What's the issue, if me, an Italian, own land in Indiana or North Cali?
1) The foreign entity is investing where Americans aren't.
2) There is a very huge risk for the foreign entity to own such an operation because of political changes. By law or decree the US or the state can always nationalize these lands.
Thus, ultimately, I see no issue there.
2. I think this represents a misunderstanding of the U.S. Constitution and U.S. law. The Constitution provides no power for the federal government to acquire land without just compensation, which courts have regularly held to mean fair market value. Put another way: The feds can likely devise a path for buying your land, but can't outright nationalize it. Changing that is not a matter of presidential decree or even a law by Congress; it would require an amendment to the Constitution itself, which is an extraordinarily heavy political and policy lift.
Proportionately, perhaps, but that doesn't mean by value of assets owned. It just means the aggregate value of assets in the US will be less.
You think zero sum like accountant or land owner.
They money coming is invested for opportunities. There will be less opportunities for startups, less VC money. Less affordable loans for corporations to expand and invest.
Like what is the sound logic here?
As an Italian I would love more foreign ownership of Italian businesses, that would not only bring capital but more scrutiny.
On other hand the economy overall and stock market especially have enormously increased due to outside investments. As injection of money in later one directly pushes valuations up. And the borrowing is only possible when someone loans money...
If we agree that that's a bad thing, then it stands to reason that there's a certain point where foreign ownership becomes a bad thing.
I think China has done an excellent job of bringing in foreign investment while keeping those foreign investors from running amok.
Capital investments are like credit card spending, feels good for a while, but ultimately outwards-capital value should always exceed inwards-capital value (that's why somebody makes an investment).
Sometimes everybody is better off (the ideal founder story with VC investment) but all too often the investment money is stolen or misused (but the debt remains for the country to repay).
The 1MDB investments didn't help Malaysia:
US investment bank Goldman Sachs helps 1MDB sell bonds worth $3.5bn... Goldman Sachs helps 1MDB raise a further $3bn in an additional bond sale, this time to cover “new strategic economic initiatives” between Malaysia and Abu Dhabi
Which to be clear will be largely domestic oligarchs and other whales since the vast majority of domestic citizens in the US don't have enough capital to own any significant amount of assets, US or otherwise.
Speaking to the middle class, home ownership (traditionally one of the most reliable sources of wealth for the middle class) would increase.