Talk:Economy of Japan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Business (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Economics (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Japan (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 00:37, November 27, 2014 (JST, Heisei 26) (Refresh)
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Significant Transcription Error[edit]

TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oil numbers don't add up[edit]

Can somebody verify these numbers? It reads as though they export more oil than they produce. Or do they export their excess imported oil?

production: 17,330 barrel/day (2001 est.) consumption: 5.29 million barrel/day (2001 est.) exports: 93,360 barrel/day (2001) imports: 5.449 million barrel/day (2001) net imports: 5.3 million barrel/day (2004 est.) proved reserves: 29.29 million barrels (1 January 2002)

Fish Catch[edit]

Japan ranked second in the world behind China in tonnage of fish caught—11.9 million tons in 1989, down slightly from 11.1 million tons in 1980.

Am I missing something? It doesn't make sense...

This was fixed by some kind editor, it now reads "up".
It would be nice to have figures that weren't 20 and 29 years old, though, especially considering the turmoil in international fishing industries.
Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 22:16, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

asean direct ripoff[edit]

http://www.asean3.net/partners/japan/index.jsp —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.151.32.169 (talk) 05:07, 20 December 2006 (UTC).

Second in GDP[edit]

It is wrong to put Japan as the country with the third largest GDP. If you look at all other books, they put Japan in the place where it belongs: Second. PPP should be listed just as a complementary information, not as the main one. Also, why is the EU cited as if it were a country? If that's the case, then NAFTA, APEC, ASEAN should also be classified as such, in which case the APEC would be the "country" with the largest GDP in the world. Can anyone correct these mistakes please? These information are distorted, which make them dangerous and ridiculous. Davi

Usually, as happens in the CIA Factbook, GDP at PPP is considered more reliable as a measure than nominal GDP. This one is considered the complementary usually. So Japan is nº 3 and Germany nº 5... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.32.121.29 (talk) 23:04, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

articles refering to an aging population as a bad thing can be dangerous because it can make people rising bigger families and for japan an aging population isn't really a total bad thing.the positive things are:less pressure in the enviroment,also japan have a high density and sometimes the space isn't as big as the one from other countries,and japan have many robots. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.250.132.165 (talk) 22:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Please do sign to the note.[edit]

IP user, Please do sign to the note.--Tyangarin (talk) 14:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Defense spending myth[edit]

This article peddles a commonly repeated myth that a "comparatively small defense allocation has helped Japan advance with extraordinary speed to become one of the largest economies in the world." But Irish journalist Eamonn Fingleton (among other Japan specialists) has pointed out that this is simply untrue. He notes that other nations such as Taiwan and South Korea spend vastly more on defense (as a percentage of GDP) than does the U.S.---and yet Taiwan and South Korea have also boomed spectacularly since World War II, using Japanese-style economic policies.

Not one mention of the debt?[edit]

The debt of Japan is equal to something like 20% of the entire world's GDP, yet there's barely any mention of it in this article. Why? -- LightSpectra (talk) 23:44, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Small wording edit: Mises institute suggestions[edit]

I combined the two sentences involving Mises institute suggestions for Japanese economic health, as before that the (paraphrased) "Ultimately, Japan should return to a gold standard" line wasn't attributed, and it was unclear that this was not a misplaced normative statement.65.117.234.99 (talk) 17:01, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Graph on japanese yen doesn't have labels[edit]

I noticed this mistake as I was doing my report and downloaded the pic. Since I couldn't figure out what the #s on the vertical axis were for I deleted it. WHAT A WASTE OF TIME! I think the dude who posted it should at least think about these things.''' IF ANYONE KNOWS WHAT THE #S MEAN, PLEASE EDIT THE PAGE '' == Graph on japanese yen == The chart is labeled the historical value of the Japanese yen versus US dollar. This gives the impression that the yen has fallen in value versus the US dollar, but the opposite is true. This is a chart of USD/JPY, or the number of yen versus US dollar. The yen has been strengthening versus the US dollar. {{subst:UnsignedIP|1=129.44.40.7|2=20:25, 2 March 2009 (UTC)}} <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> matt williams blah {{subst:UnsignedIP|1=98.195.76.48|2=00:00, 9 April 2009 (UTC)}} <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> .

