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

Do you think your standard of living has decreased? Do you think the stand of living is lower for your kids? Globalization has played a huge part in making it possible for you and them to have all the technology and stuff we now have access to.

 

I think that is one of the problem because corporations are thinking just like you. They are selfish and want to make as much profit as possible and they don't apologize for it.

 

Fair enough - thanks for being honest.

 

That or "Dey terk our jerbs!"

 

Moran!

 

Hey Rumble...there's no need to retreat on your premise that unfettered globalization is bad for the American standard of living. Just that it leads to higher prices. It doesn't. It leads to lower prices -- but many have argued, quite reasonably, that the 'cost' of those lower prices can have a detrimental effect on the overall standard of living (with respect to jobs, community, etc)....I tend to favour freer trade, and general globalization, but there are certainly those who disagree.

 

Globalization is certainly a mixed bag and I am in general a proponent of it. Just keep in mind though that protectionism has always been a long term economic loser.

 

If anything globalization gives the American consumer net benefits beyond belief->though I have to say it's a very mixed bag when it comes to developing nations. I especially don't like the fact that it gives employers the massive competitive advantage of mobility, whereas employees (and especially Third World employees) suffer for essantially being born in the wrong country.

Years of legistating fair labor practices for the United States has fallen by the wayside now that American companies can exploit workers from elsewhere.

 

Globalization as presently practiced is killing the middle class in America. Could one envison a type of globaliztion not controlled by a corporate elite who depress wages and unionziation both in the US and abroad, who don't do things like use speculation on the foodstuff futures markets to effectively make super profits, artificially raise the priice of food leading to mass starvation and other ills? I suppose, but it is not what is going on.

 

+

= The problem in a nutshell

We are more efficient and therefore there are not as many jobs needed but instead of trickling down the benefit of this efficiency in terms of higher wages it's just sitting on balance sheets.

Basically Bob and Joe used to make $200 a day each working on the assembly line. We automated their butts out of the job and now it's just Dave who makes sure the automated assembly line doesn't malfunction. Problem is Dave only makes $200 a day. Where'd the other $200 go? Just profit baby.

 

Actually there's no question that globalization has and will continue to play a role in the decline in the American standard of living. Major is just talking about it from the Wal-Mart perspective where eliminating middle class jobs so that you can buy 10 t-shirts for $3 is a good thing.

In reality, globalization is great for corporations, investors, and those on the low end of the world's economic ladder. Everyone else loses all leverage for wages and benefits. The American worker spends the time and effort creating a company and once that company achieves a certain level of proficiency and has access to countries that don't have American standards of labor, safety, wages, etc. then the company is ready to put you on unemployment as thanks for your service. Free trade is a freaking scourge.

 

This is going to sound cold but I don't any other way of stating it. What incentive is there for companies to invest in Third World countries except for low cost labor?

Exploitation and other ills certainly happen to Third World countries because of globalization but at the same time development wouldn't happen without outside investment. For many of these people the alternatives are either remaining bound to an agriculture based economy not much higher than subsistence level or use the advantage of cheap labor to invite foreign companies in.

 

One can only hope this happens, since globalization is also ensuring that these subsistence level farmers will soon find no way to sell their products in a flood of cheap industrial-level goods.

that said, I don't oppose FDI or the prosperity clause of trade theory->I'm just hoping that the pace of gradual rights reform and economic development that should come with such exploitation is proceeding much too slowly. As it is, the world is still largely constructed for MNCs to benefit. All the work the First World put into such expansive (and well-needed considering the excesses of our past) workers' protections is really going against us-and it's ridicoulous that MNCs always trot out the line that social protection is harming our competitive position. Basically, what MNCs are saying is that Third World citizens are willing to put way more blood and sweat into their profits (since what choice do they really have?), so why can't we all jump aboard?

Hopefully, as is the case in Egypt (and really I hope in China in the future), people have become tired of being so powerless and are stepping up to demand a "fair day's wage for a fair day's pay" (an underrated aspect of the Egyptian revolution has been the complete reenpowerment of the labour movement->just look up Egypt trade unions on google). I mean, you have people amassing fortunes in the billions while their workers are suiciding or living on a dollar a day! This simply isn't fair.

now, basically, we wait. I would ideally hope for a global solution to the problem-i.e a baseline of basic labour protections and minimum wage laws that encompass the globe. As it is though, I highly doubt it will happen in the foreseeable future. So you just gotta hope that these individual revolutions blossem into something bigger in the future.

Right now, our current economic prosperity is based on the blood of others. it just won't work. I think the future will see us getting higher prices. Current profit margins are unsustainable-there will be turmoil evantually. Hopefully, in 50 years or so, we'll see a more equitable economic framework-one that may cause us to sacrifice our standard of living in terms of paying more in real terms for goods, but also one that would see a safer world and a world with greater advances in technology and more markets with significant purchasing powers due to the empowerment and education of the (formerly) exploited working classes. A world with fairer trade, but also a world with much freer trade.

of course, that will entail getting resources, MANY resources from somewhere...a problem that I hope will be helped along by significant advances in technology. We've been running ahead of the Malthusian curve for decades now.