John Snow obviously had had sight of the document ( and here pdf ) when he went round lecturing us that Europe may become a non-favoured environment for US FDI:
“Foreign investment in France and Germany fell sharply in 2004, reinforcing concerns that inflexible labour practices and weak domestic demand are driving investors elsewhere.
In France, inward investment almost halved from $43bn (?35.44bn) to $24bn, according to figures released yesterday by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the group representing the world?s most industrialised countries“.
But as much as the facts, the reasons behind the facts are interesting.
“Mark Zandi, chief strategist at Economy.com, the consultants group, said the data showed US companies the main source of direct investment funds in 2004 were spending their cash piles mainly on Asian investments.
?US companies are attracted to Asia partly because the currencies remain competitive, but also as low cost bases for production destination and as growing markets in their own right,? he said.”
Actually there is little realistic way that the EU or the US can reasonably expect to compete with China for FDI on China’s own terms, we both have to find another way.
scary.
we’ve got a problem, what about our “comparative advantage” if our investment and technology (as soon as invented) are going away ? i have some real difficulties with Rocado’s theory in this world without frontiers.
Edward, Do you know why there are more FDi in china than in India ? because it’s look like we outsource in India and invest in china .
democraty is bad for business ? is it cultural ?
I really enjoyed your theory about the reason why India is a IT giant, very clever.
Physical production cost more in investment than outsourcing. Atleast according to the accountant.