Tokyo Keizai University’s Faculty of Economics boasts a distinguished core of experienced professors, who teach a full curriculum of courses in economic theory, history, and policy. This faculty also offers courses on related topics in business administration, law, and society. In addition, many seminars address important contemporary issues such as internationalization, high-tech development, information technology, and Japan’s aging society.
Department of Economics
Features of the Department and Curriculum
When asked about their studies, students enrolled in the Faculty of Economics at TKU expressed the following opinions.
“After learning basic economic theory, you can study in detail the particular field that you’re interested in, whether it’s theory, history, or applied fields.”
“The curriculum is extensive. You don’t just study economics. You also study management, law, sociology, and other social sciences.” Read more…
September 29th, 2009
admin
Abstract
There is a great deal of discussion amongst economists regarding government’s approach to economic stimulation. The discussion centers on fiscal policy, and whether the government should take a Classical or Keynesian approach regarding U.S. economic issues. In this paper we briefly explore the Keynesian side of fiscal policy in an effort to see if government intervention serves as a useful tool in stimulating economic growth.
Economic Impact of Government Fiscal Policy
Over the course of the last few years there has been much discussion regarding the state of the U.S. economy and what the “right” approach is to stimulating economic growth and prosperity. As the 2004 election approaches, there is significant discussion by Democratic presidential candidates about the Clinton economy verses the Bush economy, as they compare and contrast the two administrations fiscal policies (Berlau, 2003). Even the media contributes to the debate regarding which administration’s fiscal policy is responsible for the current challenges faced by the U.S. economy.
Still the question remains, does the Keynesian activist approach serve the nation better in stimulating economic growth and prosperity, or would the nation be better served to follow a more Classical “laissez-faire” non-activist approach? The debate will undoubtedly continue for many years to come. Read more…
Globalization, an economic, political and cultural phenomenon, has swept through the world in the twentieth century. Globalization supposedly brings the world together economically, politically and culturally. Instead, globalization has brought the world farther apart than it originally was, and more inequalities exist now. There is no static definition of globalization, as it is a concept that can mean multiple things, depending on what a definer believe in. I believe a somewhat accurate definition would be.
Globalization refers to the multiplicity of linkages and interconnections between the states and societies which make up the modern world system. It describes the process by which events, decisions, and activities in one part of the world can come to have significant consequences for individuals and communities in quite distant parts of the glove.”
The question posed “is globalization a form of American economic and cultural imperialism?” is one of many differing opinions. Neoliberalists would argue that globalization is good for the economy, but I choose to argue otherwise. I believe that globalization is Americanization of the world, and global capitalism is taking place, where workers are being exploited at the expense of developed countries in North America and Western Europe. I will structure the essay by showing what six different authors have written in their books about globalization. The authors will be grouped into two groups, one of which shows the benefits of globalization from economic, cultural, and political standpoints, and the other, which shows the negative aspects of globalization of the same three facets. Globalization is a form of cultural imperialism and Americanization, and I will set out to justify why this is so, and what the worldwide implications of globalization are. Read more…
National preference formation is the first step in interpreting the outcome of an international negotiation. Andrew Moravcsik describes national preferences as, “an ordered and weighted set of values placed on future substantive outcomes that might result from international political interaction.” (Moravcsik 24). The most significant question dealing with national preferences is determining the reasons why governments act and decide the way that they do in an international cooperative setting. What are the sources of underlying national preferences? Moravcsik’s hypothesis divides the tendencies of national preference into two camps: geopolitical ideologies and political economic interests. Even though these two theories are contrasting by nature, the resulting hypothetical outcomes of both are achieved by observing five identical observations concerning the pattern and process of state behavior.
The first hypothesis Moravcsik provides emphasizes the role of geopolitical interests as the catalyst for the formation of national preferences. The basic nature of geopolitical reasons for national preferences focuses on underlying political and military goals. This should come as no surprise. European cooperation has been dictated time and time again by the fundamental desire of all nations to avoid another world war. The geopolitical theory does provide for economic cooperation, however the outcomes have an indirect effect on integration and are subordinate to politico-military goals. The core argument of this segment of Moravcsik’s theory is that states are more likely to integrate economically with other states because they share a common geopolitical goal or goals. Perhaps the most influential common political goal is the security against potential foes. Countries that share a common enemy are much more likely to integrate economically. The potential threat of the Soviet Union and the resulting Cold War is the perfect example of a common geopolitical interest shared by many western and central European countries, perhaps explaining the increased integration throughout the second half of the twentieth century. Read more…
Currently, the World Trade Orginisation (WTO) is in the process of negotiating the issue of The People’s Republic of China’s accession into WTO as a member. China’s accession would expect to see flow of advantages to China as well as the rest of the world.
China would undertake legal obligations to provide most favored nations (MFN) treatment to goods and services for all WTO members, to treat imported and domestically produced goods equally, abolish quotas and preserve intellectual property rights. Investors would also enjoy better surety of low tariff rates and is rest assured that it would not change in the short run. As more people are willing to invest in that country, China would be expected to have a wider selection of goods and services. Following the lowering of trade barriers (e.g. tariffs), the citizens of China would also have the chance to acquire goods, bith domestically produced and imported, at lesser cost and thus, allowing them to purchase more for their money.
New opportunities would emerge for businesses as China has agreed to fully open its door in the service sector. Among the area where foreign firms would have increased opportunities are financial services, telecommunications and distribution (e.g. wholesaling, retailing). The possibilities to export to and invest in China would increase substantially with the reduction of tariff and non-tariff barriers. Elimination of quota restrictions upon China such as the restrictions under the Multi-Fiber Arrangement would enable China to freely compete in the United States market with other textile and apparel producers. Read more…
