Here we go again: The U.S president is attacked on a global scale for his thinking on trade and investments. Mrs. Merkel, chancellor of Germany even announced a “new chapter in U.S. European relations” and stated that “Europe must take our fate into our own hands’’. Similar accusations had been raised in 1980 after the election of President Reagan. He was labelled a B class actor, a cowboy and an inexperienced but lucky vote gainer. The accusers were wrong then and they are wrong now!
President Trump lived up to his convictions during the tense G-7 political summit just as he had already done during and after the U.S. presidential campaign. No surprises there when he reflected on the need for more balanced trade relations and the requirement for all nations to pay a fair contribution for the benefits they obtained from the United States.
For a long time standing now, “Latin American philanthropy” has been considered an oxymoron. Traditionally, wealthy Latins and corporations have had deep pockets but short hands, believing it the role of the public sector to fund charitable and philanthropic endeavors while keeping their own wealth in the family, shipping it offshore or giving it to the Church.
The times they-are-a- changing, however; for without much fanfare we are witnessing a growing awareness among the wealthy and corporations–principally through corporate foundations in the region–that philanthropic giving and social engagement are critically important and highly beneficial for their nations, to society, their companies and themselves. (It should be noted that most countries in Latin America use the term “private social investment” rather than philanthropy.)
What gave Rome it’s preeminent power in the ancient world? No doubt its legionnaires were feared from Iberia to Galcantray. To fund military might the descendants of Romulus engaged in prolific international trade. Today, as globalization and international trade spark heated debates in capitals around the world, it is important to remember the long history of trade. From the Chinese to the Phoenicians, the Spaniards and the Dutch, the mighty British empire and the American industrial powerhouse, trade has been at the center of every great power in history. Great powers can either take that which they need by force, or buy it away. To most, trade is clearly preferable.
Why should we worry about misaligned participations in trade? According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, less than 1 percent of U.S. firms export. Tens of thousands of small-business manufacturers and service sector firms could export their goods and services, but do not. These companies often fear the challenges of going overseas. But all firms entering new markets face shortcomings and disadvantages when compared to local competitors. Due to a lack of local knowledge, unfamiliarity with market conditions, insufficient insights into consumer behavior, and newness to political decision making, all new entrants encounter a “burden of foreignness.” Policymakers need to help prospective exporters overcome this burden and successfully access new opportunities overseas.