The following article examines U.S. investment in Mexico at the turn of the century, focusing on the tropical plantation companies and their promises of enormous profits. Viewed in the light—or shadow—of Dollar Diplomacy, the usual interpretation of such events has been that American investors exported profits and undermined internal development while the U.S. government established political hegemony. This article calls both of these outcomes into question.

The Arabian American Oil Company's plan to build a pipe-line from eastern Saudi Arabia to the Mediterranean seemed to many an ideal project for business-government cooperation. A sound business project for the company would give American policymakers more and cheaper oil to aid plans to rebuild Western Europe, as well as a significant presence in the Middle East. Events in that tumultuous region, however, soon embroiled both the company and the U.S. government in a more complex relationship than had been envisioned.

In his efforts to secure passage of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, John F. Kennedy had to placate not only oil and coal interests at home, but also traditional trade partners like Venezuela abroad, and he also had to foster the broad national security aim of retaining domestic oil reserves. This article argues that Kennedy was able to utilize a fair trade doctrine to gain enactment of legislation that would both lower trade barriers and assist domestic producers hurt by increased imports.

In the following essay on the railroad industry, Maury Klein examines preconceptions and misunderstandings surrounding Americans' views of regulation and competition. He argues that the United States seems to want competition without losers and that, at least in the case of railroads, regulation has often tried to ensure this outcome without a real understanding of the economics of the industry.