Comment by arcticbull | Hacker News Reader

Comment by arcticbull | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

It's hard to say that this is problematic. Canada's largest chain of coffee shops (Tim Hortons) is owned by a Brazilian company -- is that colonization? Saks Fifth Avenue, on the other hand, is Canadian -- is that? The Mandarin Oriental is owned by Jardine Maethson, headquartered in Hong Kong, but incorporated in Bermuda, with a long history trading opium in the South China Sea area -- is that exploitation today?

That's just three random examples. Foreign investment allows companies to grow and succeed. I think there's sensitivity in this area due to past history though I don't think it's fair in this case. Owning a foreign company isn't 'exploitative.'

They do not claim to be a Canadian company for PR and media attention. Thats the difference. Secondly, Jumia really exploits Africans to make a quick buck, they sell purely Chinese grade C goods all this is not benefiting Africans. This is modern day cannibalization. (and they still aren't profitable).

Are you saying that Tim Horton's doesn't claim to be Canadian for PR and media attention? Because that is basically the core of their marketing, to be synonymous with Canadian culture.

This is modern day eating other people? Yes Tim Hortons absolutely does.

Are the large majority of major companies in Africa African?

The issue isn't about a few foreign companies. Is the majority of Canadian market cap foreign?

> Canada's largest chain of coffee shops (Tim Hortons) is owned by a Brazilian company.

You are comparing apples and oranges. In many cases larger countries are able to conduct fair trade agreements. In the case of smaller countries they usually don't have the resources (military/political influence) to enact fair agreements and are "ripped off" by companies offering jobs.

But Brazil is larger than Canada by most measures. It has a larger population, and a higher GDP, and is 85% of the land area (but 0% frozen).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com