Japan’s economy is stronger than many realise: Not bad, but could be better

https://headtopics.com/us/japan-s-economy-is-stronger-than-many-realise-22793648 Japan’s economy is stronger than many realise Not bad, but could be better Source The Economist 12/10/2021 2:31:00 AM Japan’s public debt has been above 100% of GDP for almost 25 years without causing a crisis. But can that continue? Not bad, but could be better .Japan is the canary in this coal-mine. In the 1980s its booming economy struck fear in the world. After the bubble burst in the 1990s, public debt ballooned and deflation set in. Many in the West said Japan’s debt was unsustainable and the Bank of Japan (BOJ) should do more to boost inflation. In 2013 theBOJ’s governor, Kuroda Haruhiko, embarked on dramatic monetary easing. The debt hovered around 230% ofGDP. A strange thing ensued: no fiscal crisis struck, nor did inflation come near the 2% target. “The standard textbook on macroeconomics needs an additional few chapters—it doesn’t capture the problems Japan faced,” says Shirakawa Masaaki, Mr Kuroda’s predecessor. Many rich countries now face similar “secular stagnation”: low inflation, low interest rates and low growth. Although higher inflation has emerged recently, financial markets suggest secular stagnation will return soon. Demography is a big factor; Japan simply started ageing and shrinking earlier. As Japan has adapted and others have become more like it, some economists are seeing its economy in a new light. headtopics.com Debt has not turned out to be such a problem. “What we thought used to be fiscal limits are no longer fiscal limits,” argues Adam Posen, of the Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE) think-tank. “[Japan] has forced people to confront reality: the interest rate can stay below the growth rate for very long periods.” The public debt has been above 100% of GDPfor almost 25 years without causing a crisis.It helps that the country borrows in its own currency, the government has big financial assets and theBOJholds a big share of the debt. But as David Weinstein of Columbia University argues, Japan has also managed to contain spending. Since 2000, he writes in a paper with Mark Greenan, spending per head on the elderly has actually fallen. “There’s a quiet functionality that people miss,” says Mr Weinstein. “Markets are sanguine because Japan has a rare ability to adjust.” With low marginal tax rates, there is also room to raise revenues. Some still fear what would happen if interest rates were to go up. The argument that Japan need not worry about its debt because it can respond by levying taxes is “too academic”, says Yoshikawa Hiroshi, president of Rissho University. Raising consumption taxes is a political loser. Policymakers are also haunted by the spectre of external shocks that create new fiscal needs. Recently Yano Koji, a vice-minister of finance, caused a stir with a column comparing the country’s fiscal situation to the Titanic.Seeking fiscal spaceYet some reckon fiscal policy ought to be used more forcefully. Many now regret two ill-timed consumption-tax increases in 2014 and 2019. Mr Abe’s preferred candidate in the recentLDPleadership race called for postponing the government’s primary-balance target until BOJhits its inflation target. In late November Mr Kishida’s government announced a huge fiscal stimulus worth ¥55.7trn ($483bn).Getting inflation up has not proved easy. Under Mr Kuroda, theBOJexpanded quantitative easing, adopted inflation targeting, and purchased a wider variety of assets. That helped pull the country out of its mild deflation, but only barely. “We misunderstood the inflation issue,” says Mr Posen. “It turns out that secular stagnation is far more real and persistent than we thought.” Once inflation expectations are anchored around zero, raising them is hard. Moreover wages have not risen much, despite a tight labour market. Unions prefer stability of employment to wage rises, reckons Nakaso Hiroshi, a former deputy governor of the BOJ. Companies have gradually taken on more “non-regular” workers on part-time contracts; they account for 40% of the labour force, twice as much as in 1990. Perverse incentives may help depress their wages: many women limit their hours or incomes to secure a tax deduction for married couples earning below a threshold. Ageing, shrinking populations may also be weighing on demand and thus inflation. For Mr Shirakawa, that is a vindication of sorts. He argued at theBOJthat deflation was more a symptom of factors causing low growth, not the cause. In a new book, “Tumultuous Times”, Mr Shirakawa says the impact of demographic change on growth “is still under-appreciated”. headtopics.com Overall growth has remained sluggish, but growth per head has recently been comparable with others in theG7. Unemployment has been minimal, longevity has increased and inequality has stayed relatively low. “Maybe Western economists who were so critical of Japan circa 2000, myself included, should go to Tokyo and apologise to the emperor,” Paul Krugman, an economist, tweeted in 2020. “Not that they did great; but we did much worse.” Yet Japan could still do better. Public spending should be aimed more at improving long-term growth. Economists in Tokyo fret that the government has wasted its pandemic stimulus on handouts: a study by Hoshi Takeo of the University of Tokyo finds that fiscal support in 2020 was more likely to go to companies that were already struggling before covid-19. Boosting productivity could help to offset the impact of the shrinking population. Mr Yoshikawa reckons that innovation is key to growth, and that ageing creates new problems that entrepreneurs can solve. Generational shifts may help. While many still prefer stable sarariman(salaryman) jobs in big firms, some of today’s brightest graduates go into startups. “There is a burgeoning wave—they are a different species,” says Mr Niinami. But structural reforms are necessary too, particularly to the inflexible labour market. It should be easier for workers to move between firms and industries, and harder for firms to exploit non-regular workers. Yet pressure for reforms is lacking, partly due to resistance from vested interests, but also because life remains comfortable enough. “It’s not an acute disease, it’s chronic,” says Mr Nakaso. “You don’t really feel the pain, but it impacts your health in the long-term.” This could be treated. As Mr Posen puts it, “There are 10,000 yen notes lying on the ground waiting to be picked up.” Will Japan’s leaders grab them?

