Talk:Economy of Japan/Archive 1

Oil numbers don't add up
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) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.204.155.241 (talk) 14:59, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

asean direct ripoff
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).

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

Defense spending myth
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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.91.112.76 (talk) 21:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Fish Catch
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)

Not one mention of the debt?
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
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
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 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.246.217 (talk) 02:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.44.40.7 (talk) 20:25, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

matt williams blah — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.195.76.48 (talk) 00:00, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Very poor article
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)

Possibly of relevance...
Regards, --  李博杰   | —Talk contribs email 13:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Feb 18, 2008, Japanese women hairstyles track economy ups and downs - Reuters

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

This Article Needs Extensive Improvements
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 (talk • contribs) 20:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC) SHEEP!

Big Mac index
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)

Blatant Disregard for last two years
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)

Values in US Dollars as opposed to Measured in US Dollars
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)

Second in GDP
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 coochie coocjie coochie 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)

Grammar problems.
"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
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)

Dr. Breton's comment on this article
Dr. Breton has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:

"I have added some new material from Breton, Theodore R., 2015, “Human Capital and Growth in Japan: Converging to the Steady State in a 1% World. I have also edited some parts to improve the grammar."

We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

We believe Dr. Breton has expertise on the topic of this article, since he has published relevant scholarly research:


 * Reference : Theodore R. Breton, 2014. "Human capital and growth in japan since 1970: converging to the steady state in a 1% world," DOCUMENTOS DE TRABAJO CIEF 012433, UNIVERSIDAD EAFIT.

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 19:39, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 one external links on Economy of Japan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110427071603/http://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/handbook/c09cont.htm to http://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/handbook/c09cont.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131030101107/http://dtxtq4w60xqpw.cloudfront.net/sites/all/files/pdf/unwto_highlights13_en_hr.pdf to http://dtxtq4w60xqpw.cloudfront.net/sites/all/files/pdf/unwto_highlights13_en_hr.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150206025936/http://www.doingbusiness.org/rankings to http://www.doingbusiness.org/rankings
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101109122744/http://www.oecd.org:80/document/17/0,3343,en_2649_34111_40353553_1_1_1_1,00.html to http://www.oecd.org/document/17/0,3343,en_2649_34111_40353553_1_1_1_1,00.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050411000000/http://www. to http://www.
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130913123113/http://www.esri.cao.go.jp/jp/sna/data/data_list/kenmin/files/contents/pdf/gaiyou1.pdf to http://www.esri.cao.go.jp/jp/sna/data/data_list/kenmin/files/contents/pdf/gaiyou1.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:36, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Economy of Japan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071014004923/http://www.pref.gifu.lg.jp/pref/s11111/data/data.htm to http://www.pref.gifu.lg.jp/pref/s11111/data/data.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131121103417/http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/social_issues/jan-june12/9billion_06-12.html to https://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/social_issues/jan-june12/9billion_06-12.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130622081457/http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/AJ201206260065 to http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/AJ201206260065

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:43, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

hello — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.221.161.160 (talk) 08:48, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Article needs an almost total re-write/update. Until recently contained claim that "Anime made up 10% of Japan's GDP
This article is Bloated filled with biased conclusive statements that don't include sufficient perspective to constitute a neutral point of view along with a lot of dubious information such as a serious claim that Anime constituted 10% of Japan's GDP. It needs a lot of work to bring it up to the standard it should be at."Zubin12 (talk) 15:38, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:23, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * APEC Logo.svg

Japan-UK deal
I removed this paragraph from the section "Postwar period (1945–present)":

On September 11, 2020, Japan and the United Kingdom signed the first free trade agreement post-Brexit which will boost trade by approximately £15.2 billion. It enables tariff-free trade on 99% of exports to Japan. [ref: cite web|title=UK and Japan agree historic free trade agreement |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-japan-agree-historic-free-trade-agreement |publisher=Gov.uk (Government of the United Kingdom) |accessdate=September 12, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200911085404/https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-japan-agree-historic-free-trade-agreement |archive-date=September 11, 2020|url-status=live}}]

This is a slight renegotiation of the vastly bigger deal with the EU. If the EU deal were mentioned, there could be a note about the UK bit, but otherwise this is not significant to the economy of Japan. Sorry, I don't have the knowledge of the subject required to add it myself. Imaginatorium (talk) 03:35, 19 September 2020 (UTC)