[John Geyer]

It is not the the business of the voters to get involved in the corporate activities of a company. The only time you have any say so is if you own stock in the company. It is risky to turn business into political campaigns, as its never a good thing when government interfers with business operations.

[ECM]

...as its never a good thing when government interfers with business operations.

Sort of like if the Chinese gov't. gets involved in PG&E through, say, a shell company?

[MeanWestTexan]

You are correct, of course.

A sale only happens if the sellers in the US have (in their eyes) a more profitable venture to buy.

Exceptions for sensitive indutries should be made, of course.

But explain that to the same people who think we should be manufacturing plastic crap here in America and not permit "ferigners" to own port-servicing companies in the US. (Instead, leave that to the patriotic la cosa nostra!)

[Old_Mil]

The only time you have any say so is if you own stock in the company.

Actually, there's one time you have more say so than when you own stock in a company: when you are the customer. If the PG&E board wishes to sell the company to the Chinese, that is their choice. If customers choose not to do business with them because of it, that is the customer's choice.

Unlike ports and defense contractors, it would not appear as if there were any national security issues involved in the sale of a power company to a nuclear-capable nation.

[drypowder]

I agree and I should have added that SMUD stands for Sacramento Municipal Utility District. It's a special district, non profit, not a corporation and is essentially governed by the people. The SMUD board has approved the expansion but the Yolo voters first have to approve it as well. All I'm saying is that many people probably won't want their money supporting a foreign gov. It's bad enough that we have to indirectly support OPEC but we have no choice, in this matter we do.

[Wuli]

"It is not the the business of the voters to get involved in the corporate activities of a company. The only time you have any say so is if you own stock in the company. It is risky to turn business into political campaigns, as its never a good thing when government interfers with business operations."

If China were a free country, and the buyer was a politically independent "free enterprise" private company, I would not complain.

But China is not a free country, a company owned or controlled by the Chinese government is not a free and independent private company and there is never anything apolitical or non-political about any thing that the Chinese government does.

Allowing Chinese companies owned and/or controlled by the Chinese government to operate in the domestic economy of the U.S. is disadvantageous to U.S. companies who can only raise capital privately.

Allowing Chinese companies owned and/or controlled by the Chinese government to operate in the domestic economy of the U.S. rewards the political economic model of China, which is state-capitalism, not free market capitalism. If you're looking for an example, the last nation which fully adopted this economic model was Nazi Germany - "capitalism" under the complete control of a dictatorial state. And while China has become very "free er" in how it raises and spends capital, it remains a dictatorship and anything resembling economic "freedom" in China is known by everyone in China as no more than priveleges that are revokable by the state whenever it sees the need.

You are not looking at political and economic reality if you are comparing a Chinese government owned and/or controlled company as something equivelant to a free, private company in the U.S. They are not the same. And you are fooled if you think the Chinese stock market means anything, because the stock that is sold is never, and will never, represent "control" of the Chinese company, government or private.

You are being fooled by appearances, if you think it is free or fair competition when one company can rely on it's government's treasury, state-owned and politically run banks, and it's government's power for its resources and you think it's 'equal' competition against a private American company. It's not.

I think America should be open to all foreign investors and companies THAT ARE 100% PRIVATELY OWNED AND OPERATED in their home countries. That would be FAIR.