Notices
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Is the globalization pain in the ass?

  1. #1 Is the globalization pain in the ass? 
    Forum Freshman Janina1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    8
    Hello, here you go a new point to discuss. We all live in globalized/centralized world. Its when you can go in couple hours from one part of Europe to other in couple hours. When going to India is not an exciting mystery, rather more regular holidays and so on.
    in early beginning of 20th century globalization was look as necessity to connect, to discover and develop new markets, trades ect, but how is now?
    Therefore I would like as you ponder about:

    1.How capitalist globalization causes pain around theWorld?

    2.What can be done to counteract the effects and to usethe new communication possibilities to organize across borders?

    To keep the frames of discussion I will give an example
    : "
    Globalization ties countries together, so that if one country collapses, the collapse is likely to ripple through the system, pulling many other countries with it"But feel free to give more different examples, and controversial opinions.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,789
    It is good for businesses but not so great for people like consumers. Businesses will work together in order to "fix" prices so they can get as much as possible for their goods and services.


    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    282
    Globalization is making the traditional division into separate countries increasingly irrelevant. That makes many people with nationalist sympathies nervous. At the same time, it tends to lead to abuse as laws intended to protect consumers and the labor force from abusive companies get sidestepped by international companies picking and choosing which nations' laws they prefer to operate under. To keep up, we really need a strengthening of international law to keep companies from committing abuses. I can't speak for other countries, but in the United States we have a large vocal resistance to accepting any sort of international restrictions on business operations. It seems likely to me this resistance will simply lead to nation states becoming increasingly irrelevant as international corporations become the dominant players in international politics.

    I don't see globalization as inherently bad. Potentially, fusing national markets into a global market can lead to more competition, greater efficiency, better and cheaper products for consumers. But our legal structures are falling behind. Traditionalists who want to stick to the old and familiar ways, refusing to accept that changes are deeded, are just adding to the problem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,338
    Globalization forces countries to abandon self-sufficiency, and specialize for the international market. Not all specialties are good ones. Like, a country may specialize in dirty work a wealthier country disdains or outlaws within its own borders. Lucky those countries that specialize in being beautiful. I am posting from a city that consistently makes the worldwide top-ten "best cities to live", and admitting we do it by sucking good from the world... and I'm warning that this smug position strengthens as globalization curdles the world into geographic labour sectors. We're also brain-draining and care-draining from other countries, because now we can.
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    305
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong View Post
    Globalization forces countries to abandon self-sufficiency, and specialize for the international market. Not all specialties are good ones. Like, a country may specialize in dirty work a wealthier country disdains or outlaws within its own borders. Lucky those countries that specialize in being beautiful. I am posting from a city that consistently makes the worldwide top-ten "best cities to live", and admitting we do it by sucking good from the world... and I'm warning that this smug position strengthens as globalization curdles the world into geographic labour sectors. We're also brain-draining and care-draining from other countries, because now we can.
    Wouldn't these countries suck without globalisation? If anything free trade and comparative advantages are not a zero sum game and even the poorest nations can improve the general conditions of their people through such policies (since barriers of trade are reduced and poorer countries can access material at a much cheaper price). It is protectionism and self-sufficiency which has led to so many wars, when goods don't come over the borders, soldiers will.

    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    It is good for businesses but not so great for people like consumers. Businesses will work together in order to "fix" prices so they can get as much as possible for their goods and services.
    Globalisation is wonderful for consumers because barriers preventing trade are reduced thus reducing prices. The main concern is monopolies and the damage these companies are going to have on local cultures and the environment which can at least be controlled with sound regulation.

    To be honest globalisation in some form has always existed, if a trade route collapsed in an ancient empire it would have severe effects on the people (and only poor nations were isolated from some sort of international market, most of which were assimilated into empires), so the quote in the orginal post makes no sense to me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    flattened rat 甘肃人's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Gansu
    Posts
    285
    I am not sure this is globalization or not, or if it's just stupid, useless globalization. I used to live in Jakarta for some time. When CarreFour came to town (a kind of food-oriented French-version of WalMart, for those unfamiliar). All opinions on globalization aside, I thought, Oh good! A French super market! I will be able to get all kinds of good cheese, French food, most of all fresh French bread!

    The reality was they opened a hangar-sized 'superstore', that despite its vastness always felt claustrophobic inside what with no windows and one exit. Many Indonesians felt the same way as I did. And rather than the products I anticipated they had eight-meter long rows of local products like noodles and kecap (from which we get the English word -ketchup - a kind of thick soy sauce with variations of added spices, mostly hot). The cheeses were the same local or Australian processed ones you could get at a smaller supermarket, same with the bread.

