放开移民政策能否拯救日本？

    估算某经济体潜在GDP水平的一种方法是，将两个商业周期的峰值用一条直线连起来……其背后的理念是，经济体在每个商业周期的巅峰时期，会向我们展示其最多能生产多少商品和服务……我们推测，安倍经济学的财政和货币过剩，使得日本的实际GDP短暂（在始于2013一季度的5个季度中）高于其潜在水平……随着安倍经济学的支出停止，日本GDP正在下降。

    人口减少意味着工人少了，消费者少了，总需求也减少了。与此同时，不断老龄化的人口，使得政府预算日趋紧张。这一切怎么可能不导致经济萎缩、物价下跌、政府债务上涨？正如温伯格所写：“日本需要增加人口，减少债务。”然而，除了已经废弃的增税计划，日本现行方案中没有哪项举措旨在解决人口和债务问题。

    当然，如果日本人口不足，全世界多的是人想移民到日本这样的发达国家。那么，日本为何不对这些人敞开大门？简言之，对任何移民，日本有根深蒂固的文化排斥。在美国，争论的焦点大多是围绕将合法永久移民的数量维持在每年67.5万人，还是让更多人移民美国。人口统计学家估计，到2050年，日本人口将减少1900万，而到2055年，日本工作人口与非工作人口的比例将降至1：1。尽管如此，日本并未放开永久移民政策。结果是，日本人口中，仅有1.63％的人在外国出生，该比例在世界各国中排名垫底。（美国人口中，有14.3％的人是移民）。

    近年来，日本决策者已经采取措施稍稍放宽移民限制。来自印尼、菲律宾和越南等特定国家的数千名医护人员，获准赴日工作并力求取得“永住”资格。但对上述人士的限制很严格：日本不承认他们此前的医疗训练，而且他们必须在三到四年内学习日语，否则将被遣返。此项目每次引进的人才数量，都未达到允许人数上限。

    金融危机后，日本对于外籍劳工的态度更加冷淡，尽管该国显然需要外籍劳工。同美国一样，日本有些人认为，允许外籍劳工进入日本，对日本劳动者不利。日本厚生劳动省（Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare）的Nobuyuki Yumi于2012年向亚洲新闻联盟（Asia News Network）表示：

    “我认为护理和医疗保健领域是日本创造就业的重要领域。如今，日本人，尤其是年轻一代的日本人就业困难……可以鼓励已经离职的护士重返工作岗位。”

    上述态度反映了日本更广泛的民意。据《日本时报》（Japan Times）称：

    “民意调查显示，日本民众越来越担心人口减少的影响。然而，当被问及该如何确保劳动力供给，在日本《读卖新闻》（Yomiuri）于4月开展的民意调查中，排在前两位的答案是：提高女性就业比例和鼓励更多老人就业。只有37％的受访者表示，应该接纳更多外籍劳工。只有10％的人表示，应该引进体力劳动者。说到底，非移民国家这条宗旨仍然受到日本民众的广泛支持。”

    在资本主义国家，失业率始终是个问题。即使在经济繁荣时期，人们还是嫌就业机会不够多。但宏观经济学家几乎一致认为，不断增长的人口是经济持续增长的必要条件，尤其是在发达国家，社保计划决定了必须要有足够多的年轻劳工来抚养老年人口。

    移民在美国目前是个有争议的问题，但相较于尚未认识到移民是解决国内诸多问题良方的日本，美国可以大松一口气：它对于移民的接受度要高多了。而对于其他发达国家来说，这应该可作为警示：文化偏狭的代价可能相当高。（财富中文网）

    译者：Hunter

    审校：李翔

    One way to estimate an economy’s potential level of GDP is to connect the peaks over two business cycles with a straight line … the thinking is that an economy shows us the maximum amounts of goods and services it can produce at the peak of each business cycle…. We hypothesize that the fiscal and monetary excesses of Abenomics briefly–for five quarters beginning in the first quarter of 2013–pushed actual GDP above its potential level…. With the end of Abenomics spending, GDP is now declining.

    A shrinking population translates to fewer workers, fewer consumers, and less overall demand, all while a growing elderly population puts strains on government budgets. How could this not lead to a shrinking economy, falling prices, and higher government debt? As Weinberg writes, “Japan needs more people and less debt.” Nothing in the current program, besides tax increases that have already been scrapped, seriously addressed either of these problems.

    Of course, if people are the problem, the world is teeming with immigrants who would love to move to a country with a developed economy like Japan. So why don’t the Japanese just let these folks in? Simply put, there is a deep cultural aversion to any immigration whatsoever. Here in the U.S., the debate is centered mostly around keeping legal permanent immigration at 675,000 people per year, or allowing more people to enter the country. Despite the fact that demographers estimate that Japan’s population will shrink by 19 million people by 2050 and the ratio of the working to nonworking population will fall to 1:1 by 2055, it doesn’t allow any permanent, legal immigration whatsoever. The result of this policy is that just 1.63% of the Japanese population is foreign-born, one of the lowest percentages in the world. (In the U.S., 14.3% of the population is made up of immigrants.).

    Japanese policy makers have made moves to relax immigration restrictions, at least slightly, in recent years, by allowing a few thousands healthcare workers from select countries, like Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam, to enter the country and work towards long-term residency status. But the restrictions placed on these workers are strict: Their previous healthcare training is not recognized in Japan and the workers must learn Japanese within three or four years or they are sent back home. Not once has this program brought in the maximum allowed number of workers.

    Following the financial crisis, Japan has only become less inclined to welcome foreign workers, despite the obvious need. Just as in the U.S., some Japanese people believe that allowing in immigrant workers is bad for those already in Japan. As Nobuyuki Yumi of Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare told the Asian News Network in 2012:

    “I consider the fields of nursing and health care to be important ones that generate jobs in Japan. Now the Japanese, especially the younger generation, are struggling to find jobs…. Former nurses who have quit can be encouraged to return to work instead.”

    And this attitude is a reflection of broader public opinion in Japan. According to the Japan Times:

    “Opinion polls show the Japanese public to be increasingly worried about the effects of the declining population. However, when asked what should be done to secure the labor supply, the top two answers in an April Yomiuri poll were to increase the rate of working women and encourage more elderly to work. Only 37 percent said more foreign workers should be accepted, and only 10 percent of those said manual workers should be brought in. The bottom line is that the no-immigration principle continues to be broadly supported by the Japanese public.”

    Unemployment is always an issue in capitalist countries. Even during boom times, we all wish there were more jobs. But macroeconomists are in near-unanimous agreement that a growing population is an essential ingredient for a growing economy, especially in developed countries where social insurance programs need for there to be enough young workers to take care of the old.

    Immigration is a contentious issue in the U.S., but Japan’s failure to see it as an obvious solution to its problems puts into sharp relief how much more accepting of immigrants the United States is compared to its developed peers. It should also serve as a warning to the rest of the developed world that cultural insularity can come at a very steep price.