Do women in Japan not aspire to fall in love?
Of course many do aspire to a fulfilling romantic life. I'm always a little bit amazed, however, when perfectly normal people admit that they want to marry for status, stability, and other purely pragmatic reasons. (It's not just women who express this, by the way.)
Marriage is pretty complicated here, at least to my outsider eye. I know quite a few middle aged women who openly have steady (usu. older) boyfriends, but these boyfriends go home to a wife who barely speaks to him anymore, and yet refuses to divorce him. This also seems to be a relatively normal relationship in middle and later years here.
Like all human stuff, it's complicated under the surface.
Marriage is pretty complicated here, at least to my outsider eye. I know quite a few middle aged women who openly have steady (usu. older) boyfriends, but these boyfriends go home to a wife who barely speaks to him anymore, and yet refuses to divorce him. This also seems to be a relatively normal relationship in middle and later years here.
Like all human stuff, it's complicated under the surface.
>I know quite a few middle aged women who openly have steady (usu. older) boyfriends, but these boyfriends go home to a wife who barely speaks to him anymore, and yet refuses to divorce him.
>convenient marriage to a busy man who can give her children, financial support, and otherwise leave her alone.
This is likely going further off topic at this point, but between these two comments, why would a guy even want to get married? Even when one factors in a boost in pay/social status, this looks like a bad deal (and that is taking a very pragmatic look at it, but we are talking about marriages of convenience).
>convenient marriage to a busy man who can give her children, financial support, and otherwise leave her alone.
This is likely going further off topic at this point, but between these two comments, why would a guy even want to get married? Even when one factors in a boost in pay/social status, this looks like a bad deal (and that is taking a very pragmatic look at it, but we are talking about marriages of convenience).
To be fair, there are healthy, happy marriages here. My point was that the boomer generation devolved into some conventions that seem unacceptable from a Western perspective. You can't underestimate the impulse to act in the larger group's interest in Japan because it is a very real factor that can almost fully subordinate an ego. I don't really consider it better or worse than the "me first" philosophy of self-realization in the West.
Your question makes certain assumptions that are itself, specific to your culture.
ie, the idea that falling in love and choosing your partner are somehow related.
ie, the idea that falling in love and choosing your partner are somehow related.
Japanese people are, in general, extremely pragmatic when it comes to relationships. And the pursuit of stability is a really important aspect in japanese lifes.
It is my understanding that "love" (the Western standard of Romantic love) isn't as important as building a stable relationship piece by piece in non-Western cultures.
It's not sufficient in Western countries either. I.e., high divorce rates.
[deleted]
> my boss assumed that it would be sourcing the bride.
Yikes.
Yikes.
The image you have is probably close to how in some societies 2 families decide their children are betrothed to each other.
The reality is closer to match making: some colleagues might introduce you to somebody who could be a match. Or maybe they will invite you to what is called a goukon, a group date where one of the male participants invite a few colleagues or friends of his who are single while his girlfriend invite the same number of female colleagues or friends of hers who are single.
The reality is closer to match making: some colleagues might introduce you to somebody who could be a match. Or maybe they will invite you to what is called a goukon, a group date where one of the male participants invite a few colleagues or friends of his who are single while his girlfriend invite the same number of female colleagues or friends of hers who are single.
Though to be fair, arranged marriages are pretty common in Japan. Several of my friends have arranged marriages and are as happy as any other couple I know. I suppose you can think of it like online dating, where there is also an expectation that both parties are looking to get married. It would not surprise me at all that a company would pay the fees for a match maker if being single was causing a valued employee emotional distress. Especially foreign workers don't have family to take care of this kind of thing (sometimes parents will intervene and contact a match maker if they feel that their child is taking too long to get married).
I've never been a full time worker in Japan, except in my own consulting company (obviously -- otherwise I would still be there ;-) ). But with a 1 year renewable contract (the normal way to work if you are not a full time employee), I was surprised at the extent to which the company takes care of you. It's nice if you are like me where you want to concentrate on work, but I've known people who get frustrated by what they see as an intrusion on their personal affairs.
When I was working at the high school where I taught English, several times I had conversations with the vice principal who felt that me being single past the age of 40 was a problem. He even sent me to talk to the nurse so that she could explain how Japanese relationships work and impress upon me the importance of taking things seriously.
And... well... I listened. And they were right. I got married to a Japanese woman who I was dating (not the nurse ;-) ). Not only has it made my life dramatically happier, but it's helped my job incredibly (even though I'm consulting IT related stuff instead of teaching English ;-) ). But it's kind of beyond weird have that kind of intervention at work...
I've never been a full time worker in Japan, except in my own consulting company (obviously -- otherwise I would still be there ;-) ). But with a 1 year renewable contract (the normal way to work if you are not a full time employee), I was surprised at the extent to which the company takes care of you. It's nice if you are like me where you want to concentrate on work, but I've known people who get frustrated by what they see as an intrusion on their personal affairs.
When I was working at the high school where I taught English, several times I had conversations with the vice principal who felt that me being single past the age of 40 was a problem. He even sent me to talk to the nurse so that she could explain how Japanese relationships work and impress upon me the importance of taking things seriously.
And... well... I listened. And they were right. I got married to a Japanese woman who I was dating (not the nurse ;-) ). Not only has it made my life dramatically happier, but it's helped my job incredibly (even though I'm consulting IT related stuff instead of teaching English ;-) ). But it's kind of beyond weird have that kind of intervention at work...
I can appreciate that having work intervene is weird, but that's the culture apparently.
Studies have shown having a partner increases wages and helps you live longer. And the Japanese live the longest. Strange coincidence.
Studies have shown having a partner increases wages and helps you live longer. And the Japanese live the longest. Strange coincidence.
They are outlived by Japanese-Americans though.
Japanese marriage rates are in long term decline. They don't marry all that much.
Neither do American millennials. First world problems.
Americans still create couples that live together - just without papers. Japan is much different in that regard. They are singles.
Wikipedia: "According to the 2010 census, 58.9% of Japan's adult population is married", "As of 2006, 55.7% of Americans age 18 and over were married."
If you can find the rate of people living with an unmarried partner in the US or in Japan, I'll be surprised because I certainly can't. Part of the reason is that until recently it wasn't even on the census -- only "cohabitating families", which includes living with your parents.
I know this kind of stuff get repeated in the news over and over again, but I'm going to be honest with you. A lot of it is bad journalism. It is popular to trash foreign cultures and hold up your own as superior -- it sells. Reporters get these fluff pieces from news wires (or actually the vast majority of "trash japan" stories start from a single place - The Japan Times) and don't check the facts.
