How to overcome the negative aspect of free trade system
2004.12.04 13:34

Our country too has been deregulating.
Thanks to deregulation, lots of foreign companies have been participating in our domestic market, in labour forces.
Negative aspect is, for example, we used to have a minimum wage law in 'per day'. But it was abolished few years ago. Now, instead, minimum wage law in 'par hour'.
By lay-offs in a day, we're paid less.
At the same time, we don't have to be hired only by one company. (One has to work only in one company - such tacit agreement existed before in the society where life-long employment was guaranteed.)
For example, we work in one company for 6 hrs, and 3 hrs in another.
There're ways for anything.
Do not try to only seek for one solution for one problem.
There're many solutions for anything.
Followings are comments I posted.
#Welcome Back!
I've never been to China except Hong Kong several times. I'm expecting to read your articles about China though, were you unable to get access to blog? Because for two weeks we've never heard from you.
#Through Your Eyes
Both two are informative. In Tokyo we can see much more policeofficer than any other big cities in Japan, so if you stayed in Beijing, things might be different. There are very few intelligentsia and tens of thousands people are peasants, I guess, it might be a little bit hard for anyone outside China to know the problems inside their country. I've never been in China.
Their culture and life may be different from ours Mainly in language, between same people sometimes Chinese - their political regime differ depends where they live, mainland(Chana) or island(Taiwan), peninsula(Singapore), and Korea (North and South) but mainly in language which differs us from having a same community. but it doesn't seperate them from the basic human desires that we all have. The very first thing I noticed the first time I stepped outside the US border was how much alike we are. Exactly. As if I were speaking through your mouth. let's just say I would stay hungry for a day or two until I found something a bit more...American? Yeah, yeah, especially it's true when we first visited a different country. It's necessary for us to have a little bit courage to taste something totally different from what we used to eat so naturaly, I entered McDonalds in Strasbourg, France without a bit of hesitation - it was still rare to find in 1991, not sure now ...then I felt secured.
#Puppypet
We didn't know any of them. They are coming back soon, so we will have chances to know their names. I think fanaticism is a feature seen in many countries though when it comes to this feature, a bunch of East Asian countries enlist top five.. Japanese people need a more sober discussion than fanaticism, enthusiasm. I dragged my wife to the Japan Girls Nite US Tour Oh I meet girls only for one purpose, you were lucky to encounter your better-half anyway. .. I saw your name for the first time in jondiii's article. Thank you very much for listing my name in your friend's list, I really appreciate that. From now let me visit your site and sometimes make a comment.
#Language Doesn't Reflect Reality Well
Very interesting argument, I like it. I had rarely encountered discussions about these terms in American website.
Language is the best tool to get access to reality, but inevitably there is a difference in language and reality, because language doesn't reflect reality as it is. So language's always been a poor tool to get access to reality, I think you have already fully noticed what I try to imply here.
#Never Mind
Language changes very rapidly. The ones which were thought to be standard yesterday are subject to misuse today. In school standard language ought to be taught but in reality we use language as we like it. What's important is not how to use language correct but how to transmit what we really want to say. However correct someone speaks language as 'standard' it is useless unless they can transmit it as they wish.
Language is a best way to communicate with someone at the same time it continues to be a poor tool. What is important is 'brush up your Karma.' Words from the bottom of our heart endorsed deeply from our previous reading and experiences moves people, it's not just superficial not leared overnight things that moves people deeply.
Language we use is a criteria for many things, so when we heard about how they speak or write, we can usually tell how and where they raised up.
Haves and have-nots will be reduced to those who write isn't and ain't because their mothers told them to.
If there were two languages for haves and have-nots, they would only help widen the chasm between two people, and they will never be able to promote understanding between two people. Since language is for people to understand each other, not meant for segregate one another, especially in school standard language ought to be taught.
As long as we know how to use am not /isn't/ aren't, ain't instead is possible, in addition, language tends to be from difficult to easy, 'ain't' might appear in the text book of our next generation. So never mind!
