Why Foreign Ownership of US Assets is a Big Deal

A few weeks back President Bush used his trip to the Olympics to chide his hosts, the Chinese, about human rights violations. Even if the president was truly passionate about the issue that probably wasn't the best move.

Last week the Chinese - along with our friends the Japanese - are said to have insisted that Washington take action to protect their investments in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which is exactly what happened.

A lot of ... Full Story »

Posted by Marsha Iverson

See All Reviews »

Review

Marsha Iverson
3.7
by Marsha Iverson - Mar. 24, 2009

I tend to take the New York Post with a block of salt, but this article provides a no-holds-barred synopsis of the down-side of foreign ownership of US assets: undue influence on US governance, economy, and foreign policy when we are in hock up to our eyeballs to foreign investors.

It is time to rethink the "global economy" while we still have a say in the matter. One side leans toward the idea that our global interconnections will lead to mutually supportive policies based on common interests. I personally like that view, but consider it less likely to prevail. The other view is one of economic dominance rules: and we're no longer on top. I don't know which side will prevail--but I do know we'd better think about it before we lose all hope of having a choice.

Last week the Chinese – along with our friends the Japanese – are said to have insisted that Washington take action to protect their investments in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which is exactly what happened. A lot of stuff has happened in the past week – AIG’s bailout by the government, Lehman Brothers’ bankruptcy and Merrill Lynch’s shotgun marriage to Bank of America, to name a few. But the fact that the Chinese, or anyone for that matter, had any influence as to how our country conducts its financial affairs is by far the most important and long-ranging event. This is what it feels like to be poor. This is what it feels like to have people – or in this case a country that doesn’t particularly like us – pushing us around.

And making our creditors happy is what the game is all about. So, you and I are now the proud parents of Fannie and Freddie, which were once only government-sponsored enterprises but are now full-fledged dependents. And no sooner were they brought into the family than we adopted AIG. It’s not that I think we should have allowed Fannie and Freddie to become orphans and leave their trillions of dollars in mortgage holdings in the evil hands of the financial markets. It is just that the situation should have never gotten this bad. We should not have relied so heavily on foreign governments buying our bonds and funding our deficits. We shouldn’t have spent so much more than we had, allowing our federal deficits to soar. And if our president wants to criticize OPEC, or the Chinese, or the Japanese – for anything up to and including their cuisine – he shouldn’t have to worry about financial reprisals.

What we have right now is a delicate truce. An arrangement. Foreigners will hold their noses and keep plowing their billions into the US economy as long as Washington snaps to it whenever they have a gripe. It’s like a landlord/tenant relationship. Despite the fact that we might own the building, we as the landlord will have to jump whenever there is a leaky pipe. And right now pipes are leaking all over the place.

See All Reviews »

Marsha's Rating

Overall
3.7

Good
from 16 answers
Quality
3.8
Information
4.0
Insight
4.0
Style
4.0
Context
3.0
Enterprise
4.0
Expertise
3.0
Originality
3.0
Relevance
5.0
Popularity
3.5
Recommendation
5.0
Credibility
2.0
More How our ratings work »