Please translate into authentic English, grateful

Haha, I feel the same way, the points are too few, let's use machine translation, I'm sorry for you, translate it manually, the input and output are disproportionate, so forget it, good luck.

Legislative changes during the 90s may have been another important factor in attracting FDI in these two countries. These legislative changes are aimed at reducing restrictions on foreign investment and thus providing equal treatment for multinational corporations and local enterprises. These legislative changes even allow access to strategic industries with pre-restricted state capital, such as mineral resources in Brazil, motor transport and forestry in Mexico.

In fact, between 1990 and 2000, foreign investment in these two countries has dissipated several sectors of the economy.

As legislation progresses, Brazil and Mexico have added a common factor in attracting foreign investment: the privatization of listed companies. In both countries, the process began in the 80s of the last century and intensified in the 90s.

But what makes this superficial is the increase in foreign participation in the acquisition process of state-owned enterprises. This is particularly true in the power and telecommunications sector in Brazil and the railway and telecommunications sector in Mexico.

From the late 80s to 1995, Mexico was the largest recipient of FDI in Latin America, followed by Argentina and Brazil. In addition to the factors mentioned earlier, it is important to highlight the stability of the Brazilian economy with the "Real Plan", which may be more conducive to FDI in the mid-90s.

In the 90s, changes in legislation could have been another important factor in attracting FDI to both countries. These changes are intended to reduce restrictions on foreign capital and thus provide the same treatment as local and multinational enterprises. These changes even allow access to strategic sectors, previously limited to national capital, such as mineral resources, in the case of Brazil, motor transport and forestry, in the case of Mexico.

In fact, foreign capital in both countries was consumed in several sectors of the economy in the 1990s and 2000s.

Along with the legislation another common factor is also added to foreign investment in Brazil and Mexico: inattracting privatized public companies. In both countries, this process began in the 80s and 90s of the last century when it intensified in Brazil.

But apparently there is an increase in foreign participation in the acquisition of state-owned enterprises in the process, especially in the electricity and telecommunications sectors in Brazil, with railways and telecommunications Mexico.

From the late 80s to 1995, Mexican FDI was the largest Latin Americafollowed receiver in Argentina, which was later acquired by Brazil. In addition to the previously mentioned factors, it emphasizes the importance of a "flat" Brazilian economic stability, which may contribute to this set more favorable to the FDI in the medium term.

Changes in legislation in the 1990s may have been another important factor in attracting FDI to both countries.

These changes are designed to reduce restrictions on foreign investment, thus providing an equal treatment for multinationals and local companies.

These changes even allow access to strategic sectors that previously belonged to the national capital, such as mineral resources, in the years of Brazil, automobile transport and forestry, in Mexico.

In fact, the diplomatic capitalhas of the two countries dissipated in several sectors of the economy in 1990 and 2000.

Along with the legislation, add another common factor in Brazilian and Mexican inattractions of foreign investment: the privatization of listed companies.

In both countries, this process began in the 1980s and intensified in Brazil in the 1990s.

But it has become significantly more foreign participation in the acquisition process of state-owned enterprises, especially in the power and telecommunications sectors in Brazil, railways and telecommunications.

From the late 1980s to 1995, Mexico was the largest recipient of FDI in Latin America, followed by Argentina and Brazil.

In addition to the previously mentioned factors, highlighting the stability of the Brazilian economy was an important "gate", which may have led to this group being more favourable to FDI in the mid-1990s.

Relative to the economic crisis that began in 2008, it can be observed that Brazil is more resilient to the financial crisis and FDI flows than Mexico. As can be seen in Figure 1, in Brazil, the decline in investment occurred only in 2009, but in 2010 FDI exceeded the amount of funds before the financial crisis.

In Mexico, the decline in FDI flows, which began in 2008, intensified in 2009 and began to resume growth only in 2010, when flows did not reach pre-financial crisis levels (Figure 1). The Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean mentioned that, in the Mexican economy, this fact can be explained by the high degree of close relationship with the United States economy, which has slowed down the activity of Mexico's export platform and the activity of the main recipients of United States foreign direct investment during the crisis.

In order to build an analytical model that would enable this work to achieve its overall objectives, it was necessary to identify the relevant variables that determined the entry of FDI into Brazil and Mexico. Even though there are many factors influencing the direction of FDI, there are four variables that may be determinants of this type of investment entering these two countries. Expression (1) shows the relationship of economic interests in FDI, and the expected indications of such a relationship.

FDI = + GDP, + Openness, + Transactions, + Facilitation) (1).