Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:04am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:04am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:04am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:04am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:04pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:04am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:04am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:04pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:04pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
Non-Economic Questions of the Day
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
The Stress Test Blind Alley
Apr 24 20098:04am EDT -
Happy Hour
Apr 23 20099:04pm EDT -
Recovery Without Rebalancing
Apr 23 20096:04pm EDT -
The Shape of Your Recession
Apr 23 20095:04pm EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

Nasdaq is not a Strategic Asset
Matt Cooper today describes a 19.9% stake in the Nasdaq stock exchange as a "strategic US asset" – going even further than Chuck Schumer, the only lawmaker who seems to have any concerns about the deal at all, who said only that the deal "gives me pause". Still, the idea that a minority stake in the Nasdaq is in any sense a strategic national asset of the US certainly proves what the WSJ said this morning, that protectionism in the US is increasing:
The U.S. doesn't allow foreign companies to buy airlines, shipping firms, television networks and some security-related businesses. The U.S. has raised concern about the increasing acquisitiveness of state-owned firms from China, Singapore and Middle Eastern countries. Yesterday, the Bush administration said it would scrutinize Nasdaq's proposed deal, a transaction that would give the Dubai government a stake in the U.S. stock-market operator.
A quick look at the dollar is all it takes to show that now is emphatically not a good time to start putting up barriers to foreign capital. Richard Branson isn't allowed to start an airline here unless he owns less than half of it and doesn't control it? Dubai Ports World isn't allowed to buy US ports? CNOOC isn't allowed to buy Unocal, a company most of whose assets aren't even in the US? Rupert Murdoch can't buy Fox without becoming a US citizen? All of these artificial barriers are harmful to the US economy: they reduce competitiveness, they make it harder for businesses to realize their true value, and they contribute to the weakening of the dollar because foreigners find it that much more difficult to buy US assets.
In all of those cases, however, at least the case could be made that a foreign company was buying a domestic company. In the case of the Dubai-Nasdaq deal, we're talking about a stake of less than 20%. How anybody who believes in a market economy could object to this deal, I have no idea. And Schumer's comments just serve to make him look like someone pandering to anti-Arab prejudice. Last time I looked, Wall Street was in New York State: he really ought to know better.






