The Blurring Line Between 'Foreign' and 'Domestic' Companies

More examples why it's not possible, practical or necessary to put a flag on a company. In one of his blogs in the International Herald Tribune, "When profits come from abroad," Daniel Altman points to America-based Yum Brands, which will soon have its primary source of profit come from China. For those that don't know, Yum Brands is Kentucky Fried Chicken! He then flips his point when referring to European pharmaceutical companies that make some of their biggest profits in the United States. While Altman focuses on the comparison with KFC in terms of reaping large profits outside of a company's 'home' market, there's an even larger point I think he misses. Many of these companies don't just sell here, they actually have significant research facilities in the United States. Swiss-based Novartis, for example, moved the headquarters of its world wide R&D facility from Switzerland to Cambridge, Massachusetts! What do these two examples tell us? That the U.S. economy is best served by focusing on developing a strong, qualified employment base, rather than on the success of companies deemed 'American' by an arbitrary standard like, where the CEO of a company is based. If I thought about it, I care much more about the U.S. attracting companies that support jobs at research facilities here, than whether a fast food giant sells more drumsticks in China than they do in Kentucky.