相対危険度

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%9B%B8%E5%AF%BE%E5%8D%B1%E9%99%BA%E5%BA%A6 

相対危険度（そうたいきけんど）とは疫学における指標の1つで、「相対リスク」とも呼ばれ、暴露群と非暴露群における疾病の頻度を比で表現したもの。そのまま比率として表すが、百分率で表す場合もある。相対危険度は暴露群の発生率を非暴露群の発生率で割ることにより求めることができ、暴露因子と疾病発生との関連の強さを示す指標となる。主にコホート研究で用いられる。

疾病と暴露の比較

	疾病あり	疾病なし	計
暴露あり	A	B	A+B
暴露なし	C	D	C+D
計	A+C	B+D	T

${\displaystyle R={\cfrac {\cfrac {A}{A+B}}{\cfrac {C}{C+D}}}}$

R:相対危険度

「相対危険度」が1（100％）であれば暴露群も非暴露群も発生率は等しいが、「相対危険度」が1（100％）より大きければ暴露群の方が非暴露群よりも発生率が高くなり、「相対危険度」が1（100％）よりも小さければ暴露の方が非暴露群よりも発生率が低くなる。

「相対危険度」が1を上回る場合は「過剰相対危険度（余剰リスク，相対リスク増加）」、「相対危険度」が1を下回る場合は「相対リスク減少」を求められる。

暴露群の発生率ではなく、集団全体の発生率を用いたリスクの比は、「人口相対危険度」となる。

Concept: Person Years - Calculating in a Cohort Study

 In cohort studies, the analysis of data usually involves estimation of rates of disease in the cohort during a defined period of observation. For example, the rate of newly diagnosed cases (incidence) of cancer in a cohort per 100,000 person years of observation time. The denominator of such a rate is measured in years of observation time per person (i.e. person years).

Traditionally, cohort refers to the part of the population born during a particular period and identified by period of birth so that its characteristics such as causes of death and those still alive can be ascertained as it enters successive time and age periods. The term cohort has since been broadened to describe any designated group of persons that are followed or traced over a period of time, as in cohort study (prospective study). Thus, cohort study is synonymous with follow-up , longitudinal , or prospective study .

1. Exact Method

Because administrative data typically contain full information for birthdate, date of event, and date of death, we can use exact dates to calculate person years. However, if the exact dates of birth, entry into and/or exit from the study are unknown, these must be approximated. In this example, the person would contribute 0.5 years

Example 1


Defining a cohort of people present in Manitoba on Jan 1, 1987 and followed up to Dec 31, 1999 (or until death or loss to follow-up ). Here are two different people in the cohort.

Person 1 is present for the entire study (i.e. from Jan 1, 1987 to Dec 31, 1999).








Total person years at risk = 37.501 - 24.504 = 12.997 years.



Person 2 is present on Jan 1, 1987 but follow-up ends on Jun 20, 1992 when the event of interest takes place.








Total person years at risk = 5.467

Note: the study start date can be constant (i.e.: Jan 1, 1987) or variable for each person (i.e.: date of diagnosis of diabetes). The study end date is usually variable for each person. It is usually defined as the earliest date of:


1. Date of death
   
2. Date of event (if death is not the event of interest)
   
3. Date of loss to follow-up
   
4. Date of end of study

How much does each person contribute to 5-year age groups?



