Conference 7.286::digital

From:	DIZZY::COULTER "Dick Coulter MLO1-2/U2 dtn:223-6250  27-Feb-1990 1011"
To:	GEOFF
CC:	
Subj:	Lee Iacocca's reaction to the Japan book (Oct. 1989)

Prepared Remarks by L. A. Iacocca, Chairman of the Board,
Chrysler Corporation, to Magazine Publishers and Editors,
Naples, Florida, October 23, 1989.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Thank you Steve (Florio), and good mornint to all of you.

  Its an honor to be asked to kick-off this meeting.  I know all about the
church and state thing in your business, so all I can say is, I'm glad you
just asked me to keynote, not referee.  But it's always a pleasure to be
with you.

  Maybe I should say it's usually a pleasure.  The last time it wasn't much
fun.

  Maybe some of you remember.  It was 1980 in Palm Springs.  Chrysler had
just gotten the government to guarantee a few promissory notes so we could
stay in business.  We'd just lost $1.7 billion in one year, and we were a
little short of cash.

  The debate was still raging, of course.  Was it un-American to get the 
government to help save one of the largest companies in the country, or
would Chrysler's death be some kind of affirmation of the free enterprise
system at work?

  At about the same time, if you'll recall, the banks (who wouldn't carry
us for a pastrami sandwich on their own) were sending dollars to Latin
America by the boatload.  (Those were SMART loans, of course, while Chrysler's
was a BAILOUT.)

  And in the spirit of good old-fashioned American entrepreneurship, the
government deregulated the S&Ls and said, "Hey, you guys go do your own
thing.  And don't worry, we'll back you up all the way."

  Well, it's been almost 10 years, and I guess it's time for a progress
report.  I'll make it brief.

  The fact is, Chrysler never did take a dime of federal money.  The govern-
ment just guaranteed the loans.  In return, when we paid those notes off
seven years early, the federal treasury made almost $350 million PROFIT.

  Six-hundred thousand Americans kept their jobs.  And I guess I have to
this in -- American magazines got about $560 million in ad revenue over the
past decade from a company that would have gone under.

  What happened to all those SAFE loans to Latin America?  They're still on
the books -- about $70 billion worth --  with a lot of embarrassing asterisks
next to them.

  And how about those great bastions of free enterprise, the S&Ls?  A $166
billion blunder that will come right out of taxpayer's pockets. (That's you
and me.)

  What's the point?  Well, it's this. We began the decade of the '80s by
taking one risk that ran against some of the most deeply ingrained economic
ideals we hold in this country, and it was a huge success.  We did a couple
of other things that were safe and smart by everything we'd always held sacred,
and they were mistakes our kids will be paying for long after we're gone.

  We're about to enter a new decade, and I for one hope we're a little wiser.
I hope we're smart enough to see that some of the old ways don't work anymore.
I hope we've got the guts to break the mold, and take a few risks.

  The program says I'm supposed to talk about "Marketing in the Nineties --
How Will America Fare?"  I can answer that quickly:  America won't fare well
at all in the '90s if it doesn't learn something from the '80s.

  We started the '80s as the world's biggest CREDITOR nation, with over $100
billion in black ink.  We'll end the decade as the world's biggest DEBTOR,
with over half a trillion bucks owed to foreigners.

  We started with a national debt of under a trillion, and we'll triple it
before the decade is through.

  We saw our lead in manufacturing get blown away.  In 1980, America's share
of the U.S. color TV market was 60 percent.  Now, it's under 10 percent.  Have
you tried finding an American telephone, lately?  We dropped from 88 percent
to 25 percent.  In machine tools we went from 79 percent to 35 percent.

  We told ourselves "not to worry" because our service sector was strong and
that would save us if old Smokestack America disappeared.  Well, in 1980, two
of the three largest banks in the world were American.  Today, no American
bank is even in the top 20, but 15 Japanese banks are.  And in the second
quarter of this year we ran a trade deficit in services for the first time
in 30 years.

  If you run the trendline of the eighties through the nineties, thein I don't
think we'll want to see the 21st Century get here.  We'll be piling up more and
more debt as we get less and less competitive.

  Maybe some of you haven't been there, but I HAVE.  That's what happened to
Chrysler.  Fortunately, we had somebody to turn to.  Who does the United States
turn to?

  To the Japanese?  After all, they've got all the money these days.  If you 
want an answer, I can recommend a good book to you.

  It's entitled "The Japan That Can Say No."  It was written by Akio Morita,
head of Sony (he just bought Columbia Pictures out of his petty cash) and
Shintaro Ishihara, who is a big shot in the Liberal Democratic Party there
(he just came in third for Prime Minister).

  You know the one I mean . . . in Washington it's simply known these days
as "THE BOOK."

  It hasn't been published in English, and I think I know why.  Somebody 
sent me a bootleg translation.  The basic premis is that Japan has gained
the upper hand over the United STates economically and technologically,
and it's time for Japan to use that power.

  Now, Morita says a lot of things about American business and American
policies which happen to be true:  We don't have any kind of industrial
policy . . . no sensible energy policy . . . scandalous budget deficits
. . . more interest in shifting wealth around through stock deals than
CREATING more wealth through a healthy manufacturing sector.  I can't
argue with that.

  In fact, I don't mind working from a bootlet copy of his book because I
think he wrote a lot of it from bootleg copies of my old speaches!  But then
he gets off into an area he knows absolutely nothing about -- FAIRNESS.  He
says America is being "unfair" toward Japan by demanding equal access to the
Japanese market.

  Well, I can always take a little constuctive criticism, but I resent like
hell being lectured on FAIRNESS by a guy who got to be a multi-billionaire
in OUR market, wide open to him, while we were being systematically shut out
of his.

  The guy even has the audacity to say that American car companies won;t even
TRY to sell in Japan.  Well we try alright, but it's tough.  I send a Jeep to
Japan and the price goes up 70 to 90 percent . . . if I can even find somebody
to sell it for me.  Toyota, Nissan, and Honda have an agreement there: None of
their dealers will sell American cars.  Over here, my Chrysler dealers sell
foreign cars right next to mine.  And if I tried to stop them I'd have restraint
of trade subpeonas a foot high on my desk the next day.

  Japan is a rigged market.  If you don't believe that, you're living on another
planet.  And if Morita didn't know any more about electronics than he does about
FAIRNESS, he'd still be trying to figure out how to put together a crystal radio
set.

  Ishihara, his co-author, the politician, can get to you pretty fast, too.  He
says we Americans are racially prejudiced toward the Japanese, and that's where
the friction starts.  (This from a JAPANESE?  I wonder what the Korean minori-
ties and Vietnamese refugees in Japan would think of THAT?)