Having said that, if you actually can find the facts, I would be interested in seeing them. I suspect that you are right that people living with unmarried partners (the term currently used by the US census) has a higher incidence in the US than in Japan. But you will have to do a fair amount of work to make the comparison meaningful.
The average age of marriage in Japan is 30.1. The average age of marriage in the US is 28.2. If you couple that fact that 66% of people who got married in the US in 2012 cohabitated for more than 2 years, then you can see that there are a fair number of young people in the US who are essentially married, where in Japan people wait until they are older.
In Japan, that kind of cohabitation is rare (people live with their parents before they get married). One of the reasons (and IMHO, the overriding reason) that Japanese people get married late is because young Japanese women hold a lot of power in the proceedings. Young women live with their parents and work. And even though they often help with costs in the household, they are relatively financially well off. Also, young women tend to want to have children when they are older because it will interfere with their job. Single income families with stay at home mothers is still very popular here. This pushes the age of marriage back. It also pushes the fertility rate down (because if you have your first child in your early thirties, then there often isn't enough time to have many more. Also, it increases the generational gap).
Now, another complicating factor is that in Japan "marriage" is not really a thing the way it is in the west. In the west, marriage is still, by and large, a religious institution. In some countries, only the church can marry you. In Japan, the only thing that counts is having your name on the family register. You don't even need a ceremony. You can just wander up to city hall, fill out the forms and, voila, you are married.
If you are not on the same family register in Japan, you are not in the same family. It does not matter where you live. When the census comes around, it is sent to the head of the family on the register. If there are 2 families living at the same address, then there are 2 census forms. There is no way to indicate that you are cohabitating! Similarly, if you are on somebody's family register (because you got married), but you aren't living together -- there is no way to get another census form! So separation statistics in Japan are also impossible. I even know people who have had a wedding ceremony, but for various reasons did not want to change the family registry. So they are not married! (Which makes things very complicated because all family law is based on the family registry -- if you are not on the registry, then you are not a family, by definition).
Basically, what I'm saying is that you're going to have your hands full if you want to make a meaningful comparison. And like I said, I realise that people are inundated with a lot of stuff from the media (and especially youtube), so it is hard to know what is right and what is wrong. Just keep in mind that quite a lot of the stuff you here is motivated by something other than trying to educate you.
If you can find the rate of people living with an unmarried partner in the US or in Japan, I'll be surprised because I certainly can't. Part of the reason is that until recently it wasn't even on the census -- only "cohabitating families", which includes living with your parents.
I know this kind of stuff get repeated in the news over and over again, but I'm going to be honest with you. A lot of it is bad journalism. It is popular to trash foreign cultures and hold up your own as superior -- it sells. Reporters get these fluff pieces from news wires (or actually the vast majority of "trash japan" stories start from a single place - The Japan Times) and don't check the facts.
Having said that, if you actually can find the facts, I would be interested in seeing them. I suspect that you are right that people living with unmarried partners (the term currently used by the US census) has a higher incidence in the US than in Japan. But you will have to do a fair amount of work to make the comparison meaningful.
The average age of marriage in Japan is 30.1. The average age of marriage in the US is 28.2. If you couple that fact that 66% of people who got married in the US in 2012 cohabitated for more than 2 years, then you can see that there are a fair number of young people in the US who are essentially married, where in Japan people wait until they are older.
In Japan, that kind of cohabitation is rare (people live with their parents before they get married). One of the reasons (and IMHO, the overriding reason) that Japanese people get married late is because young Japanese women hold a lot of power in the proceedings. Young women live with their parents and work. And even though they often help with costs in the household, they are relatively financially well off. Also, young women tend to want to have children when they are older because it will interfere with their job. Single income families with stay at home mothers is still very popular here. This pushes the age of marriage back. It also pushes the fertility rate down (because if you have your first child in your early thirties, then there often isn't enough time to have many more. Also, it increases the generational gap).
Now, another complicating factor is that in Japan "marriage" is not really a thing the way it is in the west. In the west, marriage is still, by and large, a religious institution. In some countries, only the church can marry you. In Japan, the only thing that counts is having your name on the family register. You don't even need a ceremony. You can just wander up to city hall, fill out the forms and, voila, you are married.
If you are not on the same family register in Japan, you are not in the same family. It does not matter where you live. When the census comes around, it is sent to the head of the family on the register. If there are 2 families living at the same address, then there are 2 census forms. There is no way to indicate that you are cohabitating! Similarly, if you are on somebody's family register (because you got married), but you aren't living together -- there is no way to get another census form! So separation statistics in Japan are also impossible. I even know people who have had a wedding ceremony, but for various reasons did not want to change the family registry. So they are not married! (Which makes things very complicated because all family law is based on the family registry -- if you are not on the registry, then you are not a family, by definition).
Basically, what I'm saying is that you're going to have your hands full if you want to make a meaningful comparison. And like I said, I realise that people are inundated with a lot of stuff from the media (and especially youtube), so it is hard to know what is right and what is wrong. Just keep in mind that quite a lot of the stuff you here is motivated by something other than trying to educate you.
Wow. Choosing your wife for you? Who and where was this company?!
My experience with a traditionally Japanese run megacorp/zaibatsu in the heart of Tokyo is much more like a traditional western company. The minutia of HR is very Japanese and hard to get your head around, but the broad strokes of salary/bonus/non monetary benefits (I had to look up what pecuniary means) is basically the same.
My experience with a traditionally Japanese run megacorp/zaibatsu in the heart of Tokyo is much more like a traditional western company. The minutia of HR is very Japanese and hard to get your head around, but the broad strokes of salary/bonus/non monetary benefits (I had to look up what pecuniary means) is basically the same.
I don’t think “choosing” is the right word, it’s more like providing the opportunity to meet someone with drinking events, goukon etc. At least if his company is like the ones I’ve seen.
And added social pressure if one doesn't eventually move forward (this would be applied to anyone not marrying). Granted, you can somewhat see this in the US but on a much less official level. I've personally noticed it as I have aged but haven't looked into marrying or having children. Employees who have been around even longer than I have mentioned that I'll be making it harder to move upward, though no one will every officially put that on paper.
The thread is definitely making a mountain out of a mole hill. Its providing networking opportunities, not selecting an actual person to be married off.
And it's an invitation to a sexual harassment or discrimination lawsuit in a USA corporation.
The anecdote in question occurs in Japan.
[deleted]
Context is a bit important. My understanding (erroneous perh) About 30% of the workforce works at the larger companies -The Mitsubishis, Toyotas, etc. Those are the ones who used to typically hire before graduation and offered the "lifetime employment". Most of the workforce work for SMBs (<300 emps) --not the prototypical salaryman employer. Not all salarymen are averse to job hopping --though at low annual percentages, still the typical worker didn't work their whole life at one co. AFAIUI.
