JuryFury.com                                                                              A New Issue Every Monday !   SUBSCRIBE NOW !!
Online School of Politics

JuryFury Chat     I-Traderschool     QuietPoly.com    Contributors   Research     Future Discussions                               
Areas of Interest



THE USA

American Foreign Policy

US House and Senate
US Presidents
State & Local Politics





Regional Politics
Politics of China
The British Commonwealth
Indian Subcontinent
Middle East
The European Union
Africa
Latin America
ASEAN
NATO
United Nations
The Non-aligned Movement
Eastern Europe
New Nations of the 20th Century



General Topics
Constitutional Law
Human Rights
Nuclear Disarmament & Treaties
International Warfare
Environmental Law
Peace Treaties
Economic & Social Alliances
International Organizations
Journalism & Media
Racism and Democracy
Women in the Workplace
Family Law
Courts and Practices
The Judicial System
Higher Education
Education and Government
Health Care & Insurance
Rights of the Disabled
Copyright & Working Online
Legal Representation
Legal Insurance
Pornography
Domestic Violence
Religion & Law
Workers Rights
Employers Rights
Prison & Life after
Social Organizations
Welfare & Poverty
Taxation and Democracy
Third World Aid Programs
Space Exploration
Alternative Energy
Petroleum Industry & Cars
Nuclear Power
Programs for the Arts
Sports Education
Policing the Internet
Privacy and freedom
Immigration
Food and Regulation
War on Drugs
War on Pharmaceuticals
Public Housing
Pollution and Control
Sexual Harrassment
Discrimination
Electoral Process
Consumers Rights
Investors Rights
Abortion
Death Penalty
Social Security

Gender & Sexuality




Grassroots Organization
ACLU
World Watch
Oxfam
UNICEF
United Negro Fund
Ford Foundation

(suggestions welcome at  our chatsite)




Law of the Economy

Join
I-Traderschool,
our sister magazine,
for debates and news.




Economics: A Postmortem Necessary                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   


Part VII:  Foreign Investment in the US:  What information can we find in these figures?




Abstract:  In the later part of the 1990s, foreign investors were investing more in US-based companies than the US was in foreign-based companies. Most of the foreign direct investment occurred in high-tech manufacturing industries. But did jobs rise in these US sectors due to this investment? Not necessarily.



Paper:   We always hear how the US companies are leaving the US or investing in manufacturing jobs abroad. The previous paper in this series exposed how the US businesses were indeed investing in manufacturing sectors abroad, as alleged, but they were investing three times more in the foreign non-depository financial industries -- brokerages, pensions, mutual funds, insurance companies, real estate. This paper tries to show which US sectors attracted Net Foreign Direct Investment in the late 90s.


Using the Bureau of Economic Analysis data on Foreign Direct Investment in the US: Total Capital Flows: 1994-1999,
the following table was constructed:



Foreign Investment in the USA by Industry: 1994-1999 data
(investment figures in Millions of Dollars)
           




1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999

Total US Direct Investment Abroad



73,252

92,074

84,426

95,769


131,000


no data

Foreign Manufacturing

23,989
44,472
24,325
28,326
23,000
no data


Foreign Direct Investment in US



45,095


58,772


84,455


103,398


174,434



283,376

Manufacturing

19,673
 28,739
37,538 35,596
83,406
 82,382
Food & kindred products
-1,375
5,652
1,981
-431  1,158 -1,637
Chemical and allied products
 10,820 11,771
 8,081
15,733
7,445 7,435
Primary and Fabricated Metals
1,982
403
5,397
   518
1,217
2,881
Machinery1
3,826
3,516
2,868
3,882
2,047  17,878
Computers, electronics



 4,493 18,428
29,481
Electrical Equipment, Appliances, Parts



-118
 1,866
 4,206
Transportation Equipment



2,482
38,553
7,153
Other Manu.
4,419
 7,398
19,211



Wholesale Trade
 5,785
 6,556
7,974
 11,285
38,553
16,458
Petroleum 1,665
3,863
8,852



Retail Trade
1,532
1,336
2,708  3,061
3,327
3,335
Information



 10,500
1,746
 81,894
Depository Institutions
3,800
6,879
138
 7,175
5,420
 19,471
Finance (not depository)
1,751
  4,009
6,186
 19,849
  6,617
35,185
Insurance and Real Estate2 3,018
812
9282
3,079
 2,118
  5,948
Services 3 (See Notes)
2,303
 1,551
4,214

        

Professional, Scientific, Technical Services



2,841
  1,472
   5,826
Other
5,570
2,672
7,562
 8,351
1,972
 32,876

(Note:  Regions in yellow show US sectors with negative net Foreign Direct Investment. See footnotes for explanations to 1, 2, 3.)