  He rather stupidly, I think, chooses to open some old wounds by saying we
dropped the atomic bomb on Japan but not Germany because we were racists.  Never
mind that we didn't even HAVE the bomb until after Germany surrendeded . . . 
and the man seems to forget about one little detail that lead up to that, it
was something called PEARL HARBOR.  But then again, one of the mentors he men-
tions in the book is Admiral Minour Genda, who helped plan the attack.

  Well, now that times have changed, Ishihara says Japan should sell computer
chips to the Russians to assert itself agains the U.S.  (I wonder if he owns
stock in Toshiba?)  He even brags that Soviet fighters are already equipped
with Japanese technology in ceramics and carbon fibers.

  I won't go on.  It'll ruin your day.

  "The Japan That Can Say No."  That's the name of the book.  But another
title would work better because I think it's what the authors really have in
mind:  "The AMERICA That CanNOT Say No."  That's what we could be looking at
in the '90s.

  I don't like to get started on Japan, by the way.  It seems I've got a bad
reputation here for speaking my mind.  But I was very glad to see the October
9th issue of NEWSWEEK.

  You see, it ran a list of 10 prominent American Japan bashers, and for once
I wasn't on the list!  If somebody in the room was responsible, thank you.

  The fact is, I respect and admire the Japanese in many ways.  They work hard,
they're smart, and they understand that from now on power in this world will
belong to the country with the biggest trade surplus and biggest bank account.

  Let's face it, they've taken over for us as the models for economic expansion
in the world.  Everybody wants to emulate them.  Even in my own industry, every-
body keeps saying we have to become more like Honda or Toyota or Nissan. (I keep
reminding them that we're AMERICANS, and that's still something to be proud of.)

  I'd like to see America emulate Japan in one way, though.  I'd like us to act
with the same kind of long-range view that they have.

  A graduate student at Harvard a few years ago did a study of the American and
Japanese cultures using the games we like to play.  Americans play poker, and
Japanese play "Goh."

  One game, poker, is tactical.  The other, "Goh," is strategic.

  In poker, you're dealt a hand, you study the power around the table, you bet
or fold.  It's over in a few minutes, and one guy reaches for the whole pot.

  But "Goh" takes all night.  The moves are subtle.  The object is to slowly
surround and defeat an opponent before he realizes what's going on.

  I'm a poker player, but I think we Americans can learn a little about
patience, and long-range planning, and strategy from the Japanese.

  Richard Darman got it right in his famous "Maypo" speach a couple of months
ago:  We want it . . . we want it all . . . and we want it now.

  Darman tended to slide by the biggest example of that we have, though.  The
huge national debt we're passing on to our kids.  Maybe he was a little reticent
because he helped to build it during the Reagan years.  When you talk about
short-term thinking and pure national selfishness, you have to start there.  And
we'll pay for it.

  Business executives are always held up as the prime examples of short-term 
thinking in this country, but we're way behind the people in Washington.

  That's because they're always running for office.  Eighty-seven percent of
Congress is never more than 24 months away from an election.  They're always
getting ready to face voters who have only one question: What have you done for
me lately?

  I can get mad a politicians who keep burying our kids under that mountain of
debt -- they're just giving us what we ask for by aren't willing to pay for.
But there are consequences.  They celbrated the 200th anniversary of the French
Revolution last summer.  Everybody remembers about "Liberty, Equality, and Fra-
turnity" but they forget that what really caused it was a budget deficit.

  The Wall Street gang are also short-termers -- almost by definition.  Brokers
and analysts make money betting right on what a company does every 90 days.
(Last week, it was every 90 seconds.)  Whether that company will be stronger
than ever or bankrupt in three years is almost irrelevant.

  I got an invitation the other day to a seminar entitled "De-leveraging The
Troubled Company."  I took it as a sign of the times.

  "Leverage" was something I learned about in the physics lab.  It allows you
to do more work with less effort.  It's not quite something for nothing, but
it's close.

  Then, years later, I started hearing the finance guys talking about "leverage"
with a certain gleam in their eyes that only happens when something for nothing
is at stake.  This time, however, they were talking about DEBT.

  So companies started "leveraging," which has a nicer ring to it than "being
in debt."  But now what goes around comes around.  Some of the same Wall Street
folks who made a bundle convincing companies to pile up those IOUs to increase
short-term  profits will make a bundle helping the same companies unload them.

  I don't know where we lost our way, but building and growing a business
doesn't get you in the hall of fame anymore.  All the heroes (at least the ones
not in jail yet) are the ones who BROKER businesses, not the people who BUILD
them.

  There was a great cartoon in the New Yorker a couple of months ago -- a 
CLASSIC (I thought).  It showed the entrance to the company headquarters
building with two statues out in front.

  One was 20 feet tall, and on the base it said "Our Beloved Founder."  The
one next to it was twice as tall -- 40 feet -- and it said "He offered $69
a share."

  That just about tells the whole story, doesn't it?

  Another example of short-term thinking: We held a management meeting at
Chrysler in July and word leaded out that we were considering a "RESTRUCTUR-
ING."

  Well, a word like that is like blood in the water these days.  Wall Street
figured we must be going to sell something off and a big wad of dough would
go into immediate earnings.

  So, our stock shot up almost 10 percent in one day -- just on a RUMOR.  But
after the meeting was over and it was clear that we were NOT going to tear the
company apart -- that we were ONLY going to reduced our cost structure a billion
dollars (the old-fashioned way) -- it wasn't exciting enough.  So the stock
DROPPED 10 percent the next day!

  It's crazy, but the whole contry seems to be in a short-term feeding frenzy
-- make a quick buck and get out, look out for yourself, live for today.  And
the hell with the future!

  We really are a strange people, aren't we?  We load up on oat bran in the
morning so we'll live forever, and then act all day long like there IS NO 
TOMORROW.

  Well, I'm not telling you things you don't know.  And I think the consequences
are pretty clear, too.  I think it's time to apply the old "Noah Principle." 
You know, nobody gets any prizes for predicting rain, just for building arks.
We'd better start hammering together an ark.

  I've got a few planks to consider.  Starting with education.  Mrs. Bush will
be here later this morning.  When you hear her you'll know why her husband made
all those big campaign promises about becomming the "Education President."  He
had an ace up his sleeve all along -- HER!

  America isn't going to fare very well in marketing, or manufacturing, or much
of anything else in the '90s with the highest functional illiteracy rate in the
industrialized world and high school graduates who can barely read their own
diplomas.  (I couldn't read mine either, but it was in Latin.  Theirs are in
English.)

  You may not know this, but we're putting about 70 percent of our Chrysler
brand advertising budget in print media.  That's the  highest in the auto
industry.  But what worries me is that one out of four Americans can't read
the damn ads!

