Symbiotic relationship TBH (assuming the local Govt is on the ball).Can someone explain to me how a multinational corporation in a less developed country is not neo-colonialism?
It's a genuine question. Obviously there are outliers, but most of these companies in one way or another exist in locales to exploit their resources or their cheaper labor, and using managerial expertise from richer countries. They facilitate this management by attempting to build accomodations and infrastructure that more resembles their standards, and the lionshare of the most lucrative payroll is foreign. The money generated isn't largely reinvested in these states.
I mean, you could argue that they do likewise wherever they are, but every colonial empire colonized their own first.
Whilst the MNC gets to reduce costs, gets substantial tax breaks and massively increases R&D which may be cost prohibitive at home (and which often benefits people globally - the medical industry for example) the local people have employment, and health benefits, in great conditions & much higher pay than they'd get working for a local company (usually - as the MNC has to adhere to their home country regulations re. working conditions and tax, unless they outsourced but many don't as they want to keep it in-house and retain control) and the destination country gets their hands on the latest tech and ideas which benefits their local industry as well as a huge new source of tax income.
Being realistic there has to be an upside for the MNC to move halfway across the world so one can hardly blame them if it increases the depth of R&D and construction & sales to the local market.
I went on a tour of the GM factory in Shanghai - globally it's their most advanced factory and due to the R&D aspect many of GMs new products were designed in Shanghai even if only available in the USA for example.