Very poor article[edit]

I've never engaged in this kind of criticizm before, so take it easy on me. Bluntly, this article is terrible. The second paragraph says, “Japan's economy is highly efficient, highly diversified, and very competitive, . . .” not to mention imploding. In the first quarter of 2009, the industrial production index fell 34%, which puts it back where it was in 1983. The loss of 25 years worth of output should warrant a mention.

Property prices and equities fell from the 1989/90 bubble levels, and never recovered. The economy was the worst performer in the OECD over the past 20 years, growing less than half as fast (1.1% p.a. vs. 2.6% p.a.) as the average. So, there is an obvious bias in statements that put growth in the 1960s to 1980s ahead of any mention of the immediate past 20 years.

Next, in Macro-economic trend, we have a graph of the yen:dollar exchange rate that is described in the text as “chart of trend of gross domestic product of Japan at market prices” (which, if that’s what it was, would be fairly useless). After that, there’s an awful table that misunderstands purchasing power parity to the point of pegging it at the same rate for 50 years ! Since any economist would know that such a measure would be utter nonsense, it shouldn’t be surprising that no source is provided.

The unemployment graph is unreadable. The cultural and keiretsu sections don’t belong in this article, and are badly out-of-date. Beginning the Current economic issues section with “The Koizumi administration. . .” suggests that nothing much happened in "current" economic issues over the past 3-1/2 years.

DOR (HK) (talk) 09:34, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Blatant Disregard for last two years[edit]

Considering the massive damage done to the Japanese economy in the last two years, all figures from 2007 or earlier are deceptive, out of date, and not useful for inference. For example, in the October 2008 to December 2008, GDP shrank at an annualized rate of 15%, and exports had been cut in half. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.106.209.182 (talk) 15:36, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Not sure where else to put this, so here it is--

Japan has been in deflation for all but six quarters since 1995. Those quarters were the Asian Financial Crisis (4) and the Global Financial Crisis (2).
That’s the same number of quarters (6) in which Japan grew faster than the US, 1995-2010.
In the second quarter of 2010, the GDP deflator was almost exactly where it was in the second quarter of 1982.
Since 1995, Japan has had three recessions, the shortest of which lasted four quarters.

DOR (HK) (talk) 09:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Possibly of relevance...[edit]

Regards, -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs email 13:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

China to Surpass Japan to Become 2nd Largest Economy[edit]

China to Surpass Japan to Become 2nd Largest Economy in the world. [1] [2] [3] --Lanolamua (talk) 10:07, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

This Article Needs Extensive Improvements[edit]

I have had a look at this article for two days now and I have to say that this is a very poor article. I have tried to make some minor changes but this article would require some major cleanup/improvements, so it's not like a few people is capable of doing this on their own. While people spend all their time on improving facts about samurai and anime they seem to forget the economy. This article is rated C, which is a shame cause the economy of Japan should be one of the more sophisticated articles about national economies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swcfer (talkcontribs) 20:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC) SHEEP!

Big Mac index[edit]

The Big Mac index is a meaningless joke. Id suggest to leave that index out entirly, if not at least mote that thing somewhere far down the text, not in the first paragraphs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.57.122.2 (talk) 21:56, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Values in US Dollars as opposed to Measured in US Dollars[edit]

The article notes that GDP, Public Debt are in US Dollars. We should note that these quantites are actually in Yen and not in Dollars. It is only measured in Dollars for wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.9.224.215 (talk) 20:07, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Grammar problems.[edit]

"For three decades from 1960, with US military protection that Japan could ignore military spending and instead budgeting on the economy [14] that Japan experienced rapid economic growth, which was referred to as the Japanese post-war economic miracle"

I fixed the grammar here, but it still may need some work. I'm a bit busy to look this up, but apart from the grammar, the date may be wrong. The occupation of Japan started right after WWII (if I remember correctly), so even though the expansion may have started after 1960, the sentence makes it unclear that these two things occurred on a different date. Can someone please check to make sure everything is alright there?

My (half) fix: "In the three decades following 1960, due to US military protection because of Japan's involvement in World War 2, Japan was able to ignore defense spending in favour of economic spending, thus allowing for a rapid economic growth referred to as the Japanese post-war economic miracle."

