• protist@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    10 hours ago

    You’re really oversimplifying this situation, European multinationals do the exact same thing to US brands. Examples include Nestle, Unilever, and AB InBev, among many others.

    Multinational corporations make a boycott of a specific country’s products difficult, because oftentimes the factories that make the products may be within your country even if the top of the chain is located somewhere else.

    • alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      No, you are attacking a straw man.

      Of course it’s not black and white, but the overall balance is much more towards American capital than European capital.

      Even for a company like Unilever, American institutional investors hold a much larger share than European investors hold in Mondelez.

      That’s the point I was making.

      • boonhet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I’m European and even I’m part of the American institutional investor class.

        Retirement funds in stock based ETFs = everyone is part of these large insitutional funds. Until my requested change taked place, my fund mostly holds Blackrock (iShares) run ETFs and a few other American ones. Soon it’ll be Xtrackers and a few other European ones with no US specific fund, but I’m not rich so this is a drop in the sea.

      • protist@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        The GDP of the US is about $30 trillion USD while the GDP of the EU + UK is about $23 trillion USD. Europe has enough capital to effectively compete with the US, and it does. “American institutional investors” include a ton of foreign capital. This isn’t a “David vs Goliath” situation