  With a 20-25 percent functonal illiteracy rate (depending on whose numbers
you use), they'll be prize targets for television and radio.  But that's a
minor consideration compared to the social and political consequences of a new
generations that is less well educated, less well off, and less capable of
leading America in the next century.

  One obvious thing we can do is keep kids in school long enough to give them
the skills they'll need.  The biggest physical investment a community makes is
in its school buildings.  Why are they closed 180 days a year?  Why are they
closed all summer?  The kids aren't home planting crops anymore.

  Those kids are going to be competing against Japanese kids who go to schoold
almost year round, including Saturday mornings . . . kids who know as much when
they leave high school as our college graduates.  Who do you think is going to
win that competition, especially in the 21st Century when brainpower will count
for everything and muscles will count for nothing, even on a factory floor?

  Today our students lay on the beach or shoot baskets all summer, and then
spend the first month or two in the fall reviewing all the material they forgot
since spring.

  And teachers complain about pay.  They should get paid more.  So put them to 
work all year and pay them more.  Teaching is the most important profession of
all.  Why do we make it a part-time job?

  Would people be willing to pay for this?  I think so.  One reason millage
issues fail is that the public has been throwing money at education for years
and seen no restructuring to make the schools more efficient.  We already pay
more per student -- way more -- than Japan or Europe, and the quality of the
product we turn out is dead last year after year.

  I'd go broke running my plants at half capacity.  And if I want the consumer
to give me more money, the first thing I have to do is give him better quality.
I can't go to the market and say, "look, my cars are getting worse every year
but if you'll just pay more money for this year's model I promise they'll get
better in the future."

  I don't think it's a lot different when it comes to education.  People aren't
getting their money's worth, and they know it, so why the hell throw good money
after bad when they see no fundamental changes taking place in education and the
test scores keep going down?

  A little consumer marketing would do wonders for our whole education system,
but it has to start with better use of facilities and personnel to turn out a
better product.

  Now, once we get our kids started on the road toward being more competitive,
how about US?  What do we do about all this short-term thinking in Washington,
on Wall Street, and in the executive suite?

  People are people.  They always do whatever is in their own best interest.
So you have to change the reward system.

  The President wants to cut the capital gains tax.  Congress should go along.
But why not keep going?

  How about a 40 percent tax on assests held less than 90 days, 28 percent up
to two years, 15 percent up to five years, and after that the tax rate goes to
zero?  (Including, by the way, a modest tax on the huge pension funds which
don't pay ANY tax today.)  Do you think that might make investors take a longer
view?  Do you think more companies would be building research and development
centers if they didn't pay a penalty in their stock price for investing in such
lon-term assets?

  Take up the slack in revenue with a consuption tax, starting with gasoline.
In fact, start moving our whole tax base more toward consumption.  Tap into the
underground economy for a change.

  We're upside down in the world by penalizing savings and investment and en-
couraging borrowing and consumption.

  And help stop all this takeover nonsense by requireing a stock to be held for
six months before its voting rights can be exercised, then knock off interest
deductions for debt that comes with a hostile takeover.  We need American busi-
ness people to spend full-time building stronger companies for the long term,
not sitting around wondering about who's about to pounce on them or what they
can get for this place today.
 
  Now, I'm just touching the tip of the iceberg, of course.  I'm not even going
to get into trade policy, or I'd sure as hell make Newsweek's NEXT basher's
list.

  But let's not forget one thing.  Let's not forget that we need all these 
education, and business and political reforms because of the one very big
challenge we face in the 1990s.  The challenge of how to compete in a world
we no longer dominate.

  You see, we're going to hear a lot about "The End of the American Century."
I don't think any of us are happy about it, but the American Century is just
about over.  And it could come as a shock.

  The leadership of this country is about to fall on a generation that can 
barely remeber the great triumphs . . . the only generation which has seen
America defeated and embarrassed all of their adult lives.

  Think about it!  The last great American victory came 20 years ago last
summer when an American became the first man to walk on the moon.  Think 
about what's happened since.

  America lost its first war . . . We had Watergate, which shattered a lot
of our confidence in government . . . . Then the hostage crisis in Iran (we've
never in our history looked so puny).

  Ther was Three Mile Island . . . and the Challenger explosion, which put
into question our technological might . . . Then one fanatic in a truck killed
241 Marines in Labanon and forced every other Marine to evacuate the country .
. . and an airliner was ripped to pieces over Scotland killing everybody,
including friend of mine's son.

  And then maybe the ultimate act of middle-finger-to-you-America -- an
American officer hanged like a dog . . . on VIDEOTAPE yet, so we'd all get
to watch him twisting slowly on the six o'clock news.

  Those are some of the images of America the new generation of leaders have
had.  Not the images that people my age had of an America mananimous in victory
. . . rebuilding the world . . . protecting it . . . inspiring it . . . and
LEADING it.

  I wonder with all those images in their heads if they'll understand and re-
cognize what we've ACCOMPLISHED.  Will they realize that the transformation 
taking place in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe is largely the result of 
our military resolve and our democratic example over 45 years?  Will they
understand that we lost a hot war and won the cold war?  Will they appreciate
that countries who are eating our lunch in international trade learned most of
what they know from us?

  All of this is going to make it harder to cope with not being number one.
That's the challenge.  And judging by the decade just ending, we're doing a
lousy job of getting ready.

  Let's face it, in many ways (not all), we've begun acting like a soft,
spoiled rich kid . . . basking indolently out by the pool . . . squandering
the family fortune . . . charging up to the limit before the bank finds out
that the inheritance is gone and there are no visible means of support.

  I hope the Morita/Ishihara book somehow gets published in English -- the
unabridged version.  It'll tell America what our competitors think of us.  And
what they're going to do to us.

  I think we should start the '90s with a national reality check.  We're in a
deadly serious economic competition today, and we may be competing against 
peopl who have become tougher, smarter, and richer that we are.

  Political peace seems to be breaking out, and thank God for that.  But eco-
nomic peace is nowhere on the horizon.  And we're up against people who may in
other settings be our friends, but who will not give us any mercy or any respect
when we step on that battlefield called business.

  I'd like to see America hold up a giant mirror to itself.  Because I think
once we accept who we are, and where we are, and what we're up against, we'll
pull together like we always have in the past and make some of the hard choises
we need to make to keep us from being has-beens by the end of our own century.

  I hope that in many ways, the '90s will be for America what the '80s have been
for Chrysler.  We'll start in the hole . . . but if we understand what it takes
to compete . . . make some fundamental changes in how we do business . . . im-
prove our product . . . and finish the decade smarter, tougher, and with a lot
more self-respect than we entered it, we'll get back on track.

