Comments on: German Government and Business Responses to Sovereign Wealth http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/08/29/german-government-and-business-responses-to-sovereign-wealth/ Sat, 21 Nov 2009 16:40:10 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Judy Yeo http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/08/29/german-government-and-business-responses-to-sovereign-wealth/#comment-112089 Judy Yeo Tue, 02 Sep 2008 23:42:22 +0000 http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/08/29/german-government-and-business-responses-to-sovereign-wealth/#comment-112089 Not that such news is a surprise to anyone... perhaps the most liberal side of germany these days is the arts & music scene... does anyone get the sense that germany is starting to sound more like their norman neighbours... Rien be careful, Germany and France may well do what the southerners do if things get any worse. Wouldn't call what they did to Nokia sensible or diplomatic in any way. Besides, german corporatism has its own dark side, the tax evasion and alleged embezzlement /corruption is just part of it. Not that such news is a surprise to anyone…

perhaps the most liberal side of germany these days is the arts & music scene…

does anyone get the sense that germany is starting to sound more like their norman neighbours…

Rien

be careful, Germany and France may well do what the southerners do if things get any worse. Wouldn’t call what they did to Nokia sensible or diplomatic in any way. Besides, german corporatism has its own dark side, the tax evasion and alleged embezzlement /corruption is just part of it.

]]> By: Rien Huizer http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/08/29/german-government-and-business-responses-to-sovereign-wealth/#comment-112030 Rien Huizer Sat, 30 Aug 2008 20:27:18 +0000 http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/08/29/german-government-and-business-responses-to-sovereign-wealth/#comment-112030 The regulations that Germany wants to put in place are very reasonable. Germany has exemplary worker protection, worker representation on company boards etc. All of this helps too keep in place a uniquely German type of politician. German capitalism is no threat to them (no country has as much experience in keeping workers happy, productive and affordable) and the politicians are kind to their capitalists. And foreigners get the opportunity to buy black holes that no German would like to own. I have no idea Hapag Lloyd fits there (probably not, but it is smallish for the container business -incidentally do in Singapore's NOL, the suitor) but in general, German corporatism know what it wants to keep and what it wants to throw away. Apparently there is a risk that legal technicalities would allow foreigners to get the things Germand would like to keep, hence changing the law would be in order. I guess that the EU bureaucrats will have to watch their words, because germany presents a legitimate case of non-protectionism. Its is a robust democracy where the weirdest political movements are tolerated, layers and layers of checks and balances, very high social indicators and an extremely positive balance of payments. The Germans earn what the southerners waste..So, if NOL wants to buy HAPAG and the German elders do not like it, Spore should look elsewhere, or find a true private sector company to make the acquisition, like little PIL. New laws also work against non-souvereign investment? Sorry, how clever.. The regulations that Germany wants to put in place are very reasonable. Germany has exemplary worker protection, worker representation on company boards etc. All of this helps too keep in place a uniquely German type of politician. German capitalism is no threat to them (no country has as much experience in keeping workers happy, productive and affordable) and the politicians are kind to their capitalists. And foreigners get the opportunity to buy black holes that no German would like to own. I have no idea Hapag Lloyd fits there (probably not, but it is smallish for the container business -incidentally do in Singapore’s NOL, the suitor) but in general, German corporatism know what it wants to keep and what it wants to throw away. Apparently there is a risk that legal technicalities would allow foreigners to get the things Germand would like to keep, hence changing the law would be in order. I guess that the EU bureaucrats will have to watch their words, because germany presents a legitimate case of non-protectionism. Its is a robust democracy where the weirdest political movements are tolerated, layers and layers of checks and balances, very high social indicators and an extremely positive balance of payments. The Germans earn what the southerners waste..So, if NOL wants to buy HAPAG and the German elders do not like it, Spore should look elsewhere, or find a true private sector company to make the acquisition, like little PIL. New laws also work against non-souvereign investment? Sorry, how clever..

]]> By: guest http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/08/29/german-government-and-business-responses-to-sovereign-wealth/#comment-111995 guest Fri, 29 Aug 2008 20:53:11 +0000 http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/08/29/german-government-and-business-responses-to-sovereign-wealth/#comment-111995 I agree with fatbrick, and I'd add that Germany has a big surplus. It's not Lehman's or USofA case. I agree with fatbrick, and I’d add that Germany has a big surplus. It’s not Lehman’s or USofA case.

