As China Strikes Deals, U.S. Considers Expanding Foreign Reviews

This is all fine and good, but first we need to have a serious conversation about the NYT's refusal to capitalize acronyms. "Cfius" looks like an individual, whereas "CFIUS" is immediately understood as an organization.

We need to maintain our vigilance before, during and after entering into financial transactions with China and Russia in the US, in order to protect our national security interests. We should treat them only with the same reciprocity that they treat US investment in China and Russia. Further, we should demand the same things that they demand from us, and nothing less. Our security interests are more important to us, than their investing in the US.

I am sure that all of the government worshiping liberal/progressives would approve of this expansion of government power as it would allow them to add even more useless, parasitic, bureaucratic vermin to the millions that already infest all levels of government. In their ideal world, everyone would work for their great god government just like in the old Soviet Union.

US is right to reconsider some of these sales. We should NOT let the CHinese buy up so many thing. Look at Smithfield Ham - an important agricultrual asset that we allowed the Chinese to buy.

Our lawmakers fail to understand that China is a dishonest country, which is grasping at all the world minerals and businesses so it can be the dominate power in the world. The Chinese can NEVER be trusted so stop approving sales which involve China

I think goods that are made in China should be marked so consumer like myself who don't wish to buy stuff made in China can be alerted.

There is more here than just "soft powers". Shuanghui International Holdings recently purchased Smithfield Foods, one of our county's largest pork processors. Smithfield is also an aggressive propagator of concentrated animal feeding operations, which have been tied to groundwater contamination problems. The question may arise: Do we want to feed China at the expense of our environment?

Keep the Chinese away. They come like thieves in the night.

Unlike when our trading partners in Europe buy US companies (Russia excluded), the Chinese always have ulterior motives. They get ahead by stealing IP and blocking foreign companies from their own markets. The world should realize from years of experience that the Chinese market, although large, is not worth the many downsides of trading with them. No ones seems to learn.

The first item should be the national debt, which the article did not mention at all. In fact, a few countries including China had reduced their holdings in the last few years.

China forces companies doing business in China to reveal their technology and trade secrets. They are not interested in simply "doing business" with us. They are a hostile power and should be treated as such. Their methods have successfully created an enormous transfer of wealth from the U.S to them. So yes - we should review and block attempts by China to insinuate their way into our economy. Individual American investors are enriched by selling out to China but as a nation, we are writing our own epitaph.

The world will be a different place if we are to be constrained in out ability to think, speak and communicate globally. Witness what happens to Joshua Wong in Thailand where he was barred from entering at China' s request.

Those who believe that Chinese investment in Hollywood is benign, startup funding is without an agenda and buying of global technogy leaders is just a commercial operation are barking up the wrong tree.

Decades from now the western world will rue the day it so easily and willingly allowed investment without restrictions while being hampered and restricted in China from conducting business there on a level playing field.

China has both official and unofficial quotas for foreign films released in China. For any film which seeks a commercial (i.e., non-pirated) release in China, there is a strict censorship process which usually starts at the script stage. Less than 20% of American films released in the US are legally and commercially available in China. This is not because of market reasons, but driven purely by ideology.

In China, every single piece of media is controlled, not just by the government, but the Communist Party. According to China's president, "the last name of the media is Party".

In China, yes, there is private enterprise. Entrepreneurs are generally free to pursue their ambition... until that business reaches a certain size. Once that threshold is reached, there is no difference whatsoever in the underlying political intentions of a "private" company's "overseas investments" and that of a state-owned behemoth.

That threshold was long ago reached at Wanda, as it was with Huawei and other so-called private enterprises like Anbang, owner of the Waldorf-Astoria and would-be owner of Starwood. Sure, Anbang is a private-held enterprise. When you walk into their lobby there is a 60 foot oil painting of Deng Xiaoping riding a horse. Just in case you weren't sure.

Oh and by the way, The New York Times has been banned in China for some years now, for the transgression of exposing facts about the CPC.

So yes, let's have a closer look at who's buying our assets.

How does China review proposed US acquisitions there? A little comparison would be helpful. I seem to remember restrictive terms for social media companies (i.e., they have to censor to operate there), but I don't know what other Chinese companies may have been bought or invested in by US-based corporations.

I find it ironic that the Dalian Wanda Group bought AMC Theaters shortly after the state of Kansas gave AMC millions in tax abatements in order to lure the company across the state line into Kansas, in the continuing border war between Kansas and Missouri. What foresight Sam Brownback had, cutting taxes to the bone and giving away what monies they had, ultimately. to a Chinese company. No wonder the state is going down the tubes.

I'm not convinced there is a problem, and this seems like an unnecessary barrier to capital until such time as it is shown there is a problem.

What was Joe McCarthy’s line the State Department and the Hollywood is infested with Communists? Looks like it still works for Robert Pittenger, a Republican congressman from North Carolina, et al. Yes do build a wall, protect us from Chinese money infecting the country. We don’t want their investment, tell them to go elsewhere in this Globalized world.

“Even with the 2014– 2015 slump, China is quickly becoming the world’s largest cross-border investor as measured by foreign exchange reserves, portfolio capital, and FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) with its total overseas holdings projected to reach $ 20 trillion by 2020. The Cambridge scholar Peter Nolan has written that the West is still more “in China” than China is “in the world,” but that is changing quickly. Indeed, more capital now flows out of China than into it.” (Khanna, Parag. Connectography: Mapping the Future of Global Civilization).
Protect us Congress!