Summary of Table:


In the later part of the 1990s
Foreign Direct Investment in US outpaced US Direct Investment Abroad. And after 1997 the world seemed to be pouring money into the US economy.

Between 1994-1999, Foreign Direct Investment in US Manufacturing sectors rose most consistently, and occured predominantly in the Computer and Electronics, Transportation Equipment, and also in Chemicals and Allied Products industries -- an increase of 300%.

The Food and Kindred Products and the Primary and Fabricated Metals industries saw too much fluctuation, the numbers for Foreign Direct Investing shifting every 2yrs between negative and positive. Chemical and Allied Products and also the Primary and Fabricated Metals sectors fluctuated a lot, from positive to negative growth.

Foreign Direct Investment in US Machinery went up sharply later in 1999 -- compared to 1994 figure, by 350% -- but declined between 1994-1996.

Other sectors such as Depository Institutions and also Finance (non-depository) some some level of uncertainty year-to-year, though the increases from 1994 to 1999 figures were sharp -- Depository by 400%; Non-depository by 1900%. Real Estate and Insurance doubled.




The Connection between Foreign Direct Investment and Jobs in the US?


Now that we know that Foreign Direct Investment in the US high-tech Manufacturing sectors went up what should we assume about jobs in these sector?

After all, a rise in Foreign Direct Investment in any sector may not imply a rise in over-all investment in that sector. And even if over all investment rises, what's to say companies will hire more people?

There are many situations in which companies do not increase employment even if investment goes up. In times of recessions, when capital and labor force alike are under-utilized, there may not be a ready increase in labor employment.

In the 1994-1999 time period however, the US was enjoying GDP growth, a scenario that signals more positive expectations for the future. In such a case, one might expect employment numbers to be going up in general and in these sectors. But a look at actual employment numbers might say a different story.




Employment Changes by Industry:

I know that investment today does not lead to employment rise today. Hence I emphasized sectors that showed positive growth in Foreign Direct Investment below.

A look at Paper VII B:  How Employment Changed between 1994-1999 in the US is necessary to see if employment changed in the sectors that recieved Net Foreign Direct Investment.





Average change in Foreign Direct Investment
Average change in Employment


Total


400%

8%


Manufacturing
;

High-tech



400%


1.3%


Finance:


Non-Depository




1900%



10%


Transportation:


Air  


200%

--

14%

22%





These figures reveal that a 400% rise in Foreign Direct Investment in the US corresponded with an 8% rise in employment overall. It also corresponded to an almost insignificant rise of 1.3% in manufacturing employment.

A 200% rise in Transportation Investment corresponded with a 14% rise in employment in the transportation sector. And a 1900% increase in Non-depository Finance lead to a 10% rise in employment in that sector.

This implies that there is no strong correlation between % rise in Foreign Direct Investment and in % change in Employment in that sector, though there is a positive one.




Is the Converse True?


When employment rises do we assume that net foreign direct investment has gone up?

Looking again at 
Paper VII B:  How Employment Changed between 1994-1999 in the US one sees that some sectors grew despite no rise in Foreign Direct Investment. Thus, foreign direct investment is not a sign of growth in the US, where domestic private investment is healthy.

Foreign Direct Investment is more strongly related to employment statistics when neither Government Spending nor Private Domestic Investment are significant. This is the case in many poorer nations.




What explains Foreign Investment figures?



Investors are attracted to expectations of high-performance or the illusion of it. Investors get a risk premium in exchange for investing in a business. Hence, if, premium discovery is possible, and if they wish to maximize risk premium, investors follow businesses that offer maximum interest rates on business loans and maximum capital gains and dividend income potential on stocks of the company.