Calculation of Person Years by Age Group

Person	Age Group	Age at Start	Age at End	Person Years
1	20-<25	24.504	25	0.496
1	25-<30	25	30	5.00
1	30-<35	30	35	5.00
1	35-<40	35	37.501	2.501
2	65-<70	66.503	70	3.497
2	70-<75	70	71.970	1.970

In the example, both people contribute person years to several age groups depending on their ages at the beginning and end of the study. All the intermediate age groups between age at start and age at end must be passed through in order to calculate the person years accurately. For each age group, age at the start and age at the end must be calculated.

2. Approximate Method

If the exact dates of birth, entry into and/or exit from the study are unknown, the missing information must be approximated. For example, if the only information we have for a person is their age at entry, and years of entry and exit, calculate the years s/he contributed according to the following:


• 0.5 year for entry year
  
• 0.5 year for exit year
  
• 1 year for each year between entry & exit years

Note : If a person enters and leaves a study during the same year, s/he has contributed .25 year.

http://mchp-appserv.cpe.umanitoba.ca/viewConcept.php?printer=Y&conceptID=1196

10,483 reports of death (0.0022%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine

 Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause. Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. More than 485 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through December 13, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 10,483 reports of death (0.0022%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. CDC and FDA clinicians review reports of death to VAERS including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html

コホート研究 (罹患率または死亡率を比較する方法)

https://jeaweb.jp/glossary/glossary006.html 

調査時点で、仮説として考えられる要因を持つ集団（曝露群）と持たない集団（非曝露群）を追跡し、両群の疾病の罹患率または死亡率を比較する方法である。また、どのような要因を持つ者が、どのような疾病に罹患しやすいかを究明し、かつ因果関係の推定を行うことを目的としている。

たとえば、大量喫煙者（曝露群）と非喫煙者（非曝露群）、各々10万人について10年間追跡調査を行い、肺がんと冠動脈性心疾患に関する死亡率を得たとする。そこで、疫学の要因分析で重要な指標である相対危険を算出することにより、肺がんが喫煙との関連が強いということが判明したり、公衆衛生対策で重要な指標である寄与危険を算出することにより、集団に対する禁煙の効果が最も期待されるのは、冠動脈性心疾患であることが推測されたりする。仮想の例を下に示す。

表1

国民・玉木代表が小池知事と会談 勉強会開催など連携深める意向 [2021年12月15日22時29分]

https://www.nikkansports.com/general/nikkan/news/202112150000904.html 

東京都の小池百合子知事（69）と国民民主党の玉木雄一郎代表（52）が15日、都庁で会談し、玉木氏は、小池氏が立ち上げた地域政党「都民ファーストの会」との「勉強会」開催など、連携を深めていくことを明かした。

「小池知事からは『日本を変えていきましょう』という声もいただいた」と説明。「勉強会は近々に設けたい。都議の先生方と問題意識や疑問点を共有しながら、国会の政策づくりにつなげていきたい」と相乗効果を狙う。

17年の衆院選では小池氏が結党した「希望の党」に、民進党だった玉木氏が合流して、今の国民民主の基礎となるなど、これまでも情報交換を重ねてきた。来夏の参院選での連携について玉木氏は「選挙の話はしていません」と述べたが「政策的な意見や情報交換をし、新しい立法にもつなげていきたい」。小池氏も「デジタル化や（コロナの）水際対策など意見が一致した」と語った。【鎌田直秀】

国民・玉木代表、都民ファ推薦候補を応援 参院選へ関係強化 2021/12/24 21:58

https://www.sankei.com/article/20211224-RC454JNQPFLA3AN4VLJVLRT3B4/

 

国民民主党の玉木雄一郎代表は２４日、東京都東久留米市長選で同党と地域政党「都民ファーストの会」が推薦する候補の応援演説を行った。来夏の参院選をにらみ、小池百合子都知事が特別顧問を務める都民ファと関係を強化する狙いがある。

市内での演説で玉木氏は、小池氏から直接応援の要請を受け、快諾したと強調。演説後、記者団に「市政、都政、国政で連携できるところは進めたい。特に新型コロナウイルス対策では力を合わせていく」と述べた。国民民主と都民ファは、１７日には合同勉強会も開いた。