the economy works well thanks to liberalism.
I saw Steven Spielberg's “Lincoln.” I was truly moved again by President
Lincoln’s way of life, and I thought his distress was timeless. I think
contemporary Japanese and Americans should have more conviction about the
democratic system and the significance of freedom.
What is it to like to secure one's nation? The basic idea is the philosophy of foundation. What are Americans trying to secure by deploying their armies all over the world? I believe the answer is freedom and democracy.
That is why Japan did not become a colony. Now and in the future, Japan is with the U.S.
The ties between us are stronger than Americans think. If this is forgotten, the blood of so many young Japanese and Americans that has been shed would lose its meaning.
As a result of a revolution, democracy came with confusion. It is really difficult to realize democracy. And the realization of freedom is even more difficult. Democracy is not always realized when the democratic system is established. In that sense, it is a miracle that democracy has been realized in the U.S. It is God’s will. If freedom, democracy and independence were to be ignored, the U.S. would lose its raison d'etre.
We should not forget that the economy works well thanks to liberalism. Under regulated systems, economies will collapse someday. This is because, under a controlling economy, distribution tends to proceed in only one direction rather than in a circulating flow.
National defense is not a concept. It is reality. We should remember that what is important is the balance of power.
Japan is located in the middle of three big nations, the U.S., Russia and China, and has border relationships with these three countries. We accept this fact as a premise.
Japan's territorial issues are not a problem only for Japan. We should remember these issues are directly connected with U.S. national defense.
It is important to determine whether we can share our sense of value with our partner.
For this reason, Japan and the U.S. should together build a system through which we can exchange opinions more straightforwardly about world strategies.
Japanese politicians, Korean politicians and Chinese politicians all lack discretion.
After all, politics is a product of compromise. The problem is where a borderline will be drawn. First of all, it is necessary to clarify a politician’s personality before his or her stance as a politician. It is necessary to know what their limits on compromising are and what they feel they must protect. The attitude of today's Japanese politicians is vague in this regard. They often compromise in situations where compromise is not allowed and, on the other hand, cannot compromise in situations where they should compromise.
Historical issues are presented in order to know what we should learn from history. In this sense, we cannot say Japanese politicians, Korean politicians and Chinese politicians are all learning from history.
Humans must eat to live. They also need housing. Humans cannot live safely if naked.
In order to live, humans must consume a lot of resources.
The economy involves activities to live by. It is not correct to call mere moneymaking the economy. Also, the economy is not limited to production activities.
Moneymaking is nothing but a means to live by. It is not a purpose for living.
Production should be done based on needs. Production beyond necessity may involve the risks of wasting resources or overdevelopment.
Activities to live by lead to a life because we are human. We consider how to lead our lives because we are human.
It is meaningless to produce things or make money without thinking how to use them.
If we did so, it would turn out that we used things because there were things to use, or we used money because there was money to use. It is like putting the cart before the horse.
We live in a disposable era now.
If I said, “Take care of things,” people would laugh at me because it is an old way of thinking.
If you treasure something of your own, take great care of it, repeatedly repair it, treat it with memories and affection, it would be an incomparable thing for you. It would be a more precious treasure than any other expensive item. However, such a way of thinking has been discarded as a stupid idea. The idea of “That’s a waste” is shabby now. However, if you thought in such a way, I suppose it would mean that you are pure of heart.
Mass production leads to mass consumption. The ideal state of consumption is restricted by the means of production. In this era, quantity is more important than quality. Mass-produced things are completely consumed or discarded wastefully. Can this be called “efficient”?
Ultimately, approving of disposables leads to approving of the idea of disposing your own life and your own body.
Fundamentally, production should be changed depending on the users of products. But, now, people’s way of living has changed and is dependent on the production of things.
We have to live a mass-consumption type of life to suit the things that are mass-produced. Mass-produced things are homogenized through streamlining. Modifying products to suit individuals is regarded as an uneconomical behavior.
