Posted on 09/22/2004 10:35:07 PM PDT by Destro
Time is GMT + 8 hours Posted: 23 September 2004 0213 hrs
China overtakes United States as top destination for foreign investment
GENEVA : China overtook the United States as a top global destination for foreign direct investment (FDI) in 2003 while the Asia-Pacific region attracted more investment than any other developing region, a UN report said.
China's strong manufacturing industry helped the country attract FDI last year worth 53.5 billion dollars, compared with 52.7 billion in 2002, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) said in its annual report on investment flows.
Meanwhile, foreign investment in the United States, traditionally the largest recipient of such money, plunged by 53 percent last year to reach 30 billion dollars, the lowest level in 12 years, according to data from UNCTAD's World Investment Report 2004.
Flows to the Asia-Pacific region as a whole rebounded over the year to 107 billion dollars from 94 billion in 2002 driven by strong economic growth and a better investment environment, the agency said.
China was expected to continue to attract foreign companies, analysts said.
"According to our analysis, FDI in China has not peaked although their economic growth rates have fallen," UNCTAD economist James Zhan told journalists.
The outbreak of deadly Severe Acute Respiratory Disease (SARS) only had a marginal downward effect on investment activity as Asia emerged from the decline in foreign investment it had experienced since 2001, the report noted.
"Prospects for a further rise in foreign direct investment flows to Asia and the Pacific in 2004 are promising," UNCTAD's Deputy Secretary General, Carlos Fortin, said in a statement.
But the distribution of the new wealth was uneven across the region, with most of the money -- 72 billion dollars -- concentrated in north-east Asia.
Flows to south-east Asia rose 27 percent to 19 billion dollars, while the south merely received six billion dollars in FDI.
Resource-rich central Asia recorded 6.1 billion and 4.1 billion dollars flowed into the west.
The manufacturing sector remained the dominant factor that pulled investment into China, but a rise in investment in the services industry was noted elsewhere in line with the global trend, UNCTAD said.
Services, including finance, tourism, telecommunications and information technology, formed a growing proportion of foreign direct investment stock in the region -- up to 50 percent in 2002, the most recent figure available, from 43 percent in 1995, UNCTAD said.
UNCTAD said the growing tendency to shift some business activities overseas to places where labour costs are low but the workforce is skilled helped to raise the region's profile.
Asian companies were also growing in power and reach as investors in other regions, according to the Geneva-based agency.
China and India were joining Malaysia, South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan as sources of foreign direct investment, it said.
Asian firms, such as Hutchinson Whampoa of Hong Kong, Singapore's Singtel and Samsung of South Korea, again dominate the UNCTAD list of the top companies from the developing world.
- AFP
This is rich. First I'm in favor of selling national secrets to China, now I'm in favor of illegal immigration. What's next?
Just because 99% of the people who support trade with China do, wouldn't be any reason to think that hugh.
You've been around here far too long to have learned nothing from the experience.
Yes, Joe, I totally agree. We are sowing the seeds of our own destruction. At best thousands of our troops, or even millions of our fellow citizens will die when China realizes that all it's subtrifuge, spying, fifth column wankers on conservative bulletin boards couldn't deliver what they thought they could.
It will still boil down to killing the last person in the U.S., before we'd ever capitulate.
That's why the fifth column cadets anger me so.
My bad.
Now quit being a drama queen about it - I also omitted Poohbah's name though I obviously was talking to him too.
Free trade devalues labor and industry.
Populist protectionist pap. Free trade allows industry to maximize it's potential through the procurement of cheap raw materials and access to a greater market than your world of trade tariffs will allow. You're trying to sell the notion that Government's job is to run interference for inefficient businesses rather than levelling the playing field and allowing us to do what we do best - compete.
People have been spreading your workforce doom and gloom under various guises for as long as I can remember - industrial automation, Germany, Japan, and now China. We're doomed, yet somehow, each time, we keep staving off defeat.
Like I said above or in another thread - if the current economic trend/program of free trade globilization grows the middle class or maintains its numbers then I would deem it a success. Right now We have seen a stagnation and even a slight shrinkage in the middle class life style and size so I am not able to back it fully as of yet.
You haven't answered my question in #140 yet.
You haven't answered my question in #140 yet.
Why do you keep doing that? Are you assigning the effects of the high tech bubble bursting and 9-11 to trade with China?
Now, I'd be glad to try to answer your questions about the subsidization of foreign currencies if I understood exactly what that means. I have no idea what you are talking about regarding that topic.
