The following is a continuation of the previous chapter.
Why does the business world insist on introducing immigration policy, and what is the original growth strategy?
▼ Nakano
The business world, including the Keidanren and the Doyukai (Japan Association of Corporate Executives), insists on introducing an immigration policy.
Still, the reason is simple: they want to lower labor costs.
In other words, they are only thinking of themselves.
In addition, among the arguments for introducing immigrants, there is a discourse that says, "It is not low-wage workers that we accept as immigrants. There are discourses such as "we accept highly skilled foreign engineers as immigrants," but such highly skilled foreign engineers are also needed in the country that sent the immigrants, so we feel sorry for the other country.
These are the logic of corporate outsourcing.
These are the logic of corporate outsourcing.
To reduce costs, they do not have their research facilities and do not train their personnel; instead, they obtain what they need from outside the company.
It is a good thing for the company in the short term because it lowers costs.
If I were the chairman of Sony, I would hire many foreign immigrants now.
I said, "Bring in immigrants to make money now.
I don't care if Sony becomes a mediocre company that can't develop technology in 10 years."
In a few years, I will retire.
Until then, I need to make a profit, raise the stock price, and present myself as a competent manager.
There is also a discourse that says, "Immigrants must be brought in for the long term," but what they are saying is exactly the opposite: immigrants will ruin the country in the long run.
The side that accepts immigrants will be harmed in the "long term" in that it will no longer be able to develop technology. In the long run, it uses immigrants, and when it gets older and can no longer use them, it brings in immigrants from outside again.
As they repeat such a process, domestic education, research, and development will cease, and companies will cease to have technology.
The dependence on immigrants is fine for a moment, but 20 years later, there will be no technology.
The developed countries will only be competing for talented immigrants.
As is typical of American companies, they profit for a moment, sell out while the stock price is high, live comfortably, and do not care what happens to the company after that.
If they were free to bring it in from outside, they would not invest it within the company, so domestic capital investment and employment would be lost in the short term.
It may be easier for the companies, but the "fallacy of synthesis" will only promote deflation in the Japanese economy.
Immigration policies have significant economic disadvantages as well as political and social disadvantages.
In such a case, politics should not accept the immigration policy, which is a short-term demand of companies. Still, they should reject it, saying, "What you are talking about is not what we are talking about in terms of economic growth.
If immigration is not allowed, companies must provide the necessary skills.
Countries that cannot attract cheap labor must develop technology and invest in equipment to cut costs and remain competitive, even if they employ workers with higher wages.
Therefore, if they cannot bring in immigrants, they will develop their technology and make their own capital investments.
It will lead to a virtuous cycle of increased domestic demand.
Of course, it was a bloody effort at the time, but if they persevered, the Japanese economy would improve.
Companies will train and educate the people of their own country to acquire long-term technological development capabilities.
Stabilize the exchange rate, end deflation, improve infrastructure, lower transportation costs, and make it easier to develop technology and train people in Japan.
It is the original government growth strategy.
The seeds of R&D must be planted now in order for Japan to innovate in the next 10 to 20 years.
Politics should not listen to companies' voices that say, "We don't want to invest in R&D because it will be recorded as an expense."
This article continues.
2024/7/5 in Okayama
