This article calls into question the view that investment has become essentially “global” in recent decades. The data presented here suggest that productive capital is in fact remarkably immobile. This raises questions about the extent to which capital mobility constrains progressive projects. The article concludes by suggesting ways that we might clarify our understanding of the accumulation process and its potential political consequences.
Bronfenbrenner, K.1996. Effects of plant closing or threat of plant closing on the right of workers to organize. Report to the Labor Secretariat of the North American Commission for Labor Cooperation. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, New York School of Industrial and Labor Relations.
2.
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA).1994. US direct investment abroad: Benchmark survey, 1994. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
3.
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). Various years. US direct investment abroad: Benchmark survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
4.
Crotty, J.1993. The rise and fall of the Keynesian revolution in the age of the global marketplace. In Creating a new world economy, ed. G. Epstein, J. Graham, and J. Nembhard, 163-181. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
5.
Epstein, G.1996. International capital mobility and the scope for national economic management. In States against markets, ed. R. Boyer and D. Drache, 211-226. New York: Routledge.
6.
Gordon, D.1988. The global economy: New edifice or crumbling foundations?New Left Review168 (March/April): 24-65.
7.
Gruben, W.1990. Mexican and maquiladora growth: Does it cost US jobs?Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas Economic Review (January): 15-29.
8.
Koechlin, T.1992. The responsiveness of investment to foreign economic conditions. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics6 (2): 203-216.
9.
Koechlin, T.1995. The globalization of investment. Contemporary Economic Policy13: 92-100.
10.
Koncz, J., and D. Yorgason. 2005. Direct investment position for 2004: Country and industry detail. Survey of Current Business (July): 40-53.
11.
Larudee, M. 2002. Inequality and its remedies in an age of integration. In Integration in the Americas Conference proceedings. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico. http://laii.unm.edu/conference/larudee.php.
12.
Lowe, J.2005. US direct investment abroad: Detail for historical-cost position and related capital and income flows, 2004. Survey of Current Business (September): 117-154.
13.
Mataloni, R.2004. A note on patterns of production and employment by US multinational companies. Survey of Current Business (March): 52-56.
14.
Mataloni, R.2005. US multinational companies: Operations in 2003. Survey of Current Business (July): 9-29.
15.
Mataloni, R., and D. Yorgason. 2002. Operations of US multinational companies: Preliminary results from the 1999 benchmark survey. Survey of Current Business (March): 24-54.
16.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2005. Economic globalisation indicators. New York: OECD.
17.
Pollin, R.2003. Contours of descent. New York: Verso.
18.
Sutcliffe, B., and A. Glyn. 2003. Measures of globalization and their misinterpretation. In The handbook of globalization, ed. J. Michie, 61-78. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
19.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).2003. World investment report, 2003. New York: United Nations.
20.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).2005. World investment report, 2005. New York: United Nations.
21.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). Various years. World investment report. New York: United Nations.
