The Great Migration
Has the end of the American century – and perhaps even the American United States – begun?
The rise of Asia, and in particular China, has to many been “inevitable” for a long time. According to this Italian commentary, from La Stampa, translated at Watching America.com the inevitable has now begun, as the Chinese and others have begun buying up U.S. assets with state funds, in what he calls The Great Migration.
It has been written with concern that the massive intervention of sovereign funds is a kind of trans-national state-takeover
And the writer raises…
…a disturbing parallel between the United States today and the decline of the Ottoman Empire when it ceded ownership of banks to pay its debts.
.
Although the U.S. maintains global and economic superiority for now, the fundamental shift, the writer suggests, is in the role of “global economic engine” – from the U.S. to developing countries that have been benefiting greatly from increases in the prices of their natural resources – from oil to grain.
Read “The Great Migration” translated on Watching America.com, and for related specifics, check out this recent article from Britain’s Financial Times, discussing the possibility of a decline in the U.S.’ triple-A credit rating from Moody’s.
6 Responses to “The Great Migration”
Yeah- I generally agree with the article- with our economic policies and the growth of the rest of the world such a shift is inevitable. The US is only 5 percent of the world's population. We buy the developing countries' cheap goods and their economies are bound to take off.
What I don't understand is:
“Major American banks, downstream of crisis loans, have seen large devaluations of its assets and have been rescued by sovereign state funds namely, from Asia and the Middle East, whose states have become shareholders.”
Anyone have any idea?
I find it interesting that only Ron Paul has addressed this in the Republican debates.
With the dollar in free fall, foreign interests can buy major U.S. financial institutions for a song. While this may not be dangerous in itself, it is possible that they will gain more control of the flow of capital and can direct it to further their own national interests.
We are in decline, and China is a threat (despite denials from the fringe), but don't write us (USA) off yet, nor hype China. China has to rush to grow before it faces an enormous aging problem of its own, much of it a product of its brutal population control policy.
“Anyone have any idea?”
Here's a current example.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120030610310488…
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120026248209686…
In addition to the short notice in Financial Times, a larger article from that publication can be found here.
Keep it in mind as you may wonder what Bush was doing in the Gulf other than reassuring those who are threatened by Iran.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/18856818-c2d7-11dc-b6…
DLS- thanks. The China deal with Citi fell through.
What I was referring to was the alarmist tone that the author used. He said “Major American banks, downstream of crisis loans, have seen large devaluations of its assets and have been rescued by sovereign state funds…”
A possible deal involving Citi and MER is hardly a rescue (that- according to the author- already happened) of the major American banks.
Certainly there is a lot to worry about with the financial industry and such a “rescue” of one or more US banks may happen in the future, but I disagree with the author's characterization of a supposed past rescue.