  I sure hope so, anyway.  I hope we came to understand that the end of the 
American Century doesn't have to mean the end of the American dream.

    

	I just read the first half of Iacocca's speech, and I would
    read more if I didn't have to get home.

	I especially like the Japanese Goh versus American Poker analogy.
    I have played both and agree that Goh is more of a long-range strategic
    game, where Poker is more short-term tactical game.

	I wonder who invented Chess?  This is obviously another example
    of a long-term strategic game (big in Russia, but only mildly popular
    here).

				   -davo

    Chess was invented by the Chinese, I believe, in the dawn of western
    civilisation.

    re .3,                                             
    
    So was Goh.  (On the other hand, the modern day Chinese chess is
    somewhat different from the one we are familiar with).
    
    Eugene

My Concise Columbia Encyclopedia states that chess was probably invented in 
India.

And here I thought it was left behind by the ancient astronauts.

    Does DEC take the long term view so highly regarded by Lee Iacocca
    or are we too short term oriented? I think it is a mix with
    our substantial yearly R & D investment contrasted against the quarterly
    sales/certs mentality that is the norm at DEC.
    
    ed

Re: < Note 1038.1 by ATLACT::GIBSON_D >
>Shintaro Ishihara, who is a big shot in the Liberal Democratic Party there
>(he just came in third for Prime Minister).

  A tricky phrase.  There were only three candidates at the last election
  for the president of LDP.  And he polled the least.  I don't believe that
  he is in the third position for Prime Minister.

  dolby

    Yeah, I had thought this guy was on the fringe in Japan.  We in America
    all too often see Japan as monolithic in viewpoint.  Turn the situation
    around - suppose some of our more extreme politicians (either left or
    right) were thought of in Japan as vocalizing what all we Americans
    *really* thought!
    
    John                                                   

    
	In reading this notes conference, it has come to my mind that
it might be worth making my comments about the book, with taking a risk
of my limited command of English.

	When reading the book written in Japanese, I realized that Ishihara's 
part looks very much like dictation, in other word, reflects a typical Japanese
conversation style; lacks of logical flow (with words, that is), jumps into 
conclusions without showing its grounds, and so on.. you name it.   Even I 
sometimes had trouble understanding what he was driving at.   The conversation 
style in communication comes from the culture and works fine in Japanese.   
Written articles in such context is not appropriate for translation into 
another language.

	Think a bit about tranlastion process.  
	Below may be oversimplified, but just for the sake of explanation.

	1. [A's idea in his brain]
		    |
		    V
	2. [words comming out of A]
		    |
		    V
	3. [translator's understanding in his brain ]
		    |
		    V
	4. [written translation]
		    |
		    V
	5. [reader's understanding]


	Each process has to carry some change to the previous context, because
no one can copy his/her thought exactly to anyone else.  Remember that you 
compare notes with others to come to mutual understandings on a single topic.

	In typical Japanese conversation style, the distance from step 1 to 2
is very far (compare to Westerners views).   I'm courious about the translators
who tranlated the book into English; how could they fill in the gaps without
contacting with the author.    Even worse, the better translation in technical, 
the more gaps it creates, because readers may not even doubt the accuracy.

	Don't get me wrong, I'm NOT saying I'm on Ishihara's side.  I just
thought it might be worth mentioning the differences and problems you might
encounter when reading the tranlated articles.   I haven't read it and don't
want to read it.   Reportedly they are short article.   The original book has 
160 pages.


_Tak
 
Ps. Morita's part carries good logical flows that is, I believe, also 
understandable by non-Japanese; whether you agree or disagree with the content
is just another story though.  He is a good command of English and also writes 
books in English.   He knows that.

    I have grabbed the "unofficial" translation of "the book" off usenet.
    I assume it has been widely distributed, but would folks like to see
    it posted here? It is 3 long sections...
    

I'd recommend not posting the book in this -- or any -- notesfile: it took
me several evenings to read and runs almost 50 pages of pretty dense text.

You can copy it from MAY14::PUBLIC:JAPAN.TXT (unformatted text) or
JAPAN.PS (formatted for an LPS40).

Having been a translator in a previous life, I wonder whether the
anonymous translators might have slanted the English to make some political
point of their own (such as "Japan is out to get the US").  One can always
hope that a bilingual Japanese/English person might review the translation.

Much of what Morita (head of Sony) said was very familiar, and not unlike
what one might read in "The Macintosh Way" (Guy Kawaski), Lester Therow
(spelling is probably wrong: he's the Sloan School dean), or any of a million
memos by Ken Olsen.  Ishihara, on the other hand, wrote in a very different,
and much more confrontational style: I can certainly understand why it
wasn't intended for an international audience.

It's a very interesting book, and well worth spending a few evenings with.

Martin.

  In JIT081::JPNCLT conference, I pointed out the narrativeness of the text
  in question.  The author of .9 is a constant contributor to the conference,
  but I've never seen his opinion there.  He often introduces Japanese things
  to the world readers, explains Japanese culture, teaches brief Japanese
  expressions, talks about the culture gaps between the U.S. and Japan, and
  so on.  But he NEVER express his own views on any political issues (if
  there exists America's racial prejudice at the base of Japan Bashing, for
  example).  I don't mean to blame him personally, but I think this type of
  personality, which is pretty common to the Japanese, disgusting.

  My comment on the book is in JPNCLT 171.13.

  dolby, a Japanese

    
       <<< Note 1038.11 by BOLT::MINOW "Gregor Samsa, please wake up" >>
    
    >>You can copy it from MAY14::PUBLIC:JAPAN.TXT (unformatted text) or
JAPAN.PS (formatted for an LPS40).                               
    
    I tried but got the answer: remote node is unknown.
    
    ???
    Bo

>    I tried but got the answer: remote node is unknown.

  Try 26054""::PUBLIC:JAPAN.*
  [ MAY14 = 25.454, 25*1024+454 = 26054 ]

  dolby

    
    .14
    
    Thanks Dolby, I've fixed it.
    Bo

re: .12
    
>	   But he NEVER express his own views on any political issues (if
>  there exists America's racial prejudice at the base of Japan Bashing, for
>  example).  

	You've already figured it out.   It's just the matters of principle in 
using notes files to not discuss any politics, racial prejudice and the like in 
other countries as well as one's own country when they are considered as 
sensitive topics.   

	The reason is simple and part of common sense; we all work for Digital.
I like the phrase very much and tend to read it as:

		 We all "in the WORLD" work for Digital.

Public notes conferences are not the same place as "real" public, PERIOD.
No more words.


> 	      I don't mean to blame him personally, but I think this type of
>  personality, which is pretty common to the Japanese, disgusting.

	DON'T jump, please.   