    See, besides a few big supermarkets owned by presidential cronies, most of Jakarta's shops were ma and pa grocery stores, and more often still wheeless carts on the roadside. These small shops sold the most popular brands of noodles, kecap, cigarettes, small packets of laundry detergent, etc and sometimes the lesser known brands. Carrefour was the ma and pa grocery cart writ large with its long long rows of instant noodles of flavors and brands not well known. If no one bought them, well they had a plentiful stock of the most popular products as well - at greatly reduced prices (AT FIRST!). So most of the small, privately owned shops went bankrupt. Instead of shopping at the nearest corner store, people had to go by car or bus for 30 to sixty minutes to Carrefour. So some corporation in France profited nicely and continued opening megastores - hypermarts, while many local families lost all they had. If they were lucky, one of their daughters could go be a laser-scan cashier at the hypermart.

    So the rich got richer, the poor got poorer and the consumer got screwed.
    And what does the Lord require of you but to love justice, to be merciful and to walk humbly with Him?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,789
    Globalisation is wonderful for consumers because barriers preventing trade are reduced thus reducing prices. The main concern is monopolies and the damage these companies are going to have on local cultures and the environment which can at least be controlled with sound regulation.
    But fewer companies control most of the products because those companies are being bought up in other countries by bigger companies elsewhere by a few companies that have the money to do so. Regulation of this kind of exploit is almost not going to happen because governments will be paid off to look the other way when examining any company just as they do today and if you don't think so just take a look around wherever you reside and see what companies there get away with.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Trivium View Post

    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    It is good for businesses but not so great for people like consumers. Businesses will work together in order to "fix" prices so they can get as much as possible for their goods and services.
    Globalisation is wonderful for consumers because barriers preventing trade are reduced thus reducing prices. The main concern is monopolies and the damage these companies are going to have on local cultures and the environment which can at least be controlled with sound regulation.
    Since most of those consumers' wages are going down just as fast as the prices go down, I don't see how that can possibly be better than a break-even outcome.

    If the "resource" you're trying to trade with another country is their cheap labor, then they're not really offering you a resource you don't already have. Just a resource that commands a lower price in their system. Once you've knocked down all the barriers (including your laws and regulations are an exact mirror of theirs) that "resource" will soon disappear entirely. Their prices would be exactly the same as yours.

    And at that point, the only change you've effected is to make your laws and regulations an exact mirror of theirs. If they were a third world country, then your country is now a third world country (in terms of its laws).

    And that is the sum total of all that you have achieved.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    flattened rat 甘肃人's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Gansu
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Trivium View Post

    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    It is good for businesses but not so great for people like consumers. Businesses will work together in order to "fix" prices so they can get as much as possible for their goods and services.
    Globalisation is wonderful for consumers because barriers preventing trade are reduced thus reducing prices. The main concern is monopolies and the damage these companies are going to have on local cultures and the environment which can at least be controlled with sound regulation.
    Since most of those consumers' wages are going down just as fast as the prices go down, I don't see how that can possibly be better than a break-even outcome.

    If the "resource" you're trying to trade with another country is their cheap labor, then they're not really offering you a resource you don't already have. Just a resource that commands a lower price in their system. Once you've knocked down all the barriers (including your laws and regulations are an exact mirror of theirs) that "resource" will soon disappear entirely. Their prices would be exactly the same as yours.

    And at that point, the only change you've effected is to make your laws and regulations an exact mirror of theirs. If they were a third world country, then your country is now a third world country (in terms of its laws).

    And that is the sum total of all that you have achieved.
    I see that we are in agreement on this one. Please read the story I tell above.
    And what does the Lord require of you but to love justice, to be merciful and to walk humbly with Him?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,789
    Since most of those consumers' wages are going down just as fast as the prices go down, I don't see how that can possibly be better than a break-even outcome.
    Tell me where prices for anything haven't gone up. 10 years ago the price of gas was under 2.00 US and today it is over 3.00US in America and I can give you many other products that are higher today than 10 years ago but wages have not kept pace and are lower due to inflation.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    305
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    Since most of those consumers' wages are going down just as fast as the prices go down, I don't see how that can possibly be better than a break-even outcome.
    Tell me where prices for anything haven't gone up. 10 years ago the price of gas was under 2.00 US and today it is over 3.00US in America and I can give you many other products that are higher today than 10 years ago but wages have not kept pace and are lower due to inflation.
    This isn't necessarily due to globalisation though, certainly a minimum wage needs to keep pace with inflation and there needs to be restrictions on profit margins, providing that there is good government (which has more power than business to prevent it influencing the system too much) I do not see any problems of globalisation that are worse than the alternatives, certainly reducing trade barriers at the very least reduces production costs!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmictraveler View Post
    Since most of those consumers' wages are going down just as fast as the prices go down, I don't see how that can possibly be better than a break-even outcome.
    Tell me where prices for anything haven't gone up. 10 years ago the price of gas was under 2.00 US and today it is over 3.00US in America and I can give you many other products that are higher today than 10 years ago but wages have not kept pace and are lower due to inflation.
    Yeah. It is ironic that the price of petrol has skyrocketed while wages fall behind inflation.