]]> By: fatbrick http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/08/29/german-government-and-business-responses-to-sovereign-wealth/#comment-111992 fatbrick Fri, 29 Aug 2008 16:54:46 +0000 http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/08/29/german-government-and-business-responses-to-sovereign-wealth/#comment-111992 If a government does not want you to buy it, you just do not get it. End of story. If a government does not want you to buy it, you just do not get it. End of story.

]]> By: Twofish http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/08/29/german-government-and-business-responses-to-sovereign-wealth/#comment-111990 Twofish Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:33:27 +0000 http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/08/29/german-government-and-business-responses-to-sovereign-wealth/#comment-111990 I don't think that any measures that are being proposed are specifically related to SWF's, but rather to foreign purchasers. It's hard for me to think of a case in which a nation would ban an SWF, but would allow an non-SWF merger or acquisition. In the case of the United States, I don't think that any new legislation is needed since Exio-Florio and the Williams Act can handle every situation that I can think of. I don’t think that any measures that are being proposed are specifically related to SWF’s, but rather to foreign purchasers. It’s hard for me to think of a case in which a nation would ban an SWF, but would allow an non-SWF merger or acquisition.

In the case of the United States, I don’t think that any new legislation is needed since Exio-Florio and the Williams Act can handle every situation that I can think of.

]]> By: Dave Chiang http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/08/29/german-government-and-business-responses-to-sovereign-wealth/#comment-111984 Dave Chiang Fri, 29 Aug 2008 14:39:45 +0000 http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/08/29/german-government-and-business-responses-to-sovereign-wealth/#comment-111984 We'll be Worse Off Whoever's President: Jim Rogers http://www.cnbc.com/id/26452751 Neither of the two contenders for president understands the economy and they are likely to cause more problems than they would solve, investor Jim Rogers, CEO of Jim Rogers holdings, told "Squawk Box Europe" on Friday. "Neither one of these guys understands what's going on, they don't understand currency markets, economies, they don't understand the world," Rogers said. "Both of them are going to cause us more problems than they're going to solve." 'Bailing Out their Friends on Wall Street' Deep changes are needed in the U.S. system and big Wall Street banks should not be rescued by the authorities when they run into trouble, to avoid moral hazard, Rogers told CNBC Europe. "They're bailing out Wall Street, because all their friends are on Wall Street," he said. "When Ben Bernanke gets a phone call from the head Lehman, he takes the call, but if some poor school teacher in Oklahoma calls him, he doesn't take the call." "He's dealing with his friends on Wall Street trying to save them when in fact he should let them fail. That would be the better solution, at least for 300 million Americans," Rogers added. The economic stimulus package launched this year to try and fend off recession in the U.S. is unlikely to have positive consequences in the long term, despite a higher-than-forecast advance of gross domestic product in the second quarter, Rogers said. Supporting troubled investment banks instead of letting them go bust prevents a cleansing of the economy while putting additional burdens on taxpayers, but neither of the two candidates is likely to stop this, he added. We’ll be Worse Off Whoever’s President: Jim Rogers
http://www.cnbc.com/id/26452751

Neither of the two contenders for president understands the economy and they are likely to cause more problems than they would solve, investor Jim Rogers, CEO of Jim Rogers holdings, told “Squawk Box Europe” on Friday.

“Neither one of these guys understands what’s going on, they don’t understand currency markets, economies, they don’t understand the world,” Rogers said. “Both of them are going to cause us more problems than they’re going to solve.”

‘Bailing Out their Friends on Wall Street’

Deep changes are needed in the U.S. system and big Wall Street banks should not be rescued by the authorities when they run into trouble, to avoid moral hazard, Rogers told CNBC Europe.

“They’re bailing out Wall Street, because all their friends are on Wall Street,” he said. “When Ben Bernanke gets a phone call from the head Lehman, he takes the call, but if some poor school teacher in Oklahoma calls him, he doesn’t take the call.”

“He’s dealing with his friends on Wall Street trying to save them when in fact he should let them fail. That would be the better solution, at least for 300 million Americans,” Rogers added.

The economic stimulus package launched this year to try and fend off recession in the U.S. is unlikely to have positive consequences in the long term, despite a higher-than-forecast advance of gross domestic product in the second quarter, Rogers said.

Supporting troubled investment banks instead of letting them go bust prevents a cleansing of the economy while putting additional burdens on taxpayers, but neither of the two candidates is likely to stop this, he added.

]]>