	If you have any further, talk off line and not here in this notes.

Ps. It was only two weeks back when I bought the book. (Almost the same time
    I found this notes file. )    It took me some time to finish reading the 
    book twice.     Who on earth could say anything about a book before 
    reading it.   

Re: < Note 1038.16 by TKTV20::NEMOTO "Nothing ever stays the same.." >
>	You've already figured it out.

  phew.  Why on earth do you think I've already figured it out?
  You are very Japanesque, like Ishihara's sentences.

  dolby

re: .16:
    Who on earth could say anything about a book before 
    reading it.   

Any of us, of course :-)  This does not mean that we say anything intelligent,
however.

There are several things in the book worth considering:

-- Morita's discussion of process engineering and quality.  (Especially
   interesting after reading Guy Kawasaki's book on the Apple engineering
   and marketing style, The Macintosh Way.)

-- Morita's comment on how to deal with an unsuccessfull employee (he
   retrains or moves the employee around; 4 of 5 times the employee is
   still deadwood, but the fifth time pays back for the other four).

Ishihara's remarks seem more "Soapbox" polemicism, and perhaps much more
directed to a xenophobic domestic audience.  It would be interesting to
know how Ishihara is regarded in Japanese politics.  I.e. is he a "flamer"
like some of our right-wing back-benchers, or a respected statesman?

I suspect that the book contains a number of unspoken messages that would
not be noticed by a person unfamiliar with the subtelites of Japanese
politics.

I also wonder how accurate the translation is (and what axes the unidentified
translators have to grind).

Martin.

Re: < Note 1038.18 by BOLT::MINOW "Gregor Samsa, please wake up" >
>Ishihara's remarks seem more "Soapbox" polemicism, and perhaps much more
>directed to a xenophobic domestic audience.  It would be interesting to
>know how Ishihara is regarded in Japanese politics.  I.e. is he a "flamer"
>like some of our right-wing back-benchers, or a respected statesman?

  You can position him a right-wing hawk.  He has never been a mainstreamer
  in LDP, which is the ruling party in Japan since 1955(?).  He win the
  respect of some nationalists and popularity of not-so-political people,
  because he is outspoken, which is uncommon to Japanese politicians.  I
  think he has been acted as a "trickster" in the Japanese society.

>I suspect that the book contains a number of unspoken messages that would
>not be noticed by a person unfamiliar with the subtelites of Japanese
>politics.

  Both Morita and Ishihara speak straight not as the average Japanese.  You
  can take their message as is.

>I also wonder how accurate the translation is (and what axes the unidentified
>translators have to grind).

  I have no idea if the translator(s) is biased politically, but I doubt
  the tranlator's skill technically.  I'm sorry I don't have enough abiltity
  to correct the translation, however.

  Check JIT081::JPNCLT 171.* for more.

  dolby

    There seems to be a lot of attention to BASHING Japan. I'm not sure,
    but it seems to me we are trying to blame Japan for American problems.
    What does it take to be in leadership position? It takes effort and
    concentration to the achieve goals. It takes laziness to blame others.
    
    .02 cents worth...

I found Mr Iacocca's comments to be _far_ more critical of the USA than of 
Japan; I also found them to be disturbing:

-- Going in 10 years from the largest creditor nation to the largest debtor 
nation;

-- The statistics he quotes for how fast our manufacturing base has 
disappeared;

-- The loss of our strong service sector positions.

He concedes many of Mr Morita's points: "... We don't have any kind of
industrial policy . . . no sensible energy policy . . .scandalous budget
deficits . . .more interest in shifting wealth around through stock deals than
CREATING more wealth through a healthy manufacturing sector ...." 

He rails against Wall St, financial leveraging, the short term thinking in 
Washington, etc. He says "... Richard Darman got it right ... We want it . . .
we want it all . . . and we want it now ...." 

His proposals to (1) extend the school year (with increased teacher's
salaries); (2)) encourage long term investments by making the capital gains
tax a strong inverse function of holding period; (3) imposing a consumption
tax, starting with gasoline ... they're stiff medicine for the USA. 

He calls for a national reality check: "... I'd like to see America hold up a 
giant mirror to itself...."

That's USA bashing (and all of it well taken - we've got to fix some things).

/George

Just read "Japan Can Say No".  I read a few paragraphs by Ishihara, and
decided to skip those and just read the parts by Morita since Ishihara
doesn't really say anything informative (By the way, what's such a big deal
about 1 meg memory chips?)  Morita's view, on the other hand, is typical of
those who learned a little about the western/American culture(s) and think
they understand it thoroughly when they essentially know very little about it.
True, Morita has many valid points about the problems in U.S. industry, but
what he doesn't understand is that many of these problems are caused by the
deeply rooted American values that are also responsible for many positive
aspects of the American society and sometimes it is difficult if not impossible
to correct the problem without destroying such positive aspects at the same
time.  One particular example is his misunderstanding about what the
Americans mean by human rights.  As a matter of fact, his idea of human
rights contains the concept of the workers' right to be life time employment.
This concept of human right may be suitable to the paternalistic
Japanese culture, but is obviously alien to the Americans who grow up
in an individualistic society and are expect to accept the responsibility
of taking care of his or her own welfare.

I have never been in Japan, so I will be careful about what I say with
respect to that country and its culture.  However, it is my impression
that Japan has essentially one ethnic group (the Japanese, of course), 
and has a highly disciplined population.  Japanese people by and large 
are expected to conform to the social order (something like the nail sticking
out must be hammered in).  With such a highly conformed group, no wonder
they are the world's best organizer and the most efficient producer.
Moreover, with such a tightly knitted society, a paternalistic system is
not only the most efficient but also the only stable social structure that 
can preserve and perpetuate the very same group mentality.  

On the other hand, the situation in U.S. is very different.  America is
a multi-culture and multi-ethnic society.  Hence, any successful institution, 
be it a business or the rotory club, must respect its members' individuality 
and keep its intrusion to their private life to the minimum.  The advantage 
of such structure is that it is able to absorb people of diverse background.  
At the risk of sounding immodest, I will demonstrate such advantage with an 
example of my own experience.  I came to the U.S. about 10 years ago (by the 
way, I don't claim I fully understand the western culture.  It seems to me the 
more I learn, the more I find out how little I know) with a culture 
background as different from that of the European culture as night from day, 
but I am able to succeed in the U.S.  I consider myself a talented scientist
and engineer, and also well rounded in literature and music.  I am highly 
productive and versatile in many different fields.  On the other hand,
I have a habit of working odd hours (sometimes 11:00am to 8:00pm and sometimes
during weekends, like today).  In Digital and especially in my group,
this is not even an issue as long as I am productive and get the job done.
I also like to walk around the building when I solve technical problems.
Some how, I doubt the Japanese system will be able to incorporate people
like myself.  For one thing, I doubt I will be highly productive in the office
area described in note 1037.25.  In this sense, I don't think the U.S.
has much to worry about.  Every year, tens of thousands of talented people
from all over the world arrive in the U.S. to get advanced degrees, and 
most of them stay to become productive members of the society.  In the 
long run, how can the Japanese, which is essentially one ethinic group and
whose work force is essentially of one sex, compete with that?  