#Behind The Scenes
Seems to me you are good at making a whole image from a scattered statistical data, good job, Mike. Special Order 40 might be devised with respect to nullifying a biased presumption based on residential status, which might have functioned well to eliminate anxiety over illegal immigrants only for their unlawful stay, however the order came up with a loophole for those who are engaged in organised crime unfortunately. This order no more serves to nullify the social tention based on race, which is so important to keep our human rights, but it rather has been promoting serious crimes, which might result in more serious violation of our human rights. This is a good example some people who chase the ideal happened to leave the reality behind the scenes.
#Liberalism Is Not A Nihilism
So according to your passage, you think liberalism advocates nihilism? So you think you are a man of some belief and conviction, you are looking for liberals, advocates of nihilism, to hunt down? But I cannot dare to say liberals are nihilists. Liberalism is very distant from nihilism. I'd suggest you should try thinking separately liberalism from nihilism. Many people don't like nihilism, but liberalism is always thought to be one of the greatest ideas among even very conservative people. I think you are a conservative, and even rigoristic person. I know you are a paragon of law-abide person. I think you should try finding a constructive point among liberalists' idea. Their views are not at all the same as nihilism, so we can make a common front against nihilism.
#Pro-Choice Is Pro-Life
Pro-choice is pro-life. Always pregnant women have to choose to have or not to have, that's pro-choice. Then always they have to choose the lesser of the two 'unfavourables', which is whether to have babies without worrying about economy to raise their kids -that's pro-life for their babies or not to have babies, which might cause further economic troubles for them parents, which is pro-life for them parents. whichever they choose, they have to choose and live. So always pro-choice is at the same time pro-life. Some want more babies, but only their economy deters them from having more babies, or others who want to keep their lifestyle free from duty of raising their babies sometimes don't want their babies, in these cases too, they are choosing their 'life' prior to their babies, -that's pro-choice and pro-life.
In euthanasia too, if everyone around vegets were unhappy, why society has to choose to have one soul keep on being alive only for our cause of pro-one's life, in this case society choose rather pro-more than one life than to have one soul live, -that's pro-choice and pro-life.
Here we can only find positive attitudes toward their choice and life both in abortion and euthanasia issues.
I wanted to mean both pro-life and pro-choice are based on humanitalian viewpoint. I wanted to emphasise the opposite of pro-life is not pro-choice. Both two notions are supplementary relations to make a humanitalian viewpoint perfect.
I'll have to assume that your attempts to redefine words is due to English not being your first language. If a native speaker tried what you just tried, well, it would be pure nonsense.
It is your freedom to assume my analysis of word definition is derived from my shortsighted comprehension on especially this language not being my 'first' language. (All right, let me explain...) My first language belongs to a tacit dimension. For me any language is just a tool, I used to emphasise how important for anyone to realise to read between the lines especially when they read 'your' comments. I used to praise for your candidness and logics based deeply on your comprehension derived from your daily ordinary life. I cannot be deceived by just your superficial way of sayng something common in your writing. Because I can receive your message from through a tacit dimension. It is so important. Many others are unable to see what you mean by being obstructed by your superficial way of saying. But I have been always trying to receive what you really mean in your comments. I have been always trying to understand what you really intend to say somehow hidden in your comments, behind your verbal experession. Remember my first language is tacit, not verbal. My second language is English, then my third language is Japanese. I just find it unable to make myself understood in Japanese, so I prefer using English. As a tool of communication, this language is by far better than other languages.
#Words Are Just Words
I think the word 'yellow' referred to Asian people for many years before, like the word 'yellow peril', 'yellow races', and sometimes 'yellow monkey'. All were thought to be contemptuous and offensive, now all these expessions disappeared. Especially when we want to refer to something thought-to-be unfavourable, we tend to use many different words. Toilet, bathroom, restroom, WC...Fag, faggot, queer... Harlot, tart, hustler, etc.. first off another word started being used for euphemism. Later these words follows the same destiny as their predeccesors did. Unless substanctial meaning changed, nothing the words connote would change. N-word might be replaced another word like N-n-word and what not perpetually.
( How many times we have to repeat we are only one people, some have just slightly lighter complexion than others? )
Words refer to something unfavourable tend to be replaced in short cycle, thus lots of words for the unfavourable. On the other hands, words refer to something favourable tend to be used too much, then those words like God, Jesus have got different meaning.
Words are just words, nothing serious to talk about...