From: "Max Sawicky" >
> On the latter, I would disagree that opposition
> to Mexican trucks reflects U.S. corporate
> interests. Capital is anti-protectionist,
> for the most part. In this case, U.S.
> 'nationalism' is founded on response to
> labor and to popular concerns
Capital tends to be anti-protectionist when it feels like it can and should freely invest in other markets. Actually, it might be more true to say that capital would always like the state to protect its markets, but if it really wants to get into other markets, its willing to bargain away protection to get access to other markets.
In the case of Mexico, how open is it to outside investment? I haven't really studied it much. I have the impression that investors regard it as less than transparent. I have an impression of corruption, cronyism, and a deep need for inside connections, much deeper than what's needed in the American market (which, for all its other failings, I think is widely seen as the most transparent market in the world).
Specifically with the issue of trucks, do American investors feel they can freely invest in Mexican truck companies? Do American transport companies feel that they could easily buy out Mexican truck companies? If not, then I doubt American capital is going to feel especially anti-protectionism in this case. What's in it for them?
--Lawrence Krubner