This is not to say that America does not have any fundamental problem.
The biggest problem I see is that the Americans have become less optimistic
about the future and the gradual loss of self-confidence.  Some historians
attribute the decline of the Chinese civilization to the rebuilding of 
the great wall and the closing of its seaports in the Min dynasty.  Later
Adam Smith said to the effect that closing a society is tantamount to 
suicide.  Today, the American society is far from being closed, but it is
becoming less sure of itself and certain elements isolationism is popping up
again.  I certainly hope to see a reversal of such trend.

                * * *

Iacocca's response to the book is in the same caliber of Ishihara's rhetoric.
He bashes the Japanese as hard as Ishihara does to the U.S.  What is Iacocca
trying to accomplish?  Is he trying to sell cars in Japan?  His hot rhetoric
certainly doesn't help there.  

This finally comes to the central point of dispute--The trade deficit.
There I must say regrettably that it is almost exclusively an American 
problem.  The reason is simple:  With unemployment rate (5.2%) running 
around the natural rate (which most economists agree is between 5 to 6%),
what is there for the U.S. to export even if the Japanese market is complete
open?  The only way to improve the situation is to increase investment, 
thus, increase the productivity of the American workforce.  This means
either to cut the federal deficit or increase the saving's rate.  The only
thing the government can do effectively is cutting the deficit.  Hence,
unlike Morita who gives about fifty recommendations to the Americans, I will
give one.  Cut the budget deficit!

Eugene

    It seems to me that Morita does a fair amount of Japan faulting in his
    sections of the book.  He seems pretty fair overall.  The other
    sections seem to be very reactionary and poorly founded.

    As pointed out, Iacocca does a lot of US faulting in the second half of
    his talk.  It seems to me that Morita and Iacocca agree on many points.

    Iacocca seems to be very unfair about selling his cars in Japan,
    however.  The cars they sell over there (based on my walking through
    the dealer near Ginza in Tokyo) are the same big models they sell in
    the USA, including left side drive.  If Iacocca was the least bit
    serious about TRYING to sell cars in Japan it would seem that he would
    make the cars more suitable for the customers.  How many Japanese cars
    would we be buying if they came with right side drive?  Certainly, less
    than 1% of the number we buy now.

    The reason that US dealers sell Japanese cars along with US cars is
    because the customers have forced them to do so.  The US is very much
    consumer oriented while Japan is more producer oriented.

    As Morita says, friction comes from close contact.  We have little to
    gain my declaring war on them.  The two countries need one another. It
    seems very clear to me that we have much to learn from the Japanese and
    they from us.  We have taught them how to establish and maintain high
    quality and we are now learning the same thing in return from them.  We
    can teach them to extend quality to include the quality of life as
    well.  The US still has a huge lead in that area.  However, we are
    blowing that lead by doing all the stupid things that Iacocca describes
    in the second half of his talk.

    By the way, based on my experience in Japan, weird work habits are
    accepted just fine.  Of course, working until 10 or 11 at night isn't
    weird.  Coming in late seems acceptable based on my few weeks of
    experience.  All I know is that I have a lot to learn about the
    Japanese but what I have learned has made me respect them.

    Have fun,
    don

Perhaps, we should know each other's more, espacially about daily life of
the two countries including cultural aspects.   

Visiting/living in other's country may be a good way to help understand the 
people and think in reverse about one's own country.   I visited the US many 
times, a short stay each though.   I needed several visits before my culture 
shock wore off.  After that, I begun to look at Japan, the Japanese people, 
and also myself from different viewpoints.  That was good for me.  Thanks for 
the company.   

Since not all the people have oppotunities to visit/live in other's country,
Amount of information on the other's country becomes important.  However, I saw
in mass media in the US only a few information about Japan.   It seems to me 
that there is more information available in Japanese mass media about the US.   
And yet, unfortunately, most of the information is focused on political and/or 
economic news.   Not on our daily life.  The lack of this kind of information 
merely help to heat conflict when the magnitude of the problem(s) becomes 
increase, since there might be no room to respect others or to consider others.
Tend to follow what is said by mass media and such.

The lack of information on daily life may exist in not only between the US and
Japan but also everywhere.    Hence, only the people who have a good attitude 
toward other country(ies) try to aquire such information not only from mass 
media but also from other source at their own effort.

Sorry for the rambling thoughts..
_Tak

    re:.22  You make some excellent points.  Your quite right about almost
    everything.  I don't think Iaacoca did a lot of Japanesse Bashing.  He
    would like to sell cars in Japan and he has products that they would
    like to have - if they could afford them.  Cutting our deficit is
    very important.  But, what Japan has right now is a great deal of cash
    and with very little resources.  If we don't spend money there, they
    will have little else.
                                            D.A.M.

    I rarely respond in here, but this discussion warrants it.  Having
    lived and worked in a European country and being born/raised in NYC,
    I have been very fortunate in that I've been exposed to the USA from
    many non-USA perspectives.

    Lee Iacocca is a fraud!  The man wouldn't know quality if it hit him
    over the head.  I was disgusted by him when he got Nixon to remove the
    pressure over rear *shoulder* strap belts in 1973 ("they're really
    unnecessary, Dick, it's those damned liberals again").  Then I was
    nauseated when he had Chrysler introduce those minivans, pushing 
    them on the good 'ol USA *family*, the FAMILY, for God's sake, with
    their high centers of gravity (read: rollover) and paralyzing rear lap 
    belt (enjoy,kiddies).  Then we find out, thanks to the Ralph Nader-types,
    that they didn't conform to crash-standards for passenger cars.  Not until 
    the government rammed those standards down their throats did they change 
    their design!  He's a profit-motivated whore!  And did you know the 
    roll-over rate on a Ford Bronco was 13 per/100000 vehicles, as opposed 
    to the 6/100000 for the Suzuki Samurai?  Did USA's Consumer Reports go 
    after Ford with such fervor?  Better not get me going about GM...
    
    Regarding the comments about US cars in Japan, we don't know s**t
    in this country about what the Japanese car consumer wants!!  Why
    on earth should they buy a damned Chrysler Imperial when there's 
    enough parking for a Suzuki Swift?  The US automotive industry 
    deserves all that has happened to it.  Roger Smith insists he
    understands what the consumer wants better than the consumer!  He
    and Lee can rot in Detroit as far as I'm concerned!  Throw in Henry III
    while you're at it.
    
