>Posted on 28 Apr 1997 at 00:33:03 by TELEC List Distributor (011802) > >[PEN-L:9681] Re: globalization question > >Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 21:33:55 -0700 (PDT) >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >From: Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Michael Hoover responded to my question about the integration of the U.S. >South into the national economy, saying that the government expended >considerable resources to encourage investment there. > >Why did they have to expend funds? Why was the investment so slow in >coming. I have seen references to the delay noting the lack of air >conditioning until the 1960s and the lack of infrastructure until the >interstate highways began in the 1950s. But surely conditions are more >difficult in Haiti or Vietnam. > >Any other comments? > -- >Michael Perelman >Economics Department >California State University >Chico, CA 95929 > >Tel. 916-898-5321 >E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Michael, Perhaps some of the explanation lies in different forms of ownership and capital mobility. Expansion into the 1950's U.S. south was led by branch plants and firms relocating there (the latter is particularly true of New England textile firms). Globalization in the 1990s has the capital flows, but not the ownership flows. Much offshore production is done by foreign-owned subsidiaries (witness the recent strike against a Nike supplier in I think it was Thailand, or some other Southeast Asian country). U.S. managers may only consider air conditioning to be important when their own skins are involved. Marsh Feldman Phone: 401/874-5953 Community Planning, 204 Rodman Hall FAX: 401/874-5511 The University of Rhode Island Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kingston, RI 02881-0815