> my boss assumed that it would be sourcing the bride
Are you sure you understood him correctly? That would be highly irregular, to say the least. More likely it was an offer to pay for a matching agency. Arranged marriages between specific people are pretty rare these days, and unheard of outside of family. Unless your boss literally adopted you, he would never take on that responsibility!
Are you sure you understood him correctly? That would be highly irregular, to say the least. More likely it was an offer to pay for a matching agency. Arranged marriages between specific people are pretty rare these days, and unheard of outside of family. Unless your boss literally adopted you, he would never take on that responsibility!
I think people are reading rather too much into the phrase "sourcing". Read it as "assumed he'd probably wind up marrying a coworker" and the boss in question is just observing the obvious - workplace marriages are quite common in Japan, especially considering that company employees around that age tend to socialize a lot within the company.
One can think of such things as non-pecuniary benefits of a job but I think you'd be hard pressed to find a boss who's ever considered it in those terms. More likely they're just acting on the "truth universally acknowledged" that young single employees must be in want of a spouse.
(Of course, the reverse of this is one of the ways Japanese companies are rough on women - if you're 23 and single people will tend to assume you're going to marry someone and quit in a few years, and treat you accordingly.)
One can think of such things as non-pecuniary benefits of a job but I think you'd be hard pressed to find a boss who's ever considered it in those terms. More likely they're just acting on the "truth universally acknowledged" that young single employees must be in want of a spouse.
(Of course, the reverse of this is one of the ways Japanese companies are rough on women - if you're 23 and single people will tend to assume you're going to marry someone and quit in a few years, and treat you accordingly.)
especially considering that company employees around that age tend to socialize a lot within the company.
Yes. This is by design. You're not just joining a company, you're getting social belonging and a built-in set of drinking buddies. That is such a critical part of the deal, and such a universally acknowledged part of the deal, that it is not routinely described as part of the deal.
Yes. This is by design. You're not just joining a company, you're getting social belonging and a built-in set of drinking buddies. That is such a critical part of the deal, and such a universally acknowledged part of the deal, that it is not routinely described as part of the deal.
Sure, but to some extent this is Japan in a nutshell - joining anything from a university circle to the neighborhood adult volleyball team does tend to come with new drinking buddies, albeit at varying scales.
(And having said that, if you're single you can of course expect the volleyball coach to paternally try and set you up with that nice 24 year-old on the team...)
(And having said that, if you're single you can of course expect the volleyball coach to paternally try and set you up with that nice 24 year-old on the team...)
kinda related, how easy for a foreigners to play in the local volleyball team in Japan? I'm considering to move in Tokyo for a year or more, and would love to find some vball buddies
I see teams practicing now and then but I don't know how one goes about joining. But if you're eligible and the team has space, I wouldn't think being a foreigner will matter too much.
I work for a global / English-speaking company in Japan. We don't have futsal and basketball instead of vball, but it's pretty easy to get started. PM me if you're interested.
[deleted]
[deleted]
>I think people are reading rather too much into the phrase "sourcing". Read it as "assumed he'd probably wind up marrying a coworker" and the boss in question is just observing the obvious - workplace marriages are quite common in Japan, especially considering that company employees around that age tend to socialize a lot within the company.
Right, but I also envisioned that they'd be in the awkward position of "hm, but Japanese women won't want a gaijin, obviously ..." and then debating whether they need to call up the "mail order bride" services.
Right, but I also envisioned that they'd be in the awkward position of "hm, but Japanese women won't want a gaijin, obviously ..." and then debating whether they need to call up the "mail order bride" services.
I doubt he would phrase it the same way I did, but I am absolutely not materially misremembering the conversation in which he said, and this is a verbatim quote translated from Japanese, "[24 year old coworker], this is Patrick. He just joined, graduated from a good school in America, and has a bright future with the company. Have you ever considered an international marriage?"
Oh I'm not doubting you. But that's slightly different. Putting in a good word for you and making introductions to eligible young co-workers isn't quite the same as "here's your bride!", which is what it sounded like.
I can absolutely imagine a 50s-ish japanese boss saying exactly the contents of your quote.
I can absolutely imagine a 50s-ish japanese boss saying exactly the contents of your quote.
"sourcing" in this context means "identifying and referring candidates" not making an official commitment.
Exactly. If you hire a recruiter to source employees for you, they aren't going to come back and say "Here's your employee. Hope things work out for you." they are going to say "Here's someone who seems like a good fit. Do you want to interview them?".
I guess you and I and everyone else have a lot of different interpretations for what the original text might mean. The fact that it is ambiguous is demonstrated. It was simply a poor choice of words and I'm sorry to have made too big a deal about it.
Still. In my company, if a division is going to source a component for us, it means they deliver that component. They don't provide a bunch of google options for manufacturers we might want to look at, or make introductions, or whatever. They get the damn thing and make it available to us. As such, sourcing has a specific meaning to me and perhaps I went overboard applying it to the ultra-great-grandparent comment.
Still. In my company, if a division is going to source a component for us, it means they deliver that component. They don't provide a bunch of google options for manufacturers we might want to look at, or make introductions, or whatever. They get the damn thing and make it available to us. As such, sourcing has a specific meaning to me and perhaps I went overboard applying it to the ultra-great-grandparent comment.
That's very different!
There is this high quality[1] article/blog post I've seen before on HN in relation to software and Japan and it mentions it too: http://www.kalzumeus.com/2014/11/07/doing-business-in-japan/
The paragraph starting with the sentence "Don’t have a wife?" and the next one after it mention that practice, it's too much to copy paste in here.
[1] as in - lengthy, detailed and well written, but I can't judge the content itself.
The paragraph starting with the sentence "Don’t have a wife?" and the next one after it mention that practice, it's too much to copy paste in here.
[1] as in - lengthy, detailed and well written, but I can't judge the content itself.
That's written by patio11, who wrote the comment above.
I see.
I had no idea and he didn't link to it and the explanation there is much longer and clearer than the one line remark about Japanese boss "sourcing the bride" in the comment was. People are taking the comment to mean some medieval style arranged forced marriage.
I had no idea and he didn't link to it and the explanation there is much longer and clearer than the one line remark about Japanese boss "sourcing the bride" in the comment was. People are taking the comment to mean some medieval style arranged forced marriage.
>> sourcing the bride
To be clear, this is not at all normal in Japan either (at least not in Tokyo or Osaka or anywhere other than very small companies with septuagenarian managers). No one prices matchmaking services into compensation considerations. Agree generally with the rest.
To be clear, this is not at all normal in Japan either (at least not in Tokyo or Osaka or anywhere other than very small companies with septuagenarian managers). No one prices matchmaking services into compensation considerations. Agree generally with the rest.
