„Mitfahrgelegenheiten wurden in Japan aufgrund des nationalen Charakters des Landes, der das Konzept der persönlichen Verantwortung nicht akzeptieren kann, nicht eingeführt. In Japan liegt, sobald etwas passiert, ein starker Schwerpunkt auf der ‚Findung des Schuldigen‘, also der Feststellung, wer dafür verantwortlich ist.“
https://news.yahoo.co.jp/articles/cb667c2825df2d6695667688b3b7919d9ecf5bc9?page=1
24 Kommentare
[removed]
Basically in Japan no one wants to take responsibility for anything.
Not really sure I understand the point being made. The author talks about the personal risk of getting in a car with broken seatbelts, but if that happened I’d be submitting a complaint to Uber right away
I think they would rather not trouble people for rides regularly because then they feel compelled to pay them for gas etc.
There’s nothing the Japanese hate more than owning a mistake, but when they do, as an absolute last resort, you’ll see a grown man on his knees grovelling on national TV.
This has nothing to do with “the spirit of Japan” and has everything to do with taxi lobbyism and legal frameworks that require a taxi company with a garage and a working fax line to pass blame.
Counter examples that come to mind are Airbnb, Luup, Mercari. The fact that they exist when ride sharing doesn’t probably comes down to greater liabilities and stronger laws in the transport sector, as getting in a car accident is probably considered a greater and more unacceptable risk (health-wise and financially) than whatever is more likely to happen with the other services mentioned.
The author fails to mention the evolution in many European countries, where ride sharing initially also skirted any existing laws and unions, until the law and compromises caught up.
Nihonjinron bullshit. We all know it’s because of the taxi unions protecting their rates. They’re the same reason we don’t have trains or buses running late at night like other cities in the world.
Also where the hell is this strong sense of responsibility when it comes to anything else? Endless meetings with committees of generalists to dilute responsibility to the point that literally no one is responsible for anything.
Summary please?
>Cannot accept the concept of personal responsibility; the focus is on finding a person who is responsible.
That seems contradictory.
There’s also a legal stipulation that vehicles to be used for commercial passenger services must have their mandatory checks every 3 months (vs 12 months for private vehicles), which becomes a conundrum under the typical rideshare model. Those checks aren’t cheap.
Just like in my home country, I wouldn’t use the service either. It’s nothing to do with accountability.
It’s to do with not wanting to interact with anyone, anywhere, ever.
Dunno if you’ve noticed, but Japan is a leader in catering to that exact demographic of people.
Why are the taxi people so powerful?
In Japan, private railway companies played a significant role in the modern expansion and development of cities. More than just transportation, they developed residential areas around railway stations in line with urban expansion, creating a daily stream of „passengers“ commuting from home to work. As a result, in the average Japanese city, almost every location can be reached by public transport for $3 in 30 minutes and a 10-minute walk.
Taxis, on the other hand, evolved in the opposite direction. They became more upscale in competition with the public transport network, becoming like privately hired carriages for those who can afford the high fare of $15 for 30 minutes and those who urgently need to go directly to their destination.
Japanese people are naturally aware of these differences and choose their mode of transport depending on the situation. The last time I used a taxi was several years ago when I was discharged from the hospital and returned home.
Now, related to my initial point, even if Japanese people living in urban areas have cars in their garages, they usually use public transport. Weekday commutes are primarily by public transport. They probably only use their own cars on weekends for recreational activities or when going shopping at a mall more than 10km away. Almost everyone who doesn’t drive a car daily for work is a „Sunday driver“ (likely a Japanese-made English term).
The reasons why ride-sharing services like Uber haven’t become popular in Japan are a combination of these factors:
• There’s simply no need to use a shared car for transportation other than emergencies. There’s no demand.
• Resistance from the high-priced professional taxi industry.
• Japanese people themselves are aware of the small number of people who drive regularly, so they are skeptical about the skill level of Uber’s part-time drivers, who aren’t officially employed as drivers.
In reality, Uber’s original main service, part-time ride-hailing, is not legally permitted in Japan. When you request a ride from Uber, a „taxi“ is called. Furthermore, the taxi industry itself has been operating taxi-hailing smartphone apps for many years, so you can simply call a taxi using an app.
The environment and assumptions surrounding the simple act of „getting a ride to a destination“ are different, so attributing this to „the uniqueness of Japanese people“ is (as usual) a very unique form of casual racism.
This is nonsense. You often hear cultural explanations of why services and practices don’t take off at first in Japan, only for them to become standard later.
Most of the barriers turn out to be regulatory, or just inertia.
Yamato’s Takkyubin small parcel delivery service faced massive regulatory opposition when it started, because it was a direct competitor to the government-run postal service.
There were disputes over whether small parcels could include explanatory notes, as the Post Office said these constituted letters, which only they could deliver. There were arguments about the use of public roads which were on regular postal routes, on the basis that Yamato would obstruct postal vehicles. The idea of a company going direct to a private individual’s door also needed separate regulatory approval.
Yamato won the day through heavy lobbying, and winning over public opinion.
Or because the taxi system works here and most of us don’t want to be picked up by some random without official training.
And Japan is a better nation for it.
Compare: getting in a random Honda civic with a stranger who’s packing heat and ready to draw at the slightest provocation, versus getting into a marked taxi with a professional taxi driver.
Are you really on here complaining that Japan has the latter instead of the former? Ride-sharing is the degeneration of civilization masked as progress.
Actually, uber is functioning here, at least in some parts of Japan. We had a visitor who arranged her outings with it. http://Www.uber.com
Japan… does have ride sharing ? I use uber here – all the time. It’s mostly taxi drivers but not entirely
How about taxi’s with the seatbelt jammed so far into the gap in the seat you give up trying?
The prevalence of passive voice in daily conversation in Japanese indicates to me that this is nonsense.
The reason ride hailing services haven’t “taken off” in Japan is because of Ichiro Kawanabe and the taxi lobby, it’s very simple
Dunno, put a camera or two inside to see who did break something in the car?
I mean car/time sharing is doing fine here.
„Assign a scapegoat/throw someone under the bus, then sweep the whole incident under the rug“ culture.
Not unique to Japan