    The Japanese would never have succeeded in this country if they 
    didn't take the time and effort to learn about the consumer and
    the culture!  *AND* THE LANGUAGE!  Most Americans cringe at the thought
    of knowing another language.  "Speak English, God Damn It, You're In
    America Now!"  This country is in for some hard times.
    
    From the perspective of an automobile consumer whose concern is
    that our technology doesn't outpace our ability to maintain it,
    my only beef with the Japanese automotive industry is their lack
    of maintainability and repairability.  Once it's broke, throw
    it away - it's not designed to be repaired.  Thank God their 
    MTBF is high enough to minimize the negative impact of THAT one!
    On an ever-growing environmentally-conscious planet, their thinking 
    on maintainability has to improve.  (I know, the Germans use virgin 
    steel but the Japanese use recycled steel 8^)).
    
                                 OK, flame off........ 8^)
    
                                                .steve.

    re .27 by BMW320::BERNSTEIN
    
    So Iacocca has made some mistakes and pushed his business interests. 
    That doesn't make his comments invalid.  Morita and Ishihara were 
    pushing business and nationalistic issues as well, that didn't 
    invalidate their many excellent observations about the USA.  I also
    find your attacks on CR ill-advised.  CR found in its own tests the
    tendency for the Susuki to overturn and reported it.  Generally CR
    recommends Japanese cars over US cars, for many of the reasons you
    pointed out.  If you think Iacocca's comments and suggestions are
    bogus, let's hear you attack them instead of the man.  And, I'm sure
    we're all aware that some of his comments are motivated by business
    issues -- as they should be.
    comments

    From the Atlanta Journal & Constitution --
    
    In a survey of 1,800 business leaders in 34 countries:
    - 52% said Japan was the most "unfair player" in international markets.
    - 8.86% said South Korea.
    - 8% said USA.
    - 31.14% were others less than 8%.
    
    The survey was conducted by the International Institute for Management
    Development in Lausanne, Switzerland, and the World Economic Forum.
    
    Rueter, reporting the survey, did not define "unfair," but most
    analysts view import barriers as the worst offender.

re .   <<< Note 1038.27 by BMW320::BERNSTEIN "Have you reached Six Sigma yet?" >>>
           -< The US automotive industry is not the US at its best >-

Does anyone else find .27 distatesful?  There  is  an incredible amount of poor
Design,  Manufactuing  and  Customer (dis)Service going on in Detroit,  however
personal  attacks on the integrity and intentions of Lee Iacocca  are  in  poor
taste.

Beyond  that,  some observations, and I DO NOT ANY LONGER support the  American
Automobile Industry.

>    Lee Iacocca is a fraud!  The man wouldn't know quality if it hit him
>    over the head.  I was disgusted by him when he got Nixon to remove the

Many owners of the  original  Mustang  (design  team  headed  by Iacocca) would
disagree with you.  As to the "fraud", he is often the victim.  How many people
STILL believe that Chrysler was bailed out  by  the  US Government loaning them
money?  The government only GUARANTEED the loan  which  was  paid back ahead of
scheduled term.  Taxpayers did not shell out a  penny.    Chrysler has been the
ONLY  US  manufacturer  to  meet  all  Federally  mandated  corporate emissions
standards without asking for a waiver;  Iacocca continually grumbles about that
one.

>    on earth should they buy a damned Chrysler Imperial when there's 
>    enough parking for a Suzuki Swift?  The US automotive industry 

The largest selling luxury foreign car in Japan  has  been  Merceedes,  closely
followed by BMW.  It appears that size has little to do with their choice.  And
for  more  examples, the Mazda 929, Nissan Maxima and Acura  Legend  are  close
enough  in  size  in  any  dimension  to  any  Chrysler  automobile except  the
Imperial  to  make an arguement ridiculous.  The full sized Luxus and  Infinity
are within fractions of an inch to the Imperial.

I watched Iacocca on CSPAN while he railed about Japanese unfairness.  HE sells
Japanese cars on HIS lots, whereas he  cannot  sell  HIS cars on Japanese lots.
The next week it was announced that Honda will be selling some of the Jeep line
in Japan on Honda lots.  It seems that  there  is  a market for Jeeps (American
style) in Japan.  If he cannot sell Imperials in  Japan,  it  is  probable that
there is NO MARKET for the product at the price he  can sell it for there.  Now
then, discussions  of  Japanese  tariffs making prices uncompetitive are valid,
but a different matter.

>    The Japanese would never have succeeded in this country if they 
>    didn't take the time and effort to learn about the consumer and
>    the culture!  *AND* THE LANGUAGE!  Most Americans cringe at the thought

HOGWASH.  You don't need to know English or American  to  build a "quality" and
reliable car.  The only thing you need to know about our culture is that if you
build a car that is delivered with a minimum of defects and  is  more  reliable
than the American  Chromemobiles,  we  will buy them.  And we have - in droves.

>    of knowing another language.  "Speak English, God Damn It, You're In
>    America Now!"  This country is in for some hard times.

There  is an old saying that goes something like this, "...when in Rome,  speak
as  the  Roman's  do." I would expect Japanese to speak English in the US;    I
would expect Americans to speak Japanese in Japan.
    
>    From the perspective of an automobile consumer whose concern is
>    that our technology doesn't outpace our ability to maintain it,

Not a problem.  For the majority of American cars, we are stone-age technology.
We get modern only when the  competition - European as well as Japanese- forces
us to do so.  Four wheel caliper (disk) brakes are the perfect example.

>    my only beef with the Japanese automotive industry is their lack
>    of maintainability and repairability.  Once it's broke, throw
>    it away - it's not designed to be repaired.  Thank God their 

I  find that my Toyota's are both  very  repairable.    The  shop  manuals  are
inexpensive, easy to read, well diagrammed and parts have never been a problem.

FWIW
Dave

	This topic is getting less and less involved in Digital all the
	time. It is also getting into a lot of Japanese bashing, American
	car company bashing, and all sorts of other negitive things. Please
	keep new replies related to Digital. Thank you.

			Alfred

    re .31,
    
    Oh my god, this note is about Iacocca and Morita, and you are telling
    me we are supposed to talk about DEC here?
    
    Eugene

I think the US would have used the bomb on Germany if they felt it would
have shortened the war.  

The US certainly had no love of the germans at that point in time.  They might
not have used it, if germany was collapsing quickly (as was happening in the
spring of 45).  But I don't think the US would have hesitated at all, if serious
fighting was still occurring.  First, the US didn't really know how powerful
the bomb really was.  Second, this was virtually unconditional war, the bomb
would have probably been seen as just another weapon in the fight.  If it 
meant saving american lives, they would have used it.

