5 ms·
Of course, foreign capital inflows are hardly unique to Silicon Valley tech. Dodgy capital finds its way wherever speculation and money laundering are to be had
by rajekas 8y ago
Of course, foreign capital inflows are hardly unique to Silicon Valley tech. Dodgy capital finds its way wherever speculation and money laundering are to be had. Real estate is a huge example. We have known for a while that some of the priciest real estate in the world in cities such as New York and London is due to capital inflows from the Middle East, Russia, China, India and other places where people have made enormous fortunes through illegal or semi-legal means. But that's only the tip of the iceberg. There's a difference between selling drugs on the street and creating a narco-state. If you want to see the first narco-state of real estate, move to Vancouver, where Chinese capital has turned the city upside down.
The fact is that dodgy capital inflows are central to every speculative bubble: real estate, bitcoin, Uber for X, you name it. Who else has the money to throw around?
I feel like we are at the beginning of a sweatshop moment for finance. Way back when it became known that kids were slaving away to produce your shoes, there was a global outcry and enormous pressure put on companies such as Nike to improve their operations. Did that save the world? No it didn't, but it changed the way outsourcing was implemented.
Similarly, we need to change the moral landscape of finance. I don't mean the radical solution of socializing investment or samizdats that people write in secret communist pamphlets. I mean raising the bar for the mainstream - making it impossible for otherwise profit minded people to take certain kinds of money.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago> making it impossible for otherwise profit minded people to take certain kinds of money These are called sanctions. They are proper to consider, given the circumstances.
- rajekas 8y agoTrue. In a just world, the UN would be sanctioning KSA for its war in Yemen, but what are the chances of that happening? A privatized version is a modest alternative - a pledge that companies sign and enforce about their sources of financing. Nowhere near as good as state backed sanctions but a start.
- gowld 8y agoThe UN is mainly a a forum for a bunch of sovereign nations, not a world government. Sovereign nations can (and do) aplly sanctions where they see fit, unilaterally or in ad hoc multi-lateral agreements.
- rajekas 8y agoIn this case, the one nation whose sanctions are likely to impact the culprit is hesitant to do so because that will prevent the sales of weapons that invite the sanctions in the first place.
- Cshelton 8y agoIf you want to see something even more scary... go look at the amount of money given by these countries to U.S. politicians. Now legally you can't receive foreign money for a US campaign. The money comes in as gifts to non-profits and foundations owned by/supporting/supported by US politicians. Saudi money is one of the biggest. And if you typically align with the Democrat side, don't think it is just Republicans taking it. You will be shocked. Start with Hillary Clinton during her 2016 campaign. The money went to the Clinton Foundation. The list keeps going and it is on both sides.
- rajekas 8y agoAbsolutely. It would be a sign of progress if politicians and NGOs along with companies stopped taking blood money.
- cmurf 8y agoDo you have a source where we can go look this up? All I found was Trump made such a claim, but there's no proof either way. https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jul/07/fact-checking-donations-clinton-foundation/ https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jul/07...
- nkurz 8y agoI'm not sure what source should be considered authoritative, but here are some numbers from from the New York Times: The Clinton Foundation has accepted tens of millions of dollars from countries that the State Department — before, during and after Mrs. Clinton’s time as secretary — criticized for their records on sex discrimination and other human-rights issues. The countries include Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, Brunei and Algeria. Saudi Arabia has been a particularly generous benefactor. The kingdom gave between $10 million and $25 million to the Clinton Foundation. (Donations are typically reported in broad ranges, not specific amounts.) At least $1 million more was donated by Friends of Saudi Arabia, which was co-founded by a Saudi prince. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us/politics/hillary-clinton-presidential-campaign-charity.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us/politics/hillary-clint... Edit: Reading the politifact.com link you provided, I now see that it makes a very similar claim. While there is legitimate doubt as to the exact number, it seems wrong to say that there is "no proof either way". Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are looking for?
- 55555 8y ago> If you want to see the first narco-state of real estate, move to Vancouver, where Chinese capital has turned the city upside down. Are you implying that a significant amount of the Chinese money flooding into Vancouver originates from the drug trade? This is the first I have heard of this. Care to elaborate?
- rajekas 8y agoSorry for the confusion. What I meant was an analogy - just as Colombia or parts of Mexico were taken over by the narcotics industry and everything about them was transformed by the influx of drug money, Vancouver has been taken over by Chinese money transfers and everything about it has been transformed by that influx.