＜prologue＞
I started a blog called “The Baby Boomer Generation’s Miscellaneous Blog”（Dankai-sedai no garakutatyou:団塊世代の我楽多（がらくた）帳） in July 2018, about a year before I fully retired. More than six years have passed since then, and the number of articles has increased considerably.
So, in order to make them accessible to people who don’t understand Japanese, I decided to translate my past articles into English and publish them.
It may sound a bit exaggerated, but I would like to make this my life’s work.
It should be noted that haiku and waka （Japanese short fixed form poems） are quite difficult to translate into English, so some parts are written in Japanese.
If you are interested in haiku or waka and would like to know more, please read introductory or specialized books on haiku or waka written in English.
I also write many articles about the Japanese language. I would be happy if these inspire more people to want to learn Japanese.
my blog’s URL:団塊世代の我楽多（がらくた）帳 | 団塊世代が雑学や面白い話を発信しています
my X’s URL:団塊世代の我楽多帳（@historia49) on X
(Reference) Original article in Japanese
・無観客五輪は菅首相の敗北！緊急事態宣言と酒類の提供禁止は即刻解除すべし！
<Added 2021/7/31> Economic Losses from State of Emergency Exceed the Economic Benefits of the Olympics and Paralympics!
Nomura Research Institute has compiled an estimate stating that “economic losses from the state of emergency will far exceed the economic benefits of the Olympic and Paralympic Games.”
The estimate states that the economic losses resulting from the application of the state of emergency to four prefectures, including Kanagawa, will amount to 940 billion yen.
Furthermore, if the extension of the state of emergency in Tokyo and other areas is included, the economic losses from a “fourth state of emergency” will swell to 2.19 trillion yen.
This far exceeds the expected economic benefit of 1.6771 trillion yen from the Tokyo Olympics and Paralympics, and the estimate concludes that the Olympic effect will “completely be canceled out.”
On July 8th, television producer and entertainer Dave Spector tweeted a apt and powerful sarcastic comment about the “fourth state of emergency” in Tokyo starting July 12th, saying that “they’ve declared states of emergency so many times that herd immunity to them has developed first.”
His point is absolutely spot-on, and I agree.
I believe it’s only natural that the approval rating for the Suga cabinet (33% in the latest NHK opinion poll) is declining if they continue with policies like these.
Regarding vaccine administration, I think the mishandling of the situation is also having an impact. They initially accelerated the process aggressively, expanding vaccinations at large-scale vaccination sites and workplace vaccinations without a plan, only to then, after discovering a vaccine shortage, abruptly halted applications for workplace vaccinations and requested local governments to slow down the vaccination pace.
1. The state of emergency should be lifted immediately.
① There was absolutely no need to declare a state of emergency.
Frankly, I believe there was absolutely no need to declare a state of emergency given the current COVID-19 situation in Tokyo.
I think many citizens feel the same way (or are beginning to feel the same way).
② The Tokyo Olympics should have been held with spectators.
I believe the Tokyo Olympics at the new National Stadium should have been held with 10,000 to 20,000 spectators. Even simulations using the latest computer, “Fugaku,” showed almost no risk of infection spreading (the risk of infection was less than 1 in 10,000 if masks were worn and social distancing was maintained), so I can’t help but wonder why it was held without spectators.
It’s a contradictory “double standard” to hold soccer and baseball games with spectators while holding the Olympics without them.
Not only did it shatter the dreams of many Japanese people who wanted to watch the games in person, but it also eliminated the opportunity to prove the excellence of Japan’s COVID-19 infection control measures by demonstrating that they had “overcome COVID-19” by holding the games with spectators. It resulted in a defeat without even fighting, a result that is deeply regrettable. ③ The Self-Preservation Tendency of the “Experts” on the “Government Subcommittee”
Even a layperson like me can roughly guess what the so-called “experts” on the “Government Subcommittee” are saying, based on the statements of Chairman Omi and Chairman Nakagawa of the Japan Medical Association.
In short, their argument boils down to wanting to keep the number of COVID-19 infections (positive cases) as low as possible.
The reason for this is that Japan’s current medical system is not equipped to flexibly respond to infectious diseases like COVID-19. If the number of COVID-19 infections increases further, it could lead to a strain on the medical system and a collapse of the medical system, potentially leading to the government and themselves being held accountable for failing to adequately prepare the medical system.
④ Mysterious and Excessive Measures with Unclear Effectiveness and Meaning
And they continue to implement measures such as “restricting the movement of people” and “banning the serving of alcohol in restaurants,” which have unclear effectiveness as measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
⑤ Efforts by restaurants and other establishments to prevent infection will be in vain.
