I agree. But being a overly risk-averse country I don’t see a big bang ever happening here-too well orchestrated for that. Thats why I propose Special Economic Zones for one reason only-prototyping. They are not supposed to be indefinite. Set them up, get out of the way, observe and gather data, and impliment nationwide. All happening within a 10year time span.

I don’t like the government stepping. Japan has a habit of circling the wagons and one can never really be sure of why they suddenly stepped in? Why didn’t they let the market handle the consolidation? Was there a foreign threat? I saw this intervention as a way of keeping the commodities market Japanese verses effecient. As individuals they could have been taken one at a time and no one would have noticed. Now that they are one any approach from the outside will generate nationalistic cries that will make any deal almost impossible.

Japan lacks the knowledge, experience, and wisdom of advanced finance economic applications.

I’m in full agreement of that and the rest of that paragraph. To that end, I’m not sure why you’re opposed to the consolidation of the commodities markets, since that’s very much being pushed for by the international finance community and most of the opposition comes from old guard forces within Japan.

I don’t think Japan needs any special zones for financial or economic activities. Reforms should apply to the entire nation, and allow any geographic area to develop. Deregulation needs to happen nationwide. Perhaps I’m misunderstanding what you’re proposing, but it seems as though the worst thing Japan can do is set up a two-system structure, which seems to be why both dislike Project Dejima.

I do agree very much with the sentiment that Japanese firms need the influence of well-experienced foreign financial institutions. The competition will only do them good. Separating them into their own little corner of town isn’t really going to help anyone.

At the same time, don’t forget who’s really looking to profit off the rise in property prices that is bound to follow the building of Project Dejima.

When this story broke in April, Abe talked about London’s Big Bang. Then a week later using his invisible hand forced a merger of Tokyo’s commodity markets( another of my beefs). This was followed up with the corralling of the foreigners into one quartre of central Tokyo so they can go about whatever it is they do and not be concerned about Japanese business customs and language. I call this the Korean twist.

Over the centuries Japan has become very good at creating these little empcampments(in Tokyo bay during Edo, Kobe and Nagasaki-pre Edo, Yokohama during Meiji). It makes it a lot easier to masssacre (figuratively & literally) the lot when the feeling arises. It puts “them and us” right out there for all to see. This reeks of ranking #54-a national culture that is closed to foreign ideas. Like I said before I am not at all familiar with Korea and Korean society but as a member of Japanese society believe in assimulation and also believe the nail that sticks out gets hammered down.

Japan talks incessantly of hollow harmony and “Beautiful Country” in populist rhetoric. This retrogressive helter-skelter scheme of theirs should have been laughed right off the table. If harmony means by definition: the pleasant effect made by parts being combined into a whole, then I don’t see it under this plan.

In my opinion, it’s Japanese firms that need international firms. The whole premise for countries seeking out foreign direct investment is the idea of skill transfer.

What gave Japan its international financial center status in the ‘80 were the inflated share prices of Japanese banks and their assets. Coupled with foreign currency controls and a managed exchange rate, like China today, eventually allowed Japan to go on a global shopping spree like nouveau riche. This won them the title of international financial center because deals were happening here. (Note I did not say earn them the title) Japan lacks the knowledge, experience, and wisdom of advanced finance economic applications. An example of this is the over reliance of companies to use loan financing over debt issuance causing an anemic and underdeveloped bond market. You can compare the availability of advanced financial education programs with those on offer in Singapore, London, and NYC. There’s literally a dearth.

So in my mind our dear leaders in Kasumigaseki should be pushing a financial-themed special economic zone. An area of town where financial minds can get together in a deregulated, tax free zone. The zone will represent a place where government sponsored co-operatives are created for advanced financial economic research and the promotion of financial economic education. In addition, the government can run experimental programs in the area of dereg. to be spread throughout the country.

This to me would represent a progressive idea with a Japanese twist.

Could this line of thinking be why they are losing if not lost their status as a global financial center?

Which is pretty much my thinking as well. If anyone in a national-level decision making process actually believes that this “Foreigner Zone” is a panacea for Tokyo’s loss of status or prestige (which the very existence of you rightfully call into question), they are fools.

When politicians say they’re going to consult with foreign executives on what they ‘want from a city’ - they want opportunities to make money. And this could be a big one for investors, with the rise in land values that it is bound to bring, however temporary they may be.

DeOrio:

I don’t think CNOTE is saying #1 or #2 at all, but I’ll let him reply.

Also, despite Japan’s obvious success (in fact, dominance) in several manufacturing industries - notably autos, electronics, steel and shipbuilding - it is not, and never really has been, a global finance center, which is what this is about.

These steps will not remedy that situation.

1. Are you implying that Korea was the first country to come up with the idea of economic zones or encouraging the use of a foreign lingua franca within such a zone?

2. Are saying that countries should not use or be influenced by the ideas of other countries?

3. Japan is still the world’s second-largest economy by a rather wide margin and, while it may no longer be the only choice for a Western firm setting up shop in East Asia, it still has a lot of advantages over most other locations.

If you think the Bubble is the even a primary reason that Japan reached a high global position, you are simply sadly mistaken.

If Japan should not be and should never have been a global financial center, what area would have taking that role? South Korea? Not yet. Hong Kong? Hurting, possibly becoming less attractive.

If Korea’s FDI is up, even partially as a result of FEZs, it would seem that that was a point in favor of Japan’s International Business Zone.

I don’t think it’s the greatest idea in the world, and I don’t think it will achieve quite what it’s being touted as achieving, but that’s to be expected - it’s in a promotional phrase now.

I don’t understand why the plan would engender such vitriol.