Creating an original thing that suits me and allowing me to treasure it affectionately is a contemptible idea because it is uneconomical.
Thus, everything has become standardized. Diversity is uneconomical.
People across the world eat the same food, wear clothing of the same specifications and live in houses of the same shape. This is the state of contemporary economy.
No one thinks of changing the way of production to conform to consumption.
However, the cause of contemporary poverty is hidden there. In short, the mind is poor.
Art and culture are not developed. Exclusively pursuing efficiency deprives people of latitude.
In essence, as production technology matures, mass-production and mass-consumption are expected to shift to limited production with a wide variety of products and individualistic consumption. However, in our contemporary societies, everything must be uniform. Therefore, standardization and leveling are exclusively pursued. This is the same in a socialistic society or in a capitalistic society.
People think for sure that to treat everything in the same manner is equality. Equivalence and equality are different.
Man does not live by bread alone. How to live involves the question: what to consume and how to consume. This is because the way of consumption restricts the state of the economy.
But, people nowadays think for sure that the economy is moneymaking or production. Production is a means and consumption is a purpose.
The unproductiveness of the contemporary economy arises from the fact that means are exclusively pursued without clarifying the purpose.
People are born, then study, work, get married, build a house, give birth to children, rear them, fall sick, get old and die. Each of these is consumption. Each is the economy. Each is an activity to live by. Each life overlaps and makes the national economy possible.
To think consumption means to think life.
Production is not the only factor of the economy. Consumption is also a factor of the economy. The base for consumption is distribution. Namely, consumption has a limit. It is one's income that decides one's limits. Income is distribution. Basically, income is decided by work.
The economy is determined by combinations.
Distribution is determined by restrictions and limits, the equity of individuals and their needs, tastes and combinations.
Restrictions include restrictions regarding production, distribution, consumption, the physical nature of property and money. Restrictions mean preconditions. In particular, physical restrictions contain restrictions regarding preservative quality (freshness), profile and weight. Economic resources are limited. Therefore, there are limits by necessity. Limits generate restrictions. As far as they are limited, scope becomes an issue. For example, there are production limits, financial limits and distribution limits.
As for the difference between restrictions and limits, restrictions means preconditions and limits identify the scope.
Equity means income. Balance in income restricts the base for distribution.
Living standards are determined based on shares.
Living standards are caused by income differences. Income differences are caused even if income is uniform. This is because even with uniform income, physical differences cannot be eliminated.
Living standards are determined by allocation of expenditure. Allocation means a ratio. Income restricts the allocation of expenditure. The scope of income restricts the limit of expenditure.
The economy is an activity to live by. Up until quite recently, some of the resources needed to live were homemade. They could be produced without procuring them from the market. Today, with the development of the money economy and market economy, we have to procure most of the goods necessary for life from the market.
In principle, currency circulating in a market is uniform. In contracts, there are a great variety of properties. As such, property procured by individuals is combined based on the needs and tastes of individuals.
Distribution of property depends on the needs and tastes of consumers.
The nature of property is not uniform but diversified.
The trend of consumption is decided by combinations of properties. This combination of properties is inherent to individuals and depends on the tastes of each person.
Property has various characteristics depending on the purpose of use or physical natures. Such natures restrict the state of the individual property market.
In the case of fresh food, the market characteristics are restricted by freshness. In the case of conservable resources such as oil, the market is restricted by the characteristics of such resources. Transactions in the market take on the features of the properties. Transactions of property are not uniform.
Therefore, differences arise in the state of transaction or the state of competition among properties. It is an unruly and barbarian idea that the economy would be stabilized if uniform restrictions were given to every sort of thing and competition were invited.
The Copyright of these webpages including all the tables, figures and pictures
belongs the author, Keiichirou Koyano.Don't reproduce any copyright withiout
permission of the author.Thanks.
Copyright(C) 2013.6.14Keiichirou Koyano