Opinion Un-safeguards By Scott T. Hards	フレームで見る  英文をプリントする  脚注をプリントする
セーフガードは日本の権益を守るか 輸入セーフガードは日本の生産物とその業者を 守るのが目的だが、果たしてそれは長い目で見て 日本のためになることだろうか。 競争するチャンスを与えないことによって 日本の産業をだめにしてしまうのではないだろうか。

Ages ago, people could learn skills that would last them a lifetime. A good shoemaker could spend all his days making shoes and never have to worry about changing jobs or learning new skills.

But times have changed. Now, technology has created a world where workers' skills can become worthless in a short period of time. For example, I spent a lot of time in high school studying a computer language called Fortran. Today, just two decades later, nobody is looking for Fortran programmers. I had to find another way to earn my living.

In the same way, the interna tionalization of the global economy has posed huge challenges for some people and industries. As goods from around the world flow freely over borders, people everywhere have seen their lives enriched immeasurably by being able to purchase the best available, regardless of where it was made.

But this is sometimes at the expense of domestic producers who may not be able to compete with foreign products. While watching someone's livelihood falter is never pleasant, the overall benefits to consumers and society far outweigh the harm that free trade can cause some. Unfortunately, many don't seem to share that view.

Onions, shiitake mushrooms, tatami reeds, towels, neckties, wakame, eels — Japanese producers of these items have either been selected for, or are appealing for protection in the form of import "safeguards." Cheap imports from China are booming, and they can't compete. Duties may be raised so that imports will cost the same as the domestic versions. The justification is that the growth in imports has been rapid, and that such measures are allowed under WTO rules.

As a small business owner/ manager, I'm rather shocked. Nobody is going to help me if a strong competitor to my business emerges! Every day, countless small businesses fail due to competition. If the same product or service is available for a better price, it's only natural that consumers will select the competitor's item.

Imagine the owner of a small shop complaining to the government because a larger, lower-priced store opened nearby. What would you think if the government ordered the larger store to raise its prices so the smaller store could survive?

Of course it's a ridiculous idea, but that's exactly what's happening here. The only difference is that the competition is international, not domestic. Why should these producers be offered protection simply because the competition is from overseas? And why should we consumers be forced to pay more?

Look at the products at the center of this controversy. They are all agricultural items, or extremely low-technology, manufactured goods. These are products that can be produced in nearly any country in the world. It's the 21st century: Japan's highly-skilled, highly-paid work force has better things to do than weave towels. Let dying industries die, and retain or relocate the workers into the areas where Japan truly excels.

History has proven that healthy competition creates strong economies. Healthy competition also produces winners and losers. But canceling the game so that nobody loses is not the answer. Coaching the losers — training them so they have a chance to pick themselves up and win the next game — is the only approach Japan can take if it hopes to triumph in the long term.

Shukan ST: May 11, 2001

(C) All rights reserved