Ravi Batra, author of The Myth of Free Trade, stated that the watershed year for the American standard of living was 1973. It was the year when real wages started its long decline, family poverty rates increased and rising inequality between rich and poor materialized. Batra clearly stated that "economists concede that GNP and per capita income are not ideal measures of national prosperity."2 The President's Economic Report for 1992, for instance, makes the statement that growth in real GNP or GDP cannot assure an increase in the level of living. This is especially true when applied to real wages. A truer measurement, Mr. Batra states, is the weekly earnings paradigm which is applicable to production and non-supervisory workers, who according to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, constitute 80% of all employees. Therefore the GDP and per capita figures fall flat or distort the real picture. These statistics exclude executives, managers and professionals such as lawyers, doctors, etc. According to Batra's calculations, real wages increased by 15% between 1950-55; 7% between 1955-60; and only 6% between 1970-73.
Since 1973, real wages have fallen steadily. More importantly, this decline has impacted at least 80% of the work force even before increases in Social Security and taxes are calculated into the equation. Thus take home pay is seriously impacted in an adverse way thus requiring families to have multiple wage earners. During the period between 1975-1995, the inflation rate rose 183%, while blue collar and white collar workers earnings across all private industry increased a mere 142%. Average salaries in 1995 were $20,559 dollars. This average earnings unfortunately will buy $3,500 less than could have been purchased in 1975. Real wages for most workers in America are falling rapidly.3 The change in lesser buying power is not bringing the Third World closer to our standard of living but in fact is reducing our standard of living in the direction of Second and Third World levels. Extensive competition among underdeveloped countries guarantees future cheap labor markets. Many of these Second and Third World nations disregard constructive environmental regulations and utilize child and prison labor, as well as paying wages which can be as low as $1.00 per day.
As the quality jobs continue to decline at such giants as Ford, General Motors, Chrysler and AT&T, new jobs are being created by the tens of thousands by mega-retail discount chains. However, when you do a comparative analysis on the employment picture (GM vs. Wal-Mart), the facts become obvious and startling. In a three week series in The Philadelphia Inquirer on "The American Dream," which ran in September 1996, a clear picture of the future of American jobs was presented. From 1978 to 1995, the big three (GM, Ford, Chrysler) had reductions from 667,000 to 398,000 hourly employees. Not to worry, as Washington and many economic pundits point out, new jobs are being created to replace the old ones. Employment by Wal-Mart alone accounted for a 2890% increase over the past 20 years. In 1978, Wal-Mart had 21,000 workers and revenues had reached the $100 million dollar plateau; by 1995, it had over 628,000 workers and revenues were approaching the $100 billion mark. According to the data, apparently, one out of every 200 American civilian jobs is being created at Wal-Mart. The Inquirer series explains a qualitative analysis is important. For example, 30% of Wal-Mart workers are part-time (full-time is 28 hrs., therefore, the 30% is exceedingly conservative figure by traditional standards). Positions at major corporations such as the big three are full-time, i.e. 35 - 40 hrs/week and overtime pay is not unusual. As for pay, a GM assembler earns a minimum $18.81/hour in wages; a tool and die maker $21.99/hour. Most Wal-Mart workers earn a dollar or two above the former minimum wage of $4.25 an hour. Then there's the matter of benefits. The auto workers have a guaranteed annual pension. The Wal-Mart employees do not. The auto workers receive fully paid health benefits. Wal-Mart part-timers receive no company paid benefits and "full timers" must pay for part of their health insurance. The Inquirer series also states that new jobs should have been created replacing the old by new technologies, such as in cellular phones; however, manufacturers in those high technology industries seem to prefer lower cost overseas production.4
What did I tell you about posting spam? Present your thoughts, Destro, not someone else's.
Since 1973, real wages have fallen steadily.
Try to reconcile that statement with what you'll find here. You posted it, therefore you're responsible for defending it.
The Census bureau data directly contradicts what you posted - all you're doing here is wasting time arguing a position you know absolutely nothing about by way of copying and pasting the results of your various google searches.
I'm not impressed with you Destro. I never have been, and at this rate, I never will be.
Now then as someone who with so much to say on world trade you must understand that for 20 years the Japanese government uses American dollars earned in trade to buy US Treasuries. This keeps the supply of dollars artificially low. The Chinese have learned from this, and purchase T Bills to keep their currency floating in a very narrow range. Experts in this country have been on record as stating that this amounts to a 40% subsidy on the Chinese currency.
All you ever do is make a claim without data! The Census bureau data directly contradicts what you posted
Why don't you google it up for us to see and discuss then!
Back your statements up with facts - which you never which is why you are a joke on this forum to me and others and you have always been so.
See # 194 - What do you guys think? Is researching articles to back your position suddenly a bad thing? Or is that the foundation of this website?
Read my last post again, click on the link, and review the provided Census Bureau data for household incomes from 1967 throuth 2003.
Then respond by composing a post in your own words, not by simply copying someone else's work.
Incomes alone - as I explained - do not indicate anything without taking into account real buying power. Economics 101.
Reading 101.
Take another Mulligan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.