Chile, Indonesia, And Turkey

Haiti, Japan, Taiwan...what do they all have in common? All 3 have had unexpected major earthquakes strike them and demolish there land. But what is an earthquake? An earthquake is the movement of earth’s tectonic plates. They happen because a mass energy causes the constantly moving tectonic plates to pass one another in either a transform, convergent or divergent movement, after a long period of time pushing against each other. They usually occur in cities located on the border of the tectonic plates like California, British Columbia (west coast) and Japan. Depending on the intensity of the earthquake, it has the potential to cause a lot of destruction and hurt many civilians. It can degrade community to a point where it would take years to recover. However much destruction has been caused, there are precautions that could be taken before hand to reduce the damage. This report will be comparing 3 major recent earthquakes from Haiti, Japan and Taiwan and how each country is doing post-earthquake.

Historically, relations between the United States and Turkey were formed through mutual respect and interest. The first U.S. interaction dates to 1831, “when the United States established diplomatic relations with the Ottoman Empire” (the U.S. Department of State) in 1831 through the formal act of diplomatic recognition between the countries. The friendship was strengthened in the early 1900s as the United States was elevated to Embassy status in 1906. During World War I, however, the U.S. broke the neutrality and declared war against Germany, a prime ally of the Ottoman Empire for Central Powers. This incident caused a severity in the diplomatic relations between the U.S. and the

[UNCTAD2003] As a result, global FDI grew much faster than either trade or income in the last two decades. Whereas world real GDP increased at an average rate of 3.00% between 1985 and 2004 and world exports by 6.29%, world real inflows of FDI increased by 9.85%. The liberalization processes varied considerably, however, across countries in timing, speed, and magnitude.

More or less a third of the entire world’s stock market capitalization is represented by the five BRICS countries. The expected average growth rate for these emerging markets is expected to be four percent higher than all developed countries. Average growth rate for emerging markets is expected to be at five percent according to IMF predictions. Although for some of the BRICS countries overall growth may be lower than in previous years, yet these economies will still be probable to grow at a faster rate than developed countries. Long-term growth for these emerging markets looks very promising given these good growth projections, generally better debt-to-GDP ratios and higher foreign reserves compared to many developed countries. Rising

Most financial companies have now begun to eye China, India and Brazil, which hold the finance for 20 percent of the global economy and in future there will be 70 percent of total global GDP growth from these countries. There are compacts between these countries and China and Indian have opened markets globally owing to the international and US pressure after globalization. The need to invest in these countries stem from the fact that Indian market is very lucrative especially with the Forex and commodities. Likewise China has also opened up its financial markets and the investment flow can be two way in future.

Modern communications infrastructure makes it possible for anyone with a bank account to make a “foreign portfolio investment” (FPI). Rich and poor alike can gain from this ability to trade stocks and bonds overseas with speed and ease. For those with sufficient resources, however, a “foreign direct investment” (FDI) can also be made. While both types of investment can be lucrative for the investor, I believe that foreign direct investments are usually better for the country receiving the investment, and so FDIs should be the favored form of investment for those with the means to make them.

The purpose of this paper is to make a decision on whether I feel Egypt would be a good candidate for foreign direct investment. I have collected a large amount of research on Egypt’s economy in order to come up with my decision. I have taken into account several different factors including their current situation, the measures, and engines for growth, the benefits, and also the risks of doing business with such a place. There is hope that Egypt will improve but right now it seems they are just stagnating. Due to the reasons I have mentioned below, you will see I have decided that Egypt is not a good candidate for FDI at this time.

One striking feature of the sector financial system in recent a long time has been the growth of foreign direct investment (FDI), or funding by using transnational businesses in overseas international locations in an effort to manage belongings and manage production activities in those nations.

In 2009, China attracted $95 billion FDI inflows, accounting for 1.9 percent of its GDP compared with India’s $36.6 billion inflows, equivalent to 2.7 percent of its gross domestic product. China attracted 2.5 % more FDI’s than India in the year 2009.India’s FDI inflow dropped by 14 percent in 2009 and that of China by 12 percent. India should improve its infrastructure as well credibility of the government to attract FDI’s. India is a vast country with many natural resources including metals, minerals and oil deposits. English speaking ability gives edge over China to improve its service sector. India should sustainably increase it’s invest on infrastructure to attract more FDI’s. Foreign investors, who could invest their money anywhere, find more opportunities and less obstacles in China. (Zhou Siyu, 2010)

Abadie and Gardeazabel (2007) agreed that the stock markets are the main source of FDI, it is well known. But foreign firms that have been purchased through the stock market are in desperate need of financial services. This way, as a prospective investor makes decisions regarding his investments, he will be able to take into account the country’s financial development and banking development, and determine how such factors will ultimately affect their investments

In recent times, there has been increased attention devoted to the role that foreign direct in-vestment (FDI) could play in ameliorating the general dearth of capital available for investment in most developing countries. Even though FDI is primarily meant to bridge the gap between the desired level of gross national investment and the prevailing amount of domestic savings and in-vestment, it also results in positive externalities that often serve as a catalyst in the overall eco-nomic growth and development of the country that receives it. The inflow of FDI is known to yield indirect benefits, such as enhanced employment opportunities, the improvement of the bal-ance of payments (BOP) account situation due to the increased availability of foreign exchange in an economy, and perhaps, most importantly, the prospect of the transfer of technology, manageri-al skills and other intangible knowledge to the host country which would allow domestic firms to improve their collective profitability and performance (Elijah, 2006).

India and South Africa are members of the five major emerging economies. They are both developing countries however, they are well distinguished for their large democracy, fast-growing economies and significant influence on regional and global affairs. This report aims to comparatively analyse whether India or South Africa is in a better position to succeed in the global economy. For the purposes of this report, I will be comparing and analysing each country’s political and economic environment and also looking at the environment for foreign direct investment in order to determine whether India or South Africa is in a better position to succeed.

Similarly economic development is directly proportional to profitable investments, which are possible through foreign capital. On the contrary there are certain advantages and disadvantages associated with open capital accounts in emerging and developing economies. The choice of sourcing finances is very critical. It is recommended to attract foreign direct investments as the

The Philippines is a small archipelagic country, archipelagic meaning that it has very many islands, 7,107 to be exact. The people in the Philippines are referred to as Filipinos. The country is located in the South East part of Asia. There are 3 main geographical divisions in the country Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao with Luzon being in the north and Mindanao being at the south. The capital of the Philippines is Manila and the most populous city is Quezon City. The Philippines location in the Pacific Ring of Fire is close to the equator, this makes the country highly prone to typhoons and earthquakes. The country has an area of about 115,831 square miles and a population of about

In Indian context, the importance of FDI was realized way back in 1948 when emphasis was given on creating domestic base. However, since access to finance was quite limited, the attitude towards FDI was receptive (Kumar, 2004). Since then there was a debate over the necessity of FDI and Government of India in the 1980s cautiously went on deregulation of industries. However, after the adoption of liberal investment policy under economic reforms in 1991 resulted in attraction of more FDI inflow to the country. In recent times, FDI inflow to India increased by 17.1 percent in 2005, which is 5.8 percent of GDP of the country.