"Sourcing" might be a bit string, but there are company organised outings for match making
I actually know several instances of how company expects employees to sacrifice everything for the wellbeing of company and how company takes care of employees for life.
One example, during 2008 crisis, the company my friend was working for 20+ years already, was in trouble and didn't pay employees for almost a year. My friend continued to work for the company despite it being bankrupt and him not getting paid for so long.
Once company turnaround completed and came out of bankruptcy, owners not only made unpaid employees whole but has done much more for the employees that stuck around during bad times.
The loyalty runs both ways.
One example, during 2008 crisis, the company my friend was working for 20+ years already, was in trouble and didn't pay employees for almost a year. My friend continued to work for the company despite it being bankrupt and him not getting paid for so long.
Once company turnaround completed and came out of bankruptcy, owners not only made unpaid employees whole but has done much more for the employees that stuck around during bad times.
The loyalty runs both ways.
I find all these anecdotes interesting, but I'm not sure how much I can extrapolate from them.
I've worked in Japan, and seen the inside of a few Japanese companies. I've seen some weird stuff. I've worked in other countries too and I saw some pretty weird stuff in those companies too.
Thing is, I think there's a tendency too attribute weird things that happen in Japan to "Japanese culture" where-as sometimes it's really just a weird thing that happened...
I think that's less of a case perhaps in other countries, where you have a better understanding of the baseline culture.
I'd love to see more studies/data on what the average experience is like.
I've worked in Japan, and seen the inside of a few Japanese companies. I've seen some weird stuff. I've worked in other countries too and I saw some pretty weird stuff in those companies too.
Thing is, I think there's a tendency too attribute weird things that happen in Japan to "Japanese culture" where-as sometimes it's really just a weird thing that happened...
I think that's less of a case perhaps in other countries, where you have a better understanding of the baseline culture.
I'd love to see more studies/data on what the average experience is like.
Nice anecdote, and I'm glad your friend was made whole (and then some), but this is crazy. I wonder how many times the same scenario has played out, and the company continued to spiral into bankruptcy. Separating emotion from $$$ is important for this exact reason. He owes the company nothing. Maybe I'm being overly cynical though...
[deleted]
[deleted]
I knew people with 25+ years just gone after 2008 dip.
Most people can't afford to be 'loyal'(especially for a year~) and have bills to pay/children to feed.
I've been to several factories/shops, and that 'loyalty' is quickly eroding. As worker wages stagnate while Management's increase. Management being under the squeeze of following Gov't Regulations and Outsourcing. So both sides are under this toxic stress.
Most people can't afford to be 'loyal'(especially for a year~) and have bills to pay/children to feed.
I've been to several factories/shops, and that 'loyalty' is quickly eroding. As worker wages stagnate while Management's increase. Management being under the squeeze of following Gov't Regulations and Outsourcing. So both sides are under this toxic stress.
The problem is Japan has been in a deflationary environment for so long that they've forgotten how to bump up a price and turned into a nation of misers.
I've witnessed first hand the collective hysteria when an ice cream company raised their prices by 10 yen[0] and also had to put up with coworkers banging on in excitement whenever 7-11 has an Onigiri sale dropping from 110 to 100 yen. Not to mention the queues stretching around the block when Yoshinoya cuts a buck and a half off their beef bowls.
My anecdotal evidence, based on looking in shop windows, is there's plenty of part time (arubaito) jobs on offer; the problem is young people are too smart to take them up on their pitiful 700 yen per hour offers, which in Tokyo barely cover your transport and lunch costs. And yet the businesses will continue to weep and wail and gnash their teeth because they can't find anyone. It's not rocket science.
[0] https://qz.com/656080/a-japanese-ice-cream-maker-deeply-apol...
I've witnessed first hand the collective hysteria when an ice cream company raised their prices by 10 yen[0] and also had to put up with coworkers banging on in excitement whenever 7-11 has an Onigiri sale dropping from 110 to 100 yen. Not to mention the queues stretching around the block when Yoshinoya cuts a buck and a half off their beef bowls.
My anecdotal evidence, based on looking in shop windows, is there's plenty of part time (arubaito) jobs on offer; the problem is young people are too smart to take them up on their pitiful 700 yen per hour offers, which in Tokyo barely cover your transport and lunch costs. And yet the businesses will continue to weep and wail and gnash their teeth because they can't find anyone. It's not rocket science.
[0] https://qz.com/656080/a-japanese-ice-cream-maker-deeply-apol...
Reminds me of the bizarre behavior of many co-workers who wait over an hour in line when Dunkin Donuts has free iced coffee day.
>coworkers banging on in excitement whenever 7-11 has an Onigiri sale dropping from 110 to 100 yen
Usually it's an up to 150 yen onigiri for 100 yen, so of course they're going to get excited.
Edit: It looks like it is/was an up to 160 yen onigiri for 100 yen! That's a 37.5% discount! [1]
[1] http://seven-eleven-mania-blog.jp/gohankei/5617/
Usually it's an up to 150 yen onigiri for 100 yen, so of course they're going to get excited.
Edit: It looks like it is/was an up to 160 yen onigiri for 100 yen! That's a 37.5% discount! [1]
[1] http://seven-eleven-mania-blog.jp/gohankei/5617/
It's still pretty silly, considering the absolute value of the savings.
My personal favorite along these lines is the way that a single building might have 2-3 floors of the same kind of restaurant (say, yakitori), but the one place that is 5 yen cheaper per item will have a line out the door, while the others are half-empty.
My personal favorite along these lines is the way that a single building might have 2-3 floors of the same kind of restaurant (say, yakitori), but the one place that is 5 yen cheaper per item will have a line out the door, while the others are half-empty.
Is this a cultural thing? I've never been to Japan so I'm kind of flying blind here but I'd assign that 5 yen as a convenience cost and happily pay that price to avoid the long line. I have a hard time thinking the Japanese people place no value on their time whatsoever...
walmart(lines to get in line) vs. Kroger(generally pretty fast) vs. giant eagle(empty walk right up and pay).
[deleted]
> the problem is young people are too smart to take them up on their pitiful 700 yen per hour offers,
There's a large population of chinese students in Japan who are very happy to work at such rates.
There's a large population of chinese students in Japan who are very happy to work at such rates.
> There's a large population of chinese students in Japan who are very happy to work at such rates.
> which in Tokyo barely cover your transport and lunch costs
Is this another of those things where paying a person an non-livable wage is going to be construed as a Good Thing™? How about we raise the prices so the people serving us the food can, you know, live?
> which in Tokyo barely cover your transport and lunch costs
Is this another of those things where paying a person an non-livable wage is going to be construed as a Good Thing™? How about we raise the prices so the people serving us the food can, you know, live?
