Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bank of Japan, in a Surprise, Adopts Negative Interest Rate

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 250 posts

Re: Bank of Japan, in a Surprise, Adopts Negative Interest Rate

#131

Post by SolaceQuantum »

yuiyui wrote: post #125
woodpanel wrote: post #67

Maybe OT: Isn't this just proof that Japan needs to let go of it's biggest barrier to growth? By which I mean it's non-existing immigration? I've been recently to Japan and despite my fears Tokio was a really affordable place (leaving out the hotel prices of course). I thought this was due to the lack of growth and the recent quantitative easing and other government measures. Measurements that seem to be failing at t…

> By which I mean it's non-existing immigration? That's not a bug, it's a feature. Japan enjoys the advantages of having a civilized, educated, homogeneous, high trust society, and they're not willing to abandon that in exchange of what, low skilled workers they don't need and ethnic conflict?

I think that the parent specifically mentioned highly skilled young workers who would be attracted by the modern lifestyle in Tokyo.

Re: Bank of Japan, in a Surprise, Adopts Negative Interest Rate

#132

Post by jevgeni »

becuzIwnatitobi wrote: post #90
jevgeni wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On FT or Bloomberg, yeah. HN has more important things to do, like arguing if one can call a variable "iGiveHead" in a FOSS project[1]... ____ [1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11018019

By linking that thread you're giving it more attention which is counterproductive.

Yes, because supressing and self-censoring certain subjects works so well to solve them. /s

Re: Bank of Japan, in a Surprise, Adopts Negative Interest Rate

#133

Post by jevgeni »

Cyph0n wrote: post #42
jevgeni wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On FT or Bloomberg, yeah. HN has more important things to do, like arguing if one can call a variable "iGiveHead" in a FOSS project[1]... ____ [1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11018019

We have a winner here. If you don't like what people discuss here, go to Financial News.

Why thank you! If you don't like what I discuss here, go to another discussion.

Re: Bank of Japan, in a Surprise, Adopts Negative Interest Rate

#135

Post by vetinari »

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #130
yuiyui wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you didn't solve the underlying cause of why people don't have kids. Exactly. And the cause is the mutually reinforced effect of capitalist consumerism and feminism.

I don't see how capitalism or feminism is the cause of Japan's low birth rate. Could you explain?

Capitalism could be indirectly responsible.

One of the causes why people postpone having children is financial insecurity. In their mid-twenties they cannot afford to have a home, they are unable to secure the costs of first few years of raising child, when they don't know if they will have a job in three months and they have zero savings. Add student loans to the mix, popular desires to travel the world, to "live" and it's obvious why the developed countries have problems with natality.

One of the reason of population boom in Czechoslovakia in 1970's was the policy of support of young families. Newly wed pairs were were provided security, they got their own homes, they had job security[1], they got financial support for raising children. It wasn't a luxury, you couldn't lead a lavish life, but you knew that if you have a child, everything will be OK.

[1] we are abstracting from the fact, that in socialist countries it was unlawful to be jobless. You were provided a job, but it didn't have to be a one you would like.

Re: Bank of Japan, in a Surprise, Adopts Negative Interest Rate

#136

Post by danans »

VLM wrote: post #113
hackerboos wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The key phrase here was 'aging population'. If the majority of Japan's population are retired then there will still be a huge deficit. Japan needs to bite the bullet and accept immigration as part of its economic strategy.

Is a Japan without any Japanese people still Japan? Culturally would modern Japanese tolerate a cultural mass suicide or did that go out of style at the end of WW2? USA has been talked into it, but would that work on modern Japanese? Meanwhile there's a weird undercurrent of racism, if we just take Japan 2016 and person for person swap out for obviously superior foreigners (imperialism?) then magically everything is…

Why would a slightly more open immigration policy result in a Japan without any Japanese people? Nobody is proposing Schengen-agreement style open borders, anyways.

The culturally (and racially) homogeneous state is a myth. Even the Japan you might perceive as homogeneous is the result of many waves of migration stretching to pre-history (Jomon, Ainu, Yayoi, Chinese...)

Places that have relatively open borders (EU, US) aren't experiencing anything like "cultural mass suicide" - unless you buy the nationalist rhetoric coming out of right wing and neo-nazi camps.

All cultures are evolving, including Japan. Sometimes it is gradual, and sometimes it is faster (your example of WWII). Healthy societies accept that change is natural, and try to make sure that it happens in a constructive way.

Re: Bank of Japan, in a Surprise, Adopts Negative Interest Rate

#137

Post by SolaceQuantum »

vetinari wrote: post #135
SolaceQuantum wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how capitalism or feminism is the cause of Japan's low birth rate. Could you explain?

Capitalism could be indirectly responsible. One of the causes why people postpone having children is financial insecurity. In their mid-twenties they cannot afford to have a home, they are unable to secure the costs of first few years of raising child, when they don't know if they will have a job in three months and they have zero savings. Add student loans to the mix, popular desires to travel the world, to "live" a…

Does Japan have the same issues with student loans and such that USA might have?

Otherwise, thank you for the explanation and I do apologize for my ignorance.

(Also, I'm still confused about the feminism thing)

Re: Bank of Japan, in a Surprise, Adopts Negative Interest Rate

#139

Post by fiatmoney »

There's a huge difference between negative interest rates on the part of the government as a lender and as a borrower.

As a lender (ie, giving out loans that only need to be paid back in part), they mean the gov is essentially giving away money (which constitutes an incredibly corrupt bargain with the banking establishment, but is obviously distortionary on face regardless of who's getting the deal).

As a borrower (ie, charging to hold money at the fed) they're essentially collecting a fee for various regulatory and quasi-seigniorage services. For instance, if you require assets to be held in certain forms (central bank deposits, government bonds...), a negative yield is basically charging for providing an asset that satisfies those regulatory requirements.

Re: Bank of Japan, in a Surprise, Adopts Negative Interest Rate

#140

Post by hawkice »

jessriedel wrote: post #118
jernfrost wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the growth problems of Japan is largely an illusion and myth caused by population decline. Growth per capita in Japan has been completely normal in the supposed terrible years. It is the population decline which causes the overall GDP growth to look anemic. Naturally it is growth per capita which matters as this is what improves the living conditions of people. There are many countries with high GDP growth but wh…

What time period are you talking about? In 1991, per capita GDP in US and Japan were both ~$32k in 2005 USD. But now it's ~$38k for Japan and $47k for US. http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-per-capita http://www.tradingeconomics.com/japan/gdp-per-capita

Or, looking at even tighter bounds of GDP per working-age person, today the US is at ~$82k/year, and Japan ~$64k/year -- a slightly larger gap. I prefer this metric when talking about "the economy" in the sense that most people interact with it.
Post reply on HN