I'm not so sure that is the best way to state that, but at least it is grammatically correct. It should probably be split into two sentences, and it should probably use more common vocabulary, but I'm too busy to completely fix it right now. 24.245.50.143 (talk) 21:46, 30 March 2013 (UTC) EDIT: Corrected for British English.

I should have read further before posting this. This whole article is a nightmare. It needs a lot of work. 24.245.50.143 (talk) 22:08, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikiecon[edit]

I would love to see a Wiki project map out the global economy. In an organized format all local/country economic data would be collected. All authors would be required to write articles according to a standardized and cited format. The model revolves around publicly released economic data: GDP, employment, industries, corporations, fiscal policy, etc. Economists and volunteers can help determine which economic data accounts are most appropriate to be required under the standardized format.

There is nothing in the world that resembles this model. There is no Wiki that allows economists to add economic data under a standardized format.

I have already written the article for 'Economy of the United States'. It is 7 pages long. This article contains what I believe is the most important economic data available to the public. The data is almost entirely in table format. Citations include the U.S. Census Bureau, the World Bank, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Yahoo Finance, CNN'S Money's Fortune 500 list, U.S. treasury releases, Federal Reserve websites, company annual reports and the IMF. The article can be seen in PDF format at: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_Economy.pdf

The Contents are: 1. States, 2. Industries, 3. Corporations, 4. Employment, 5. Fiscal Budget, 6. Monetary Policy, 7. Creditors, 8. Cities, 9. International Accounts 9. History

All articles would be standardized and connected in an organized network. This model would go down to the most local level. All 196 countries would have a standardized country article to have the same exact format used in the attached file. This project would evolve as economists determine better ways to present the data.

The 'Economy of ______' pages would be a very educational collection of economic data. I think that these articles would be greatly improved if they were modified to become uniform. This would allow for greater comparability. I believe that these pages would be improved with a standardized and simplified format. This would allow for greater comparability and public understanding of the economy and fiscal budgets. Below are the Wikipedia Contents of the four biggest economy articles. As you can see, the Contents are inconsistent between them. I believe this can be fixed with my Wiki project proposal.

1. Economy of the United States 1 History 2 Overview 3 Employment 4 Research, development, and entrepreneurship 5 Income and wealth 6 Financial position 7 Industry Sectors 8 Notable companies and markets 9 Energy, transportation, and telecommunications 10 Finance 11 Health care 12 International trade 13 Currency and central bank 14 Law and government 15 See also 16 References 17 External links

2. Economy of China 1 History 2 Government role 3 Regional economies 4 Development 5 Macroeconomic trends 6 Financial and banking system 7 Industry Sectors 8 Labor and welfare 9 External trade 10 Foreign investment 11 Demographics 12 Transportation and infrastructure 13 Science and technology 14 See also 15 References 16 External links

3. Economy of Japan 1 Economic history 2 Infrastructure 3 Macro-economic trend 4 Services 5 Industry 6 Mining and petroleum exploration 7 Agriculture 8 Labor force 9 Law and government 10 Culture 11 Other economic indicators 12 See also 13 Notes 14 External links

4. Economy of Germany 1 History 2 Macroeconomic data 3 Economic region 4 Natural resources 5 Sectors 6 Infrastructure 7 Technology 8 See also 9 References 10 External links

Leave your signature 81.158.209.177 (talk) 21:20, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

External links[edit]

Hello everyone, I am working for the International Trade Centre (ITC), a UN/WTO agency that aims to promote sustainable economic development through trade promotion. I would like to propose the addition of an external link (http://www.macmap.org/QuickSearch/FindTariff/FindTariff.aspx?subsite=open_access&country=SCC392%7CJapan&source=1%7CITC) that leads directly to our online database of customs tariffs applied by Japan. Visitors can easily look up market access information for Japan by selecting the product and partner of their interest. I would like you to consider this link under the WP:ELYES #3 prescriptions. Moreover, the reliability and the pertinence of this link can be supported by the following facts 1) ITC is part of the United Nations, and aims to share trade and market access data on by country and product as a global public good 2) No registration is required to access this information 3) Market access data (Tariffs and non-tariff measures) are regularly updated

Thank you, Divoc (talk) 13:47, 30 July 2014 (UTC)