Raising prices destroys demand. It's not immediately clear that 5 well employed people and 5 unemployed people are preferably to 10 poorly employed people.
If the 5 who would be unemployed have some superior alternative, why aren't they doing it already? Or would you say they should be forcibly unemployed to combat their laziness in looking for better work (which you apparently think exists)?
If the 5 who would be unemployed have some superior alternative, why aren't they doing it already? Or would you say they should be forcibly unemployed to combat their laziness in looking for better work (which you apparently think exists)?
Then maybe demand should be lower? If your business can't operate without paying people slave wages, you have no business being in business.
Or, far more likely, the CEO needs to make a few million less so the people who operate his business can EAT.
Or, far more likely, the CEO needs to make a few million less so the people who operate his business can EAT.
I'm start from the (perhaps naive) assumption that our intention here is to make people better off.
Whose life is better if the business doesn't exist?
Whose life is better if the business doesn't exist?
Business that make their money by exploiting people should not exist, because they create the illusion illustrated here: that somehow earning less money than is livable is better than earning none at all. If you don't have enough money to pay your rent and eat, what is the point exactly? You're still screwed, it's just going to take slightly longer.
And from this we then go the side hustles and the app workers and all the rest of the stuff that let us pretend someone working 120 hours a week for pennies is "doing good."
And from this we then go the side hustles and the app workers and all the rest of the stuff that let us pretend someone working 120 hours a week for pennies is "doing good."
>If you don't have enough money to pay your rent and eat, what is the point exactly? You're still screwed
If this were true, why would people in bad jobs continue to show up for work?
Okay, you've identified that shifting people from precarious existence to outright starvation and homelessness will make others more aware of their plight. How will that help, exactly? Are they going to somehow turn around public opinion on the welfare state? Start a Communist Revolution? Because it seems like they will just be worse off, and we will be more aware, and nothing else will happen.
If this were true, why would people in bad jobs continue to show up for work?
Okay, you've identified that shifting people from precarious existence to outright starvation and homelessness will make others more aware of their plight. How will that help, exactly? Are they going to somehow turn around public opinion on the welfare state? Start a Communist Revolution? Because it seems like they will just be worse off, and we will be more aware, and nothing else will happen.
train is extremely cheap in tokyo and eating is cheap as well. with one hour of this kind of work you can pay for both and you just dont work one hour so the rest is profit.
Cause that's Socialism(TM)!
> The problem is Japan has been in a deflationary environment for so long that they've forgotten how to bump up a price and turned into a nation of misers.
My understanding is that the blame for this lies squarely with the Bank of Japan. The system was much more stable under the Finance Ministry.
My understanding is that the blame for this lies squarely with the Bank of Japan. The system was much more stable under the Finance Ministry.
Japan's primary problem on income is that the economic ground they've lost in the last 20 years is vast. In the late 1980s, their GDP per capita was beyond that of the US. Now it needs to climb 50% to catch up. The last 20 years has taken them back to #16 among major economies in terms of GDP per capita. That gives you an idea of how difficult it's going to be for Japan to bring their incomes back in line with high per capita output economies like the US (or Australia, Denmark, Sweden, etc).
They need very substantial, sustained economic growth for a decade or more to start regaining lost ground. Their debt problems will continue to put pressure on the Yen, the debasement of which is a big culprit in the sizable drop in their standard of living over the last decade. While their interest costs are eating up such a large portion of their budget, their ability to properly invest into growth is heavily restricted. They're stuck between a rock and a hard place. I've yet to see a plan for how they're going to deal with that. To make matters worse, their savings rate has dropped to low single digits, as their standard of living has dropped they've been forced to reduce savings to try to maintain (which has further pressured the government's ability to properly fund itself, as they can no longer count on tapping into large new pools of savings via debt issuance, leading to abusing the Yen as a last resort).
They need very substantial, sustained economic growth for a decade or more to start regaining lost ground. Their debt problems will continue to put pressure on the Yen, the debasement of which is a big culprit in the sizable drop in their standard of living over the last decade. While their interest costs are eating up such a large portion of their budget, their ability to properly invest into growth is heavily restricted. They're stuck between a rock and a hard place. I've yet to see a plan for how they're going to deal with that. To make matters worse, their savings rate has dropped to low single digits, as their standard of living has dropped they've been forced to reduce savings to try to maintain (which has further pressured the government's ability to properly fund itself, as they can no longer count on tapping into large new pools of savings via debt issuance, leading to abusing the Yen as a last resort).
Lots of childless old-timers are sitting on hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars in liquid assets that presumably will revert to the state. Household savings in the 60+ demographic are exemplary. Of course, that's part of the reason the economy is stagnant.
Keynes vs. Hayek in a nutshell.
Sounds like where the US is headed.
Running out of people? Most large corporations in Japan have WAY too much staff doing about nothing productive all day long. This is due to the long standing tradition that started in the 70s to keep hiring most university graduates well before they graduate in April every single year, even though there is no such need for hiring (kind of social contract between the Japanese government and the large corporations). If anything less workforce will be a blessing, they will have to finally focus on what REALLY matters.
This makes no sense to me. Why wouldn't the companies expand their output if they have idle workers? I feel like you described 1/10th of the issue and it's up to the reader to fill in the rest?
You still have to sell that output. And until you do, you have to store that output. And if you can't sell that output, then you have to get rid of it in a fire sale.
Yeah, I do get contacted by Japanese recruiters, and their comp in my field is pretty laughable by US standards. That said, the same applies to all of Europe as well. People literally seem to be making one third of what they'd be making in the US if they were any good.
I don't know your field, but developers in Tokyo make (in USD) between 50k and 100k a year. This is a salary equiparable to what could be made in Europe and most parts of the US. It's even quite higher than what is paid in South Europe.
The metric that you have to consider is
salary - taxes - costs of living [including health insurance] + expected future revenues [in particular pensions]
Can you provide me evidence that, say, Germany, is so much worse than the USA with respect to this metric?
salary - taxes - costs of living [including health insurance] + expected future revenues [in particular pensions]
Can you provide me evidence that, say, Germany, is so much worse than the USA with respect to this metric?
Germany has severe wage compression going on for more than a decade. Companies are making more money every year, but instead of sharing that by increasing wages or sharing equity, they invest the profits (mostly abroad).
The only reason it hasn't blown up yet is that the value of € is kept low by southern European countries that are struggling to stay afloat. Since the living costs remain relatively low, employees don't have to ask for more.
Source: recruiters trying to convince me that €60k is what senior software engineers make in Germany. If you are wondering, that leaves you with €2900/month after taxes and insurance. The wonders of progressive income tax.
The only reason it hasn't blown up yet is that the value of € is kept low by southern European countries that are struggling to stay afloat. Since the living costs remain relatively low, employees don't have to ask for more.