    It seems another "advantage" of globalization is the ability to collude on a grand scale. OPEC countries control approximately half of the whole world's oil, and deliberately set quotas on its members to force the price to go higher. (Saddam Hussein did quite a lot to undermine them in the late 1990's, but the USA media branded that as "bad", and the USA government attempted to stop him by requiring him to abide by an "oil for food" rule. )

    When American oil companies say the price is out of their hands, what they really mean is that OPEC is setting the price. An American oil company may pump the actual petrol, and refine it, but they don't typically own the well. The well owners are the ones conspiring to raise prices.

    It would be illegal to fix prices inside the USA.
    Last edited by kojax; September 26th, 2014 at 09:32 PM.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by danhanegan View Post
    Globalization is making the traditional division into separate countries increasingly irrelevant.
    Actually it is making them more relevant than ever. Instead of gaining advantage by improving their production process or managing their resources better, companies seek to gain advantage by positioning their factory in the most favorably political system.

    The most generous political system wins, which usually means the one most willing to hurt its own people.

    Basically an additional dimension has been added to "competition", but it's one that has virtually zero potential to improve anything at all. It's more likely to simply break down every concept of "rights" and "dignity" anyone has in any nation, and replace it with slavery. People will vote away all their political power just to make a living.



    That makes many people with nationalist sympathies nervous. At the same time, it tends to lead to abuse as laws intended to protect consumers and the labor force from abusive companies get sidestepped by international companies picking and choosing which nations' laws they prefer to operate under. To keep up, we really need a strengthening of international law to keep companies from committing abuses. I can't speak for other countries, but in the United States we have a large vocal resistance to accepting any sort of international restrictions on business operations. It seems likely to me this resistance will simply lead to nation states becoming increasingly irrelevant as international corporations become the dominant players in international politics.
    How would they become irrelevant? Those boundaries become the core of many business' entire strategies.

    We'll increasingly wish they were irrelevant. Yes. That is true.


    I don't see globalization as inherently bad. Potentially, fusing national markets into a global market can lead to more competition, greater efficiency, better and cheaper products for consumers. But our legal structures are falling behind. Traditionalists who want to stick to the old and familiar ways, refusing to accept that changes are deeded, are just adding to the problem.
    There is no reason to think there would be much more of any of those things.

    That's what globalists seem to utterly fail to understand. Imagine you live in a totally closed nation that occupies 10% of the world, and contains 10% of the world's resources.

    Next, imagine you extend the economy of that nation to encompass 100% of the world. So 10 times more resources, and 10 times more people who need them. Not 10 times as much variety, but certainly a bit more variety. ("Variety" doesn't scale that way.)

    Now imagine you could double the size of the planet. - Same type of change.

    Globalization's maximum benefit is the benefit I just described. If you could eliminate all of the liabilities. It's actually a pretty meager benefit. I'm not saying a perfect zero benefit, but just a very.... meager.... benefit. It seems really sad to see people sacrifice all of their liberties (as outlined above) just to gain such a small, and unnecessary benefit.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    305
    ah yes everything to do with globalisation is bad, and Saddam Hussein was a nice guy trying to reduce oil prices...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Saddam actually was.... reducing .... oil ....prices. That's an established fact. It's not even in dispute.

    Of course he wasn't doing it out of the goodness of his heart. He had huge war debts to pay down, and dumping his nation's oil was a convenient way to raise revenue.

    I just get a kick out of how many Americans believe GWBush invaded Iraq out of a desire to help oil prices, when it's plainly obvious he was deliberately trying to wreck them.

    Some stories don't have a "good guy" and a "bad guy". Some stories just have "bad guys" all around.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Ethics of Globalization
    By kojax in forum Politics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: February 23rd, 2012, 08:07 PM
  2. Definition of Globalization
    By newnothing in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: March 7th, 2009, 12:51 AM
  3. Wild Ass and Natural Selection
    By maximg in forum Biology
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: March 25th, 2008, 06:23 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •