What does a new Treasury Secretary have to do with Global Relocation?
Paulson, in His Own WordsMay 30, 2006 12:26 p.m.
Henry Paulson, newly appointed to the job of Treasury secretary, has been a solid supporter of the Bush administration in commentary pieces published in The Wall Street Journal, the Financial Times and elsewhere. His arguments frequently also cite the benefits to Goldman Sachs, where he has been the sole chief executive officer since 1999. Below, excerpts.
* * *
On the pain and benefit of globalization
Today's global economy is in the midst of a period of … intense growing pains. The emergence of new technologies, more efficient global capital flows and production, distribution and servicing networks are converging to create new levels of competition and challenge our traditional notions of comparative advantage. … It is in America's interest to push for open markets that have the power to create new demand from consumers in emerging economies. (Full text)-- The Wall Street Journal, July 14, 2005
On Europe's failed deregulation, opposition to mergers
Europe must restructure its inadequate pension systems while finding the right mix of regulation and taxation. It needs less intrusive government regulation. It needs to liberalise and integrate its capital and labour markets and to promote development of continent-wide clearance and settlement systems. And it needs more accountable corporate governance. These are admittedly daunting challenges. Regrettably, it is unclear that Europe is willing to meet them. The failure of the European Takeover Directive squandered 12 years of efforts. Governments, including those in France and Germany, have recently taken some backward steps in deregulating labour markets. Even in the UK, there are worrying signs that regulation is becoming more intrusive in areas such as financial services, telecommunications, water and electricity. Moreover, mergers are under assault across the EU. There are, indeed, legitimate grounds for stopping some mergers; but the EU must be careful to avoid giving the impression of rigidity that risks inhibiting competition rather than enhancing it.-- Financial Times, Nov. 13, 2001
On how the U.S. will lose if it does not do business with China
Chinese economic reform has reached a milestone as PetroChina, the oil and gas company that is the flagship of Beijing's privatization program, has begun offering stock to the public. (Goldman Sachs was a proud underwriter of the initial offering.) Trading in the stock began last week on the New York and Hong Kong exchanges. … This entry of a giant state-owned Chinese company into the international equity market had been far from a sure thing. An array of special interests, led by labor unions, had lobbied hard against it, asking the Clinton administration, Congress and the Securities and Exchange Commission to prevent listing of the shares on the New York exchange. …If Congress turns down normalized trade with China, we are the ones who will be isolated. The rest of the world is eager to do business with the Chinese, and China will still be able to join the World Trade Organization. On the diplomatic level, a no vote would repudiate nearly 30 years of constructive engagement under Democratic and Republican administrations alike. -- New York Times, April 15, 2000
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114900189210166357.html?mod=home_whats_news_us