Source: recruiters trying to convince me that €60k is what senior software engineers make in Germany. If you are wondering, that leaves you with €2900/month after taxes and insurance. The wonders of progressive income tax.
60k Euro for a senior? Is that total liquid comp? That's like one fifth of what a senior makes at goofacesoftwhatever. I had no idea German salaries were so low, wow.
It's similar in Amsterdam. I remember being pretty well paid (granted this was 5 years ago) as a software engineer and my salary was around €60k. I will say that, for me, quality of life on that salary felt much better than you'd expect in absolute terms. But then rent and housing costs have gone up quite a bit in the last few years I understand.
When I look at descriptions about the living costs/housing prices in SF and its environment, I think that with, say, EUR 40k one has a better life in Germany (except the really expensive metropolitan areas in Germany as Munich, Stuttgart etc.) than with US$ 100k somewhere around SF.
Right, but if a senior at amagoowhatever is making 350k usd, and a senior in Berlin/münchen is making 70k usd, it's a very, very different conversation. I meant literally five times as much, not a figure of speech...
München is very expensive - if you don't earn a lot of money when living there it is not worth taking the job. On the other hand in Berlin it is much simpler to live cheaply (though the prices for apartments in Berlin have skyrocketed in the last years).
Germany is much worse in this metric compared to UK. I am specifically talking about London.
I get contacted by recruiters from Germany (and other EU countries) quite often and they could never match London contractor pay even remotely.
Germany also has higher taxes and health care coverage is comparable in UK and Germany (both have national healthcare).
I think that's a microcosm of US vs EU salary situation in software engineering. IT job market in London is very different from any place in Europe, I'm not sure why that is.
I get contacted by recruiters from Germany (and other EU countries) quite often and they could never match London contractor pay even remotely.
Germany also has higher taxes and health care coverage is comparable in UK and Germany (both have national healthcare).
I think that's a microcosm of US vs EU salary situation in software engineering. IT job market in London is very different from any place in Europe, I'm not sure why that is.
> I am specifically talking about London.
The living costs in London are enormous. A fellow student has a highly payed analyst job at Goldman Sachs in London, but still does room sharing in a flat somewhere in London.
The living costs in London are enormous. A fellow student has a highly payed analyst job at Goldman Sachs in London, but still does room sharing in a flat somewhere in London.
I know living costs are "enormous". But if you make 3 times more money as you'd do in Berlin, it's still a much better deal.
The point I was making even in top cities in Germany (Munich for example) where living costs are also enormous, salaries are not very competitive compared to SF/NY or London (this only applies to contracting, permanent salaries are low in London).
The point I was making even in top cities in Germany (Munich for example) where living costs are also enormous, salaries are not very competitive compared to SF/NY or London (this only applies to contracting, permanent salaries are low in London).
So be fair and compare to the contractor salary in Tokyo as well. I can assure you that, despite being lower, salaries are quite close to London ones. A 3 time difference is a myth. Unless you are going to compare London engineers to Tokyo combini part time worker.
Yes I meant contractor salary is 3x more than permanent salary for a very senior software engineer in Germany for example. The idea behind this comparison is that you don't really have contractor market in Germany being so active as in London.
In London contractor market is very active and large so you can go from contract to contract basically without gaps and function basically as if you had a perm job but with much higher salary.
In Germany contracts are more sparse and I don't think it's easy to pull off a full time contracting there. The rates are also quite a bit lower (at least from emails I get from time to time about contracts in Netherlands & Germany) so there's that as well.
And of course, Tokyo is much much worse in this respect. I know some people who live in Tokyo so I know that being a programmer there is pretty bad.
In London contractor market is very active and large so you can go from contract to contract basically without gaps and function basically as if you had a perm job but with much higher salary.
In Germany contracts are more sparse and I don't think it's easy to pull off a full time contracting there. The rates are also quite a bit lower (at least from emails I get from time to time about contracts in Netherlands & Germany) so there's that as well.
And of course, Tokyo is much much worse in this respect. I know some people who live in Tokyo so I know that being a programmer there is pretty bad.
> In Germany contracts are more sparse and I don't think it's easy to pull off a full time contracting there. The rates are also quite a bit lower (at least from emails I get from time to time about contracts in Netherlands & Germany) so there's that as well.
A rule of thumb in Germany: If you earn double the amount as a contractor as you would as an employee this is about the same standard of living. In other words: If you don't really earn a lot more as a contractor than as an employee, it is not worth the hazzle.
Another problem for contracting are the laws concerning Scheinselbständigkeit (fictitious self-employment) - cf. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheinselbst%C3%A4ndigkeit - which make it really difficult for companies to contract someone for a longer time.
A rule of thumb in Germany: If you earn double the amount as a contractor as you would as an employee this is about the same standard of living. In other words: If you don't really earn a lot more as a contractor than as an employee, it is not worth the hazzle.
Another problem for contracting are the laws concerning Scheinselbständigkeit (fictitious self-employment) - cf. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheinselbst%C3%A4ndigkeit - which make it really difficult for companies to contract someone for a longer time.
Yes there have been changes like that in UK as well (IR35) aimed at making it difficult for companies to keep hiring contractors for a longer time.
First problem with that was that public sector IT in the UK depends on contractors so they have shot themselves in the foot (already many public agencies started relaxing the rules and working around IR35 to be able to hire anybody).
Also most contractors usually change contract every 6-12 months so it's not a problem. You don't work at a single company for longer than that (1 year 11 months is maximum, after that you get in trouble because of IR35).
> A rule of thumb in Germany: If you earn double the amount as a contractor as you would as an employee this is about the same standard of living
Well what if it is 3 or 4 or even 5 times more. With top market contracts the rates can be really good. If a company urgently needs to hire somebody skilled to come in and do some firefighting you can negotiate a very high daily rate for 6 months contract.
Also keep in mind you pay lower taxes as contractor as most of your income is via dividends. And you can also expense a lot of things you buy if it can be justified as cost of running business.
First problem with that was that public sector IT in the UK depends on contractors so they have shot themselves in the foot (already many public agencies started relaxing the rules and working around IR35 to be able to hire anybody).
Also most contractors usually change contract every 6-12 months so it's not a problem. You don't work at a single company for longer than that (1 year 11 months is maximum, after that you get in trouble because of IR35).
> A rule of thumb in Germany: If you earn double the amount as a contractor as you would as an employee this is about the same standard of living
Well what if it is 3 or 4 or even 5 times more. With top market contracts the rates can be really good. If a company urgently needs to hire somebody skilled to come in and do some firefighting you can negotiate a very high daily rate for 6 months contract.
Also keep in mind you pay lower taxes as contractor as most of your income is via dividends. And you can also expense a lot of things you buy if it can be justified as cost of running business.
