Globalization? What are you willing to give up for it?

What do you mean by "redustribute the wealth"?

Are you talking about US MNC's closing all their factories in the US and opening them in foreign countries? (AKA the destruction of the US middle class?)

 

Interesting rant, except that globalization is not about redistributing wealth - its about generating wealth. Globalization is why you can buy a flat screen TV for $900 instead of $10,000. Or an iPad for $500 instead of $3000. You win, they win.

There are certainly numerous negatives about globalization, and rants on those would make sense. But redistribution has nothing at all do with the concept.

 

Yeah... screw the free market!

 

American government?

 

I hate to tell you this, but globalization is not killing the middle class. It's the shift from human labor in industry to automation. Globalization is about having access to all markets, and it is fully intended to be bilateral.

 

If less nationalism means less war, I'm for it. I'm for it, anyway, but I'm really for it if that's the consequence.

 

They can still have a better life, they just have to just work harder then the competition to achieve it. That and probably a job in one of the STEM fields. Globalism just means Americans on a large scale now have to adapt to compete with the rest of the world for decent paying jobs.

 

Globalism sucks for the countries on top as citizens go from making $10 an hour to $9. Globalism is great for countries on the bottom as citizens go from making $1 per hour to $2. Top country's citizen loses about 10% of their income while bottom country's citizen gets a 100% increase. Because of this, top country's citizen may end up being able to only afford a PS2 instead of PS3 while bottom country's citizen gets to eat 3 times a day instead of just once. Get it?

 

Then why did you even bother posting this?

Did you want to find some companions who'll shout " F8ck the rest of the world! " with you?

 

What the hell was the point of this.

 

There have never been an empire that always stayed on top in human history, power rotate, always.

 

Major nailed it. Globalization is what's contributing to cheaper goods and services. So it's an odd rant that focuses on the potential rising cost of things. Companies don't outsource for egalitarian reasons -- they do so to reduce cost.

There's a dark side too, of course. But would you be willing to pay more for utilities if the company only used US made goods, had a US based call center, and only sourced it's power from the US? Or would you buy from the less expensive competitor? (or prefer the government mandated potentially higher production and delivery costs).

 

I don't get the OP post.

1. As individuals, we don't get to "choose" to give up globalization or not. As a country we can close our doors to the rest of the world to create an insular society. But as long as our policies allow for a relatively free market, the market itself dictates the extent of globalization.

2. The redistribution of the wealth comes from companies employing less American workers and more cheaper, foreign workers in order to lower costs. Hence, the redistribution of the wealth goes from middle-class Americans, who are no longer employed, partly to rich Americans who hold stocks and foreign employees now employed by such companies. This is partly why countries like China and India now have much more wealth these days.

3. Even big corporations are "forced" into globalization because competition will not allow otherwise. If a company stays in the US and makes a widget for $10, he's not going to stay in business when another company goes overseas and sell the same widget for $5.

In the end, short of countries deciding that globalization sucks and that mass tariffs are the way to go, no one can really do anything about it. It's not about whether you like it or not. But rather you just have to deal with it.

 

I believe it begins with Herp and ends with Derp.

 

I'd give up my right arm to be ambidextrous.

 

Added an important part. Where globalism goes wrong is that more often than not, costs are reduced to increase profits rather than decrease prices.