Who Really Wins From Globalization? (Pros and Cons of Globalization)

Economy | Information | History | Online | Facts | World | Global | Money

1. Globalization is a slow but constant growth. The opportunity for growth is indeed uneven but it is still growth. It is the job of those developed nations to contribute part of its growth to the world in order to maintain that development. With this slow growth we'd be able as a planet to extend the vitality of our resources.
   In contrast free market economies, have quick and explosive growth. It's a race to the riches (resources) that allows these developed countries to flourish at an exponential pace. People want results as soon as possible, they want to reap in the rewards but all at the expense of another nation. What will happen when we run out of resources? If Darwin were alive of course he'd justify this with his "Survival of the Fittest" argument. He'd say tough cookie, for those who didn't have resources, the world is dark and grim and it's all about conquering resources. But that's a lie. Globalization is an investment in future. It's a steady progression towards peace overall well being of our people and planet. There is a reason that long yield stocks are a better investment than day trading.
   
   An easy example:
   Let's say I just bought a carton of orange juice. I've been craving it all week and this orange juice cost me a days worth of work Developing country I could drink it all now and be satisfied + more for this one day or I could take a sip, and make it last another couple days. Extend that satisfaction and not have to burden myself with another days of worth of work just to obtain it. We as humans are so obsessed with now now now. We want to be able to live the maximum benefits because we don't know if tomorrow will come. But if we keep consuming the way we do there will be no tomorrow to be alive for.
2. Globalization mainly benefit multi corp and their largest share holders, not necessary benefit to the consumers in the working people - both middle class and the poor in the developed countries include the US. The main reason is these big globalization corps outsource jobs to overseas mainly looking for low cost, high profit margin and more sell on their products, they won't lowering the prices when sell their products back to developed countries included US. As an result, many jobs in the developed countries include US are lost because these jobs are shipped to the underdeveloped world. And these US globalization corps may continuously reinvestment their money in other underdeveloped nation, not bring their money back to US. Therefore, not only the US government lost tax revenue, more middle class jobs are gone, and the life standard are letting lower gradually. One you can tell that our infrastructure are poor, the living cost is getting higher, and more and more US populations live on FOOD TAMS, and the riches are getting riches, and the middle classes in our so call "#1 world power" nation are striking, and the poor are getting poor.
3. globalization destroy the cultures of the world, money doesn't bring happiness but disasters, wider social gap
4. paul krugman "globalization is uniting us against globalization"
5. globalization will not see light of day book year 2000 institute for economics zagreb croatia place where prodigies work
6. "globalization is uniting us against globalization" paul kruan
7. instiute for economics Zagreb Croatia place where prodigies
   globalization or sameness has no chance globalization is dictatorship of mighy sameness totalitarianism
8. Globalization leads to an increased Gdp by all nations involved. Ok. That sounds wonderful. But who actually benefits? Take the US as example, the Nasdaq, an indicator of the value of stocks is sometimes used as an interchangeable barometer of economic health of the nation. This is misleading when 90% of all new gains go to a tiny sliver of the actual population. Globalization frees business interests from central governing authority therefore leading to these same interests acting as a quasi-governing  body themselves. Unaccoutable to anyone, they are free to punish or reward anyone without fear of reprisal. This is as much a totalitarian system as anything that existed in human history. Instead of imprisonment being the chief deterant, hunger and want takes the place as the primary disciplinary force. Since the fall of the USSR, there has failed to be a counter balance to unbridaled caplitalism and we are heading full steam, with open arms into a similar fate such as that of those who suffered under state socialism.
9. 0:33 clearly shows the benefits for wealthy people and the cons for common people
   2:15 and 2:56 though he was talking about countries in the world, i believe the same concept applies to people too
10. GDP and GNP, which are aggregate measures of economic growth, have never been accurate measures of inequality. Your operationalization of inequality as a concept is rather different; what you have here is a comparative analysis of economic growth resulting from globalization. Inequality in its contemporary usage is a much broader term in the development discourse that tackles poverty, health, gender, democratic processes, education, human rights, basic needs and so on.
11. wahts with the fkgin music. its irritating
12. I think you got "Countries" and "CEO's" mixed up ,hoss .
13. A much more telling question who be "Which sections of society have benefited from globalization?".  Taking into account rise in cost of living, of course.  and inflation.