Plus you can work 80% remotely and live in cheaper area of London. There are more and more contracts which allow remote work lately.
I don't know why this is getting down voted, it was a reasonable response to the parent explaining how even when you compare it with metrics such as taxes and other benefits (health care), it's not a very competitive deal.
Taxes are much lower in the US too, even if you factor in the cost of health insurance. And if you are expecting "pensions", there's a bridge I'd like to sell.
It's also important to factor in the ability to move later. If I earn a small amount of money in a place with low cost of living, then I can't move to a high cost of living location later. If I earn a large amount in the US in a high cost of living area, then I can still live frugally and move to a low cost of living area later.
Cost of living is fungible. If I buy a property in an expensive city, then I have to invest a lot of my money, but I can also recoup that later if I sell the property. In boom cities the property will appreciate and create more wealth. Other costs like food and transportation provide the opportunity to be significantly frugal if you desire to be. But with the high compensation available to top workers in tech, it's possible to not be frugal and still save a large amount.
Cost of living is fungible. If I buy a property in an expensive city, then I have to invest a lot of my money, but I can also recoup that later if I sell the property. In boom cities the property will appreciate and create more wealth. Other costs like food and transportation provide the opportunity to be significantly frugal if you desire to be. But with the high compensation available to top workers in tech, it's possible to not be frugal and still save a large amount.
> If I earn a small amount of money in a place with low cost of living, then I can't move to a high cost of living location later.
Having done this out of school, I found myself literally borrowing money for first/last/security. Not much money, and not for long, but that's of course because I had a signed contract before I settled on an apartment. Cheap living is pleasant, but it can leave you in a serious cash crunch should you try to move - especially as a young person.
Having done this out of school, I found myself literally borrowing money for first/last/security. Not much money, and not for long, but that's of course because I had a signed contract before I settled on an apartment. Cheap living is pleasant, but it can leave you in a serious cash crunch should you try to move - especially as a young person.
True that Japanese companies should pay more. For what it's worth, it doesn't appear to have started. Nikkei ran a story today noting that summer bonuses (which are a thing) are down for the time in five years.
Fun fact, the Phillips curve for Japan sure looks a lot like Japan: http://qed.econ.queensu.ca/working_papers/papers/qed_wp_1083...
See also the wage inflation/unemployment relationship. https://www.boj.or.jp/en/research/wps_rev/lab/lab14e02.htm/
See also the wage inflation/unemployment relationship. https://www.boj.or.jp/en/research/wps_rev/lab/lab14e02.htm/
> At the same time, baby boomers are approaching retirement
It wouldn't have occurred to me that Japan had a baby boom. I suppose soldiers returning home in despair or in triumph are all looking for comfort and stability.
It wouldn't have occurred to me that Japan had a baby boom. I suppose soldiers returning home in despair or in triumph are all looking for comfort and stability.
The last century of Japanese history looks a lot like that of the Western developed nations. (Probably because Japan made itself into a Western-style empire, then got involved in WW2 big time with the Western powers, then got a Western-style American occupation, so…)
There's a statistic that the US population is growing because of children of immigrants.
Almost all countries baby boomed after WW2, not just westernized ones.
I guess I'd always assumed that the Baby Boom was the result of a victorious end to war, but the other makes sense too.
Was there a baby boom after WWI, or the American Civil War, or other wars that siphoned off a major part of a country's young men?
Was there a baby boom after WWI, or the American Civil War, or other wars that siphoned off a major part of a country's young men?
Japan may have been the loser, but it also had a big postwar economic boom. To me this seems like the more obvious cause.
The Allied Powers had seemingly learned the lessons of Versailles and didn't try to punish the losers (well, not as much), instead letting them grow. Thus why them not being victorious didn't matter, I guess.
> The Allied Powers had seemingly learned the lessons of Versailles and didn't try to punish the losers (well, not as much), instead letting them grow.
This was true for Germany but not for japan. Due to hard feelings over ww2 and of course racial animosity/hatred, our plan for japan was deindustrialization. We wanted japan to be at least a few decades behind the US and turn more of their nation into docile agrarian farmers. We also instituted starvation policy to thin out and subjugate the japanese. There was rampant starvation in japan in the first few years after ww2.
We had troops specifically assigned to destroy japanese industrial/engineering/science capacity. One of the most famous was the destruction of japan's cyclotron.
https://youtu.be/hJRxchhBbNQ
Keep in mind that we were an extremely racist nation 70 years ago and we had just nuked and firebombed japan into complete rubble. Whereas germans were "our white aryan brothers" ( it's absurd to think it now, but that's how the leaders of the US thought back then ) and we felt an obligation to rehabilitate them, the japanese were viewed as inferior asians with plenty of motive to attack the US again.
The only reason japan was allowed to reindustrialize was the soviet threat and the korean war. We needed japan to help seal off the soviets, chinese and north koreans.
It's fascinating stuff. If the communist threat didn't exist and the korean war never occurred, japan might be a more agrarian society today controlled by the US administrators.
This was true for Germany but not for japan. Due to hard feelings over ww2 and of course racial animosity/hatred, our plan for japan was deindustrialization. We wanted japan to be at least a few decades behind the US and turn more of their nation into docile agrarian farmers. We also instituted starvation policy to thin out and subjugate the japanese. There was rampant starvation in japan in the first few years after ww2.
We had troops specifically assigned to destroy japanese industrial/engineering/science capacity. One of the most famous was the destruction of japan's cyclotron.
https://youtu.be/hJRxchhBbNQ
Keep in mind that we were an extremely racist nation 70 years ago and we had just nuked and firebombed japan into complete rubble. Whereas germans were "our white aryan brothers" ( it's absurd to think it now, but that's how the leaders of the US thought back then ) and we felt an obligation to rehabilitate them, the japanese were viewed as inferior asians with plenty of motive to attack the US again.
The only reason japan was allowed to reindustrialize was the soviet threat and the korean war. We needed japan to help seal off the soviets, chinese and north koreans.
It's fascinating stuff. If the communist threat didn't exist and the korean war never occurred, japan might be a more agrarian society today controlled by the US administrators.
There was a Japan faction and a China faction who each wanted their respective countries to be the center of US Asia policy and the China faction lost.
Also, the US felt a strong, capitalist Japan would be less likely to fall prey to communism.
Concerns about communism also led to them doing a 180 on keeping war criminals around and in them outright funding Japanese organized crime to violently suppress the Japanese left, as detailed in Kaplan and Dubro's Yakuza book. Japan still has echoes of this policy in that organized crime is entangled with legitimate government and business to a surprising degree.
America did try to punish the Germans. Millions starved as a result of deliberate Allied policy. It wasn't until the schism with the USSR that policies shifted. Eisenhower in particular wanted Germany to be an agrarian society.
