The Japanese steelmaking company Nippon Steel wanted to buy U.S. Steel and keep the operations running in the U.S., Cleveland-Cliffs (U.S. Steels competitor) CEO (who is Brazilian-American (more on that later) made some remarks essentially saying America needs to keep its steelmaking operations in American hands and made a bid for the company as well. However, that would further consolidate the steel industry leading towards a monopoly, by a company ran by, a Brazilian-American.

Nucor is the leading steel manufacturer in the U.S. but doesn’t deem steel for the automotive industry worthy of their time because they make more money producing cheaper products (which keeps their company growing…and thus employees paid)

Biden blocked the deal between Japan’s Nippon Steel and U.S. Steel (which was overwhelmingly voted for by the union) for $14.9 billion…which has left a poor taste in the mouth of the Japanese considering the US and Japan has had a fairly decent trade relationship since World War II (more on that later). The remarks made by the Brazilian-American CEO of Cleveland-Cliffs, definitely don’t help as some Japanese feels this tension could widen because of the rising concerns regarding Asian/ and Asian American prosperity in the U.S.

_______________________________

During Trump’s last presidency there seemed to be a rise of “America first” patriotism in other countries and their leaders (see Brazil’s Bolsonaro). Part of me wonders whether this stems from the potential trade arrangements that could be made in other countries’ ability to boost their GDP, and less about a true love for American citizens. Basically, brown-nosing Trump helped boost their economy. The logic being “If Trump loves himself, the more I mirror him, he’ll love me too…and thus want to do business with me so I can take better care of my people*.

It’s a dangerous precedent being set where the average American loses out because no matter WHERE the industry/job goes….it isn’t built for you to be a participant in as the future goes on. (see Elon Musk,/Vivek recent comments).

From my perspective, this trend of how “growth” is achieved becomes a down cycle until America is America no more. But…as it began so it i’ll continue. And it began as a colony with charters from other countries…
______________

Protectionism <—if you’ve never heard that word before, learn it. Try that lens on when you’re reading historical and current events regarding trade relationships globally and domestically.

What does America look like 20 years from now if much of its manufacturing and critical infrastructure is foreign owned?

Will everything not “Owned by/Made In America” potentially become a “national security threat?

Does foreign investment in American companies have more dominance over how America is shaped then the American people?

What IS America currently, if not a multi-national hedge investment for foreign nations?

TAKEAWAYS

1. Protectionism and Foreign Ownership of U.S. Assets

Protectionism—where a country prioritizes its own industries and workers by restricting foreign competition or investment—has long been a topic of debate. Your concerns about foreign ownership of critical infrastructure and manufacturing in the U.S. are significant. If much of America’s core industries are owned or heavily influenced by foreign interests, it could create a situation where U.S. policies are shaped by those countries’ needs and priorities rather than American citizens’ interests.

This issue could be particularly pertinent for industries seen as vital to national security, like steel, semiconductors, or energy. If foreign companies control large portions of these sectors, they could, in theory, sway policy, or worse, threaten U.S. sovereignty in moments of geopolitical tension. The ongoing trade disputes, particularly with China, are a real-world example of this dynamic. Nations with critical industries abroad may have leverage over the U.S., especially in the event of economic or military conflict.

2. The Rise of “America First” Nationalism and Its Global Echoes

As noted, the “America First” sentiment became popular under President Trump, and it’s resonated with leaders of other nations too, like Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro. Part of the appeal, especially for countries with large economies in the Global South, might be economic. By aligning with the U.S. during Trump’s presidency, Bolsonaro and others likely hoped for more favorable trade deals or access to the U.S. market. However, this strategy could often be self-serving and might not necessarily benefit the average American worker.

In the case of Brazilian-American CEOs, such as the head of Cleveland-Cliffs, who are publicly advocating for more domestic control over key industries like steel, there’s an interesting mix of corporate interests and nationalistic sentiments. These CEOs are often seen as balancing a desire for American economic growth (by keeping industries under U.S. control) with their personal and business interests (which may include benefiting from international trade or mergers). This tension highlights the complex intersection of global business with national identity.

3. Consolidation and Monopoly Fears

I raise an important point about consolidation in industries like steel. While it may seem that having U.S. companies take over key American industries is good for national security, it can lead to a situation where fewer players dominate the market, potentially increasing prices, stifling competition, and reducing innovation. The current situation with Cleveland-Cliffs bidding for U.S. Steel, for example, could make the steel industry less competitive, which might harm American consumers and workers in the long run.

Moreover, if these industry leaders—whether they’re Brazilian-American or otherwise—are more interested in profits or consolidating their power, it can undermine the interests of the average American worker who may be left behind as industries become more globalized.

4. America’s Future with Foreign Investment

Looking ahead, if much of the U.S.’s manufacturing base and critical industries are foreign-owned, there’s a real question about how American policies will evolve. Will foreign interests dictate the direction of industries that impact daily life? Will the voices of the American populace be drowned out by the financial stakes of international corporations? It’s entirely possible that foreign investors could have a significant influence on U.S. policies, especially in sectors like technology, energy, and manufacturing.

In fact, many argue that the U.S. has already become a sort of multinational hedge fund for foreign investors, as foreign capital flows into American markets and businesses, benefiting both U.S. companies and foreign nations’ economies. However, this creates an imbalance of power, where decision-making is increasingly shaped by external forces rather than the will of the American people.

5. National Security and “Made in America”

I also ask whether non-U.S.-owned or foreign-made products will eventually be seen as national security threats. This could happen if critical infrastructure and industries—particularly in areas like defense, energy, and tech—are increasingly controlled by foreign powers. The idea of a “Made in America” standard may become more than just a marketing slogan; it could become an essential part of ensuring national security. In some ways, there’s already a growing push to bring supply chains back to the U.S. to reduce dependency on foreign manufacturers, particularly for critical technologies and materials.

6. What is America in the Global Context?

To the final point about what America currently is, it’s a multifaceted question. On one hand, it is still a nation with a strong identity rooted in democratic principles and a complex relationship to its past. But economically, it may increasingly resemble a multinational hedge investment for foreign interests, especially as global capital flows and international trade relationships take precedence.

As for the future, there’s a real risk that the U.S. could lose some of its traditional industrial base and autonomy, making it harder for the country to retain control over its own destiny. This may lead to more challenges in ensuring that the U.S. workforce is equipped for the future and that Americans benefit from their nation’s growth.

In Conclusion

In 20 years, if much of U.S. manufacturing and critical infrastructure is foreign-owned, it could raise serious concerns about national security and sovereignty. The increasing influence of multinational corporations, especially when their interests don’t align with the needs of American citizens, could further erode the notion of an “America First” economy. There are certainly risks of foreign interests dominating U.S. industries to the point where ordinary Americans feel excluded from meaningful participation in their economy.

The big question is whether America will prioritize the interests of its people, or whether it will continue to function primarily as a vehicle for multinational investment and influence. It’s a delicate balance between protecting national security, ensuring economic opportunity, and fostering a globalized economy.

A new rival bid for US Steel is emerging as the US extends deadline on Nippon’s bid blocked by Biden