No.0147：The Thought-Stopping Phrase Called “Responsible Proactive Fiscal Policy”
February 22,2026
Irresponsibility Through Ambiguity
The government’s slogan, “responsible expansionary fiscal policy,” is the kind of phrase that would get you called out by your boss if you used it as the title of a client proposal. It sounds soft and vaguely understandable, yet it can be interpreted in countless ways. Later on, it invites the client’s inevitable “That’s not what we meant”-the kind of ambiguity that leads to misaligned expectations. It resembles the highly abstract, authoritative laws of authoritarian states: conveniently worded so that those in power can interpret them however they like. What I want from politics is not pleasant-sounding language. There may be backlash now, but when our children look back on this era, I want them to be able to say, “That was the least bad option,” and genuinely accept it.
 

• Does it mean not slowing the momentum of investment toward economic revival?
• Does it mean boldly concentrating investment in promising sectors?
• Does it mean decisively cutting current waste and not leaving debt to the next generation?
• Does it mean leveraging low interest rates to induce inflation and minimize past debt?

 
The first two interpretations are probably the dominant ones-but the others aren’t impossible. Yet no one tries to explain it clearly. If you keep pressing with questions, you sense an atmosphere where you might be mocked-What a pain this guy is. So the “correct” answer is to stop at a vague understanding. A disappointing resignation hangs in the air.
 
I don’t want to end up asking the victor for chocolate the moment we lose a war that began in the pursuit of prosperity-especially when that victor was despised just moments before. That’s why I say this: no matter how much money the government hands out, unless people accumulate the motivation to challenge themselves, the urgency of “we have to do something,” there will be no real development (there are exceptions, like capital-intensive industries). It was inevitable that so many world-class companies emerged from the scorched, empty ruins after the war.
 
Anxiety Over Losing Jobs, Comfort in Standing Still
Applied to today, unless politics moves toward a direction that embraces both the hardship and the potential of greater labor mobility, we’ll remain stuck. Telling people who are desperately clinging to the status quo-people who are reasonably satisfied-“Here’s some money, now go challenge yourself!” will likely end in nothing more than networking drinks labeled as “talent mobility initiatives.” Like an overprotected pet dog that has lost its ability to think. I want politics to move top-down in a direction that corrects this passive maintenance of the status quo: industries that have lost momentum, talent that has lost its place, all being preserved without action. There will be fierce resistance, of course. But this is precisely the moment when strong public support makes bold intervention possible.
 
Even so, the resistance from those who want to protect what they have will be formidable. A certain number of people strongly demand continuity, maintenance, repetition. Learning something new is a hassle. If it doesn’t work out, your salary drops. Human relationships might not last. At the same time, this defensive posture is becoming harder to maintain as AI spreads. We now constantly hear phrases like “jobs that will be lost to AI.” Every era has been described as one of change, turbulence, innovation-but never with this level of intensity.
 
The app development industry I work in is especially at risk. Large areas will likely be overtaken by AI in the near future. When I was younger, I once worked on a project using automatic code-generation tools. They were clumsy-never quite scratching the itch. But this time is different. It’s not even comparable. Sometimes it’s unsettling-how does it understand even the vague, unarticulated layers of my thinking? As if to prove the point, software development companies’ stock prices have been falling across the board recently, driven by fears of being ensnared by AI. I want to believe this is short-term pessimism, but the underlying momentum toward change shows no sign of slowing.
 
The Stage Is Set-Now, Freedom
Returning to politics: in growth strategies, I want politics to focus on creating environments that enable challenge-deregulation, safety nets, and the like. Risks may increase slightly, but the returns from inviting challenge are far greater. If something clearly fails, then create modest, well-targeted regulations to address it. Reward those who succeed; guarantee a minimum standard of living for those who don’t. Ideas like basic income have emerged along these lines, and overseas they are now seriously discussed. Rather than incremental improvement, we need leapfrog innovation. To encourage that, I want politics to support-quietly, behind the scenes-a culture of trying fast, failing fast, and restarting fast. As for me, I want to “accelerate consideration” so that I can grow rather than decline in the age of AI. And I mean that seriously-not in the political sense of empty words.
 
If “responsible proactive fiscal policy” ends up being nothing more than an excuse to avoid change, wouldn’t that be the height of irresponsibility?