We suppose a State that has done the had thing, for example, according to the World Bank, has established a basic legal ordering, maintained surroundings of nondistorting policies, including the macroeconomic stability; invested in basic social services and infrastructure, prote’ge’ to the vulnerable groups and defendant the environment. We suppose a State that obtains, by means of aggressive policies and reforms, to control the inflation, to lower the interest rates to acceptable levels, to lower unemployment to understandable levels, abrir its economy, to privatize the unnecessarily estatizadas companies or to desmonopolizar the construction of infrastructure, the social benefit of good part of the sevicios public, services and other goods and services that have been inefficient, to create an essential, strong and nonarbitrary base institutional, to protect, in due form, the public order after to have agreed to La Paz with the insurgent groups, to protect the property, to end the economic insecurity in the home (avoiding the misery in oldness through systems of pensions, helping to do against catastrophic diseases by means of health insurances and offering attendance, in case of loss of the work, with insurances of unemployment), to control the corruption, to extend the citizen participation to good part of the democratic instances and, in short, that manages to close that ample existing breach between hoped of him and its own opportune possibility of answer, accommodating, since the same World Bank has said to it, its functions to its capacity. That is to say, we imagine a state that distills optimism and is attractive for the investment. Good, no? Now we imagine that it would happen later. Before as much efficiency and so good conditions are not exaggerated to anticipate the massive coming of foreign investments. It would not either seem to us stranger who the national investors, instead of to be producing use and development in foreign countries return to bring their talk.