Well Japan esposes (or esposed) many of the same sentiments here; full
employment for all, job for life, protect companies from outside
competition, buy "home built" products, yadda, yadda, yadda. Sounds to
me like the "carrying, benovlent" government action that is being
espoused here.
As far as "built here so it has to remain here", I think that is
foolhardly and short sighted. This isn't "fortress America", and its
quite conceivable that someone elsewhere in the world is "doing
something better" than its done in the US. So if you ban takeovers of US
companies by foreign interests, then one of two things has to happen:
1) You let market forces run their course, and the US company is forced
out of business (or has no potential for growth, and is thus unable to
attract investment) by the better "foreign" company due to inferior
product/higher price/less features.
2) The government steps in and "protects" the company with tarrifs and
trade barriers, and then your "Japan comments" apply.
The alternative is to allow foreign takeovers, and realize that wow,
maybe someone else can improve the way things are being done and maybe
even make everyones life a bit better (better/cheaper products, more
sales/more employment). As a parting comment, service industry jobs such
as McDonalds and KFC are even better examples of why ownership doesn't
matter; you can't exactly move all of the McDonalds drive-thrus to Tokyo
if McDonalds was bought by a Japanese company...
Craig
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rekker21@aol.com [SMTP:Rekker21@aol.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 1998 12:26 PM
> To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> Subject: Re: DML: Damn! Anyone seen those "profits"? I think they
> left the country!
>
<snip>
> Well, the Government of Japan really isn't in it for the best
> interest of
> the people. By that I mean the concern isn't exactly for a higher
> standard of
> living for the average citizen of Japan. The Japanese Gov. is
> protecting the
> interest of the country in an extreme sense of the term. They allow
> their
> industries to sell over seas while they put heavy restrictions on
> foreign
> goods sold in Japan, which inturn frustrates foreign sales and deters
> The
> Japanese people from paying high dollar for foreign items.
> Again you havent kept up on the prior posts. The "proposal" by me
> wasn't that
> the US Gov. keep foreign investors out, but to not sell American
> interests to
> foreign investors unless they set of HQ in the States. That their in
> would
> protect the American interest, which would be to "shore up" and
> protect the
> American People, and the standard of living. However, all foreign
> investors
> will always be allowed, with little if any "restrictions" outside of
> the
> standard tax procedure, to sell their goods in the states. But my
> point, and
> final stand, is that companies that have been created in the states
> like
> Chrysler, GM. Ford, Mcdonalds, KFC shouldn't be allowed to be bought
> out by a
> foreign investor and be allowed to have the seat of power and profit
> taken
> outside of the American border. To me, this is the base of our
> infrastructure, without that we become susceptible to out side sources
> more so
> than if it is intact.
> Eric
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:09:56 EDT