As a German. I have never heard about these starved millions. The agrarian society plan was the Morgenthau plan which didn't get implemented from what I know.
My parents are WW2 generation. I have never heard any complaints from them or relatives about the American behavior after WW2.
My parents are WW2 generation. I have never heard any complaints from them or relatives about the American behavior after WW2.
Being German does not preclude you from being ignorant of post war German history. Google it. You can find lots of information on the Allied occupation of Germany. It wasn't until the Berlin airlift that feeding Germans became fashionable. My dad was in WW2 on the American side. He ended as a guard in a POW camp after the war. He'd have denied the starvation too but it did occur.
Eisenhower did want, initially, for Germany to be an agrarian society. He wasn't the only one with this view. Morganthau was not the only person with this idea.
Eisenhower did want, initially, for Germany to be an agrarian society. He wasn't the only one with this view. Morganthau was not the only person with this idea.
The first years after the war were confusing for everybody. The country had been effectively destroyed,news about German crimes slowly came out, nobody knew how the Germans would respond to occupation. It's no wonder it took years to sort things out.
No matter what people in DC were planning I have never heard from people who lived then about Americans getting in the way of people trying to rebuild.
No matter what people in DC were planning I have never heard from people who lived then about Americans getting in the way of people trying to rebuild.
Because the Americans that people in Germany interacted with weren't making the decisions. Use Google. Research it. It's not a controversial topic in terms of historicity. Germans as a matter of deliberate policy were prevented from getting the food they needed.
I guess I'll have to take your word. From what I have heard life in the American Zone was by far the best and it was worst in the Russian Zone.
The extreme version of the Morgenthau plan wasn't implemented, but they did do something close for 2 years.
> Eisenhower in particular wanted Germany to be an agrarian society.
The US wanted to apply the same policy to Japan as well.
The US wanted to apply the same policy to Japan as well.
Wait, i'm confused. I've always been told America poured tons of money into Germany via the Marshall Plan [0], which resulted in the "Wirtschaftswunder"[+] of the 50s and 60s. Former president Hoover went over and surveyed Germany almost directly after the war, in 1947.
[0]:https://web.archive.org/web/20090419195002/http://www.un.org...
[+]: Literally "economic miracle"
[0]:https://web.archive.org/web/20090419195002/http://www.un.org...
[+]: Literally "economic miracle"
Long story short: This wasn't the original plan. The original plan, which was in effect for a while, was a variant of the "Morgenthau plan" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgenthau_Plan#JCS_1067 ). It took two years for them to realize that not only would they be starving Germans (intention), but also the rest of Europe (unintended), and more or less block any economic growth in Europe (+risk Europe falling under the sway of the Soviet Union). So, they reversed their plans and the rest is history (that history includes the Marshall plan).
The initial plan (Carried out between 1945 and 1947) was starving Germany - economically, and literally.
Once communism became the big boogieman, the US did a 180 on its occupation policy, and instead started dumping money and American goods into Germany via the Marshall plan.
Once communism became the big boogieman, the US did a 180 on its occupation policy, and instead started dumping money and American goods into Germany via the Marshall plan.
Didn't Marshall Plan money end up coming back to the US?
Essentially a loan to purchase US goods?
It's definitely helpful as a loan, of course.
Essentially a loan to purchase US goods?
It's definitely helpful as a loan, of course.
It may also have been to do with little other recreational options. Poland had a baby boom after curfews were introduced in the 1980's: https://www.economist.com/news/europe/21725707-now-polish-fi...
Quick googling leads to this StackExchange question regarding WWI. Apparently it didn't see a boom (at least, not in the US?): https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/1026/did-ww1-pro...
It's funny that nobody mentions the Spanish Flu. Unusually, that took out a lot of child-bearing age individuals around the world. And the flu, in particular, ravaged pregnant women.
It was a lot easier to move around the country and commute ranges were greater after WWII due to the enhanced infrastructure and greater number of personal automobiles. This and the improved economy after the war had some big effects on society.
Who'd have thought limiting the labour pool would drive up wages?
Just remember in the end of the 80s and the begging of the 90s, Japan was on the verge to become the world most powerful economy and market crash after that... 25+ years later the market is still almost in half - so many retirement money lost and a great example why buy and hold for a long time is actually not a good retirement strategy...
What does that mean for things like Vanguard's retirement fund strategy? Isn't that based entirely on long-term improvement in the market?
It means that all those robo fintech companies and the Vanguards of the world are making a lot of money, but "buy and hope" is not a good retirement strategy for the little guy, especially if you are close to retirement and you have some money set aside and count on them to live off...
Japan has one of the lowest birthrates in the world. This is inevitable as demand from the elderly outpaces young people to fulfill it.
Presumably though, as tax revenue falls due to citizens retiring, that will lead to more privatization of services as the government won't have the money to buy them, and a consequential push towards automation as service providers try to lower costs. If automation happens quickly enough it's not outside the realms of possibility that Japan's aging population could lead to fewer jobs in some sectors.
This is a lot of automation. :-) When you have 1.46 births per Mom [0] you are effectively automating a quarter of the jobs. On the surface this seems achievable, but generally automation winds up creating new needs. (The advent of tractors meant farmers were more productive, and other jobs wound up absorbing hte workers)
[0] https://www.google.com/search?q=japanese+birth+rate&rlz=1C5C...
[0] https://www.google.com/search?q=japanese+birth+rate&rlz=1C5C...
> that will lead to more privatization of services as the government won't have the money to buy them,
Governments can be funded by their central banks printing money.
> and a consequential push towards automation as service providers try to lower costs.
Governments can put that same automation in place to provide services with no profit motive.
Governments can be funded by their central banks printing money.
> and a consequential push towards automation as service providers try to lower costs.
Governments can put that same automation in place to provide services with no profit motive.
The fundamental problem is that the Japanese population is shrinking. The only real solution is more babies or at least really good robots.
The non-pecuniary terms have been weakening in recent years but salaries have not been increasing at anything approaching parity. The non-pecuniary terms are not small relative to the total notional compensation package.
One reason that Japanese companies are having difficulty hiring folks is that their candidates have marked-to-market the non-pecuniary terms. There is a totally defensible reason to value Toyota's standard offer as of 1975 at being worth an integer multiple of the salary part of the package. It is very, very difficult to make the case that a traditionally managed Japanese company's non-pecuniary terms are presently worth $50~$100k per year given that one will be taking advantage of them in 2017 to 2062 as opposed to 1975 to 2020.
[+] One of my first conversations with a boss at a traditionally managed Japanese company involved my expected timeline to get married and what the company's role in that process would be; my boss assumed that it would be sourcing the bride.