Since the bomb wasn't ready for Germany, we'll really never know.

				Bob 

    Germany surrendered before the first bomb was exploded.  Japan had not
    surrendered at the time the bomb became operational. Whether or not the
    US would have used it on Germany is conjecture.

    re: 35 - You are correct, and remember also that the US developed the
    bomb in response to a perception that Germany was pretty far along with
    their development of the bomb (Einstein's 1940(?) letter to FDR). 
    These two facts call into question the alleged "racial" motivation of the 
    US...           

	This week's "Newsweek" has an cover article about Japanese attitudes 
toward US.  All our "notable quotables" are featured, Iacocca has his own 
page, and Robert J. Samuelson has a side article on economic aspects.

    Japan attacked Pearl Harbour. Germany never invaded the United States.
    Could that be a reason that the bomb was dropped on Japan? Anything
    we say will be a guess. I guess we will never know the fact. 

    Many Noters are correct on their facts about the availability of the
    bomb and realizing that it is conjecture if it would have been used
    against Germany.  Regardless of these ignored facts, something else
    bothers me.  The Germans committed untold murders and the Japanese
    tortured, maimed and killed many Americans.  Should I hate them both, 
    or remember these facts to temper my dealings with them today?  Or
    should I evaluate them on the basis of their current performance
    that I can observe and for which they are responsible.  I WILL 
    FOLLOW MY LAST SUGGESTION, and care not what dark thoughts they
    may or maynot harbor.
                                   Daryl

re: 39  

 Of course, the "right" answer is to judge people on their current actions.

 I was just commenting on the position that the dropping of the bomb on Japan
 was a racial act.  Just seems a little simplistic to me.  I read the article,
 poorly translated and all, and found many of these type of simplistic judgments
 among the interesting points.

 Unfortunately, many nations of people seem to have very long memories and hold 
 "grudges" for generations.   Witness the re-balkenization of europe with the 
 current Soviet pullback.  It seems incredible that one of the 1st actions of 
 the new rumanian and hungarian goverments may be to declare war on one 
 another!!!  Real progress!!!

				Bob Cohen

  

The version of history taught in the so-called "progressive" countries is that
the U.S. dropped the bomb so late in the war that it had no military signifi-
cance.  The entry into the war by the Soviet Union a couple of days after the
bomb was dropped was what actually led to surrender.

The "progressive" view is that the bomb was dropped in order to intimidate the
Soviet Union.

/john

In one of the courses I took at USMA (either a history or tactics) we
studied an interesting article about the Bomb.  It dealt with issues
like "If Hilter has moved his armored divisions up earlier at Normandy
he would have won the war." and "If the German armor had not run out of
gas during the Battle of the Ardennes they might have one the war. 

The author's point was this was all B.S. because WWII was decided
strictly by technology.  All a year's delay would have done was make
Germany the A-Bomb target.

To back this up the document contained references to documents on the
selection of targets within Germany.  If I remember correctly, Berlin
was #1 on the hit list and Nurenburg was #2.  The problem for selecting
a target in Germany at that time (late 1944) is that there were few
German cities left standing so dropping a bomb would have made little
impression. The recommended targets where therefore ones that were
designed to hit the hearts of the Nazis.  So there clearly were plans to
nuke Germany.

I was watching a documentary on WWII a few weeks ago where they claimed
the same thing about the firebomb raids.  We though the Japanese were
subhuman so it was all right to firebomb them and not the Germans.  Such
claims ignore the facts.  The Air Corps did a pretty thurough job at
Dresden and other German cities.  I also find it interesting the the
U.S. avoided bombing certain cities of cultural significance to the
Japanese while in Germany anything was fair game.

John

    All very interesting, but what has this got to do with the price of tea
    in China?   (Where are the moderators?)
    
    Historical perspective is always 20/20, and we can conjecture here 'til
    next winter and not come to any conclusions.   It doesn't matter today
    what the motivations were since warfare has changed.
    
    I'll throw this up:   World War III is in progress.  Has been since the
    mid 70's.   It's not being fought with conventional weapons.  The
    armaments of choice these days are balance sheets, corporate takeovers
    by foreign companies, real estate deals, the price of a barrel of
    oil, and how many Yen (or marks) you can buy for a dollar.

    
    
    Re: .-1
    
    	     Guess I'm not the only one that "wonders" about World War
    	III like I do.
    
    	My father was in the military for 21 years so I've been all
    	over the world (both ends and a few years back) and have
    	come to wonder at the anti-Americanism of so many countries
    	whose butts we saved. We spend our money guarding their
    	homelands so they don't have to; they in turn spend their
    	money "taking us over". It does make you wonder. But then
    	again, this IS probably the wrong conference for this
    	reply.
    
    						Warren
    

    Before the mod steps in ...
    The alternative to Hiroshima and Nagasaki would have been approaching
    1 million Allied casualties in the invasion of Japan. That is a 1945
    military estimate. Judging by Iwo Jima , Guadacanal etc quite probably
    an underestimate.
    
    With regard to -1, "An enemy is the guy who stabs you in the front" ..
    
    Mike Day
    

    Who knows if racism had anything to do with Trumans decision.  Much
    has been written and speculated on the subject.  
    
    Part of the reason the Russians distrust the west is that they took
    the brunt of Germany.  U.S. History books don't discuss the fact that
    the Red Army captured Berlin at great cost.  Ike stopped the advance
    of the Allies at the current East/West German border before the 
    Red Army attacked Berlin.
    
    I tend to believe that the bomb was used on Japan for two reasons:
    
    1)  We didn't have a ready Red Army to assult Japan and take heavy
        casulties.
    
    2)  We didn't want the Stalin to pull a division on Japan like he
        did in Eastern Europe.
    
    Point of history.   The U.S. lost approximately 250,000 men/women.
    The russians lost 1 out of 8 citizens.  I'm sure the U.S. casulties
    were lower that the Brit's and French.
    
    

    re .46
    This discussion is certainly getting away from how we work at Digital.
    But, for the record, your asessment of WWII history is way off base.
    The U.S. waited at the Elbe for the Russians to arrive *at the request
    of the Russians*. It was precisely because of the heavy losses that
    Russia suffered at the hands of the Nazis that they wanted to be the
    ones to take Berlin. And the German army wasn't allowed to surrender.
    The Russians wanted to extract revenge. IMO, if the US, UK and French
    armies were allowed to take Berlin, the remnants of the German army
    would have surrendered. They fought on in Berlin because they were
    afraid of what the Russians would do to survivors.
    
    Bob Mc