As for why businesses relocate or give business to foreign companies, it's usually due to some assesment of greater returns.

Perhaps there are reduced barriers to capital markets or tax incentives. Perhaps wages are cheaper. Always, economic conditions that companies are exposed to determines their mobility globally. It leads to competitiveness and alliances across borders.

The 1994-1999 figures showed some sharp changes in some sectors. Why did those happen?  The period after 1996 saw a sharp jump in Foreign Direct Investment in some sectors. Why kind of market forces shaped those?

Was it the collapse of the Asian Banking system in the Far East? The global panic following the Stock Market Crash of 1997? But the Finance sectors shown did not show a rapid rise in 1997, but a rapid rise in 1996, followed by a fall in 1997, and then a rise in 1998. Were the finance industry investors worldwide apprehensive about the finance industry and trying to invest in other industries -- like Chemical and Allied Products?




International Trade and Multinationals


The questions raised in this paper reveal that by themselves these figures on Foreign Direct Investment in the US reveals very little. They don't include anything about the business relationships that we see in global markets.


The Loop:

Let's take the scenario where a US-based manufacturer of clothes goes to say, Bangladesh, and invests in a Bangladeshi garments company. Possible outcomes of this are:

  • The US company lays off garments workers that it originally employed in the US.
  • The US company now either owns a certain part of business of the Bangladeshi company -- is a business partner  --  or iis a business lender, often capable of buying up the Bangladeshi company in case of default.
  • The US company sets conditional terms for doing business. For e.g. it convinces the Bangladeshi company to buy machinery from one of its subsidiaries/business partners/investors that makes machines for garments. The "partner/benefactor" in this case could be in the US or UK or Egypt.
  • The third party involved repays the US company by extending a business contract, or is simply part of some holding company that runs the US company.

It's hard to make sense of how any multinational company or a company exposed to international trade and investment is better or worse off from the way actual Investment figures for US Direct Investment or Foreign Investment in the US look. We must investigate for such loops.



Skepticism in Statistics:


So, perhaps a net gain in Bangladeshi Direct Investment in the machinery industry in the US is the cause of a net gain in US direct investment in the Garments industry in Bangladesh. And perhaps this happens despite there being cheaper options in China or India. Perhaps some nations have the ability to set such conditional contracts and greatly coerce Foreign Investors.

The fact that there is a direct power disparity between Bangladesh and the US -- both economic and military -- gives the US and such super powers much leahway in how international trade is done.

As such, Foreign Direct Investment statistics may be more representative of how good US businesses and embassies abroad are in deal-making with foreign counterparts and thus less and less reflective of the competitiveness of US sectors recieving foreign investment.






Notes:  

1994-1995 and Industry Data came from here.

1.    It's not clear if Machinery includes Electrical Equipment and Appliances and Transportation Equipment, for 1994-1996.

2.   1994-1996 Real Estate and Insurance figures were added, since after that, the sum was shown.

3.    It's not clear if Services in 1994-1996 included
Professional, Scientific, Technical Services.

4.   It's not clear if Other in 1994-1996 is defined same as for after years.

5.   It's not clear what transportation equipment includes - vehicles, airplanes etc.







 


ALL Awards & Internships




Become an Activist

Join an Organization
Get Volunteerism Alert
Write Letters to a local Politician
Start your own Group





Applied Politics Projects
Suggest a Project
Start your Yahoo Groups
Get Internship Credit
Funding for Projects





Encourage Discussion

Join Juryfury Chat
Promote Juryfury.com
Join online discussion Groups





Be In the Spotlight
Let us Interview you :
Authors of political books
Activists
Journalists
Lawyers
Law Enforcement
Politicians
Politican Scientists





Archives





Be A Columnist

Get Internship Credit
Write twice a Month
Get Heard
Start a Yahoo Group






Advertise with Us
Books (Free)




About Us

Our Staff & Contributors
Our Magazines
   Quietpoly.com
   I-Traderschool
   Juryfury.com
The Company





Our Address:
QuietPoly Inc.
240 W. Saunders. Dr. (#146)

Flagstaff, AZ 86001
Tel (928) 214-7365
quietpoly@yahoo.com





Our Affiliations
MoveOn.org
MediaChannel.org
IndyMedia.org