Despite restaurants and other establishments investing time and money in infection prevention measures, these efforts will be rendered useless and completely wasted.
⑥ The “ban on serving alcohol in restaurants” will only lead to “drinking on the streets” and “drinking across prefectural borders.”
Because of the ban on serving alcohol in restaurants, people who want to drink will resort to “drinking on the streets” or “drinking across prefectural borders.” Alternatively, they will drink at establishments in Tokyo that continue to serve alcohol.
Frankly, I have serious doubts about whether the “ban on serving alcohol in restaurants” is an effective infection prevention measure. If it leads to “drinking on the streets” or “drinking across prefectural borders,” I believe it would be far better to allow people to drink at restaurants within Tokyo.
Considering these circumstances, the “ban on serving alcohol in restaurants” should be stopped immediately.
2. Economic negative impacts should be considered.
① Significant negative impact on a wide range of businesses, including restaurants, and their employees.
The “state of emergency” will not only affect restaurants serving alcohol, but also liquor wholesalers, travel agencies, accommodation providers, and liquor manufacturers. It will lead to reduced wages for employees, termination of employment and layoffs of non-regular workers, business closures and bankruptcies, increased unemployment, and a rise in suicides.
② Increased burden of compensation for business closures.
The negative impact will be widespread, including an increased burden of compensation for business closures on the national and local governments, resulting in enormous economic and financial losses.
③ Zero ticket revenue for the organizing committee due to the no-spectator policy.
The inexplicable decision to hold the event without spectators has not only shattered the dreams of many Japanese people who wanted to watch the games at the stadiums and caused dissatisfaction among overseas athletes, but has also resulted in zero ticket revenue for the organizing committee, significantly impacting its finances. The deficit will primarily be covered by the Tokyo Metropolitan Government, and if the Tokyo Metropolitan Government cannot cover it, the national government will, ultimately passing the burden onto taxpayers.
The Tokyo Metropolitan Government has incurred enormous expenditures on “COVID-19 related business closure compensation and subsidies,” and its once abundant funds are nearing depletion, making national compensation unavoidable.
As of July 2020, the “Fiscal Adjustment Fund,” which is equivalent to savings, has plummeted from 900 billion yen to 80.7 billion yen, and is on the verge of running out.
3. The classification should be changed from Category 2 to Category 5.
As of January last year, COVID-19 was an unknown disease with little understanding of what kind of infectious disease it was, so it’s understandable that it was classified as “equivalent to Category 2 infectious disease” based on the highest possible risk assessment.
However, despite the fact that we now understand more about COVID-19 over the past year, it remains classified as “equivalent to Category 2 infectious disease,” and the perception hasn’t changed at all since January of last year, which is utterly inexplicable.
By changing the classification from “equivalent to Category 2 infectious disease” to Category 5, the top priority for COVID-19 countermeasures is to increase the number of medical institutions capable of treating COVID-19 in order to prevent medical strain and collapse.
This was listed as an issue to be considered at the end of the Abe administration, but there is absolutely no evidence that it was considered under the Suga administration.
4. The focus should shift from “Number of Infections (Positive Cases)” to “Number of Severe Cases and Deaths.”
Daily television reports on the trend of “COVID-19 infections (positive cases)” in Tokyo and across the country. According to the “framing effect theory,” this is likely an “infodemic” that gives the public a false impression.
If reporting is to be done, the focus should shift to “Number of Severe Cases and Deaths.” Otherwise, it will lead to a misunderstanding of the current COVID-19 situation.
Furthermore, the “zero-risk belief” of “reducing COVID-19 infections (positive cases) to as close to zero as possible” should be abandoned.
Also, the excessive fear of COVID-19, the failure to compare it with seasonal influenza, and the lack of a calm analysis of the infection situation in Japan and other countries, which fuels public anxiety, should be changed.
The government should not be swayed by such biased television reporting and should make calm judgments.
5. The members of the “Government Expert Panel” should be completely replaced.
Continuing measures such as “banning alcohol service to restaurants,” “reduced business hours,” “voluntary business closures,” and “restrictions on spectator numbers at events and sporting competitions” without verifying their effectiveness is highly questionable.
Now is the time to return to the fundamentals of COVID-19 infection control, just as we did with the “return to the origins of the Olympics.”
To achieve this, the members of the current “Government Expert Panel” should be shuffled and completely replaced.
The advisory body should include a balanced mix of experts who can propose truly effective COVID-19 infection control measures without excessive fear of the virus, and economists who fully understand the “negative economic impacts.”
As for “experts,” I believe Professor Yasushi Takahashi of the International University of Health and Welfare, Associate Professor Takayuki Miyazawa of Kyoto University, and Moriyo Kimura, a former medical technical officer at the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, would be suitable.