Turn on thread page Beta

Globalisation, positive and negative effects of watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speciez99)
    nike and gap also pay ridicolous salaries in order to achieve enormus profits so their directors can buy their 8th house where ever, it would be far more responsible in terms of sustainable development to increase the workers pay and cut profits

    macdonalds is corrupting peoples taste accross the globe

    no by econonmic policy im talking about schemes like the descisons made on the policy of indonesia in the 1960's by the world bank which lead to it being importing american food stuffs heavily and thus destroying the lively hood of the indonesian farmers in order to achieve food and line the pockets of the United States
    No one forces you to work for Nike/Gap.

    No one forces you to eat a Big Mac.

    No one forced Indonesia to ask for World Bank help.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rah)
    but world bank policy also began it's steps towards further development, opening up its markets for foreign investment...surely one would sacrifice having to eat big macs once in a while(okay and horrendous human rights abuses, they can't be excused) for much higher standards of living/life expectancy/employment etc
    the sad fact is that the opening of markets often leads to the exploitation of the workers in the country and so the world banks policy is not helping

    who is gettin the higher standards of living here? us yes, taking advantage of the poor

    those working for multinational companies - ok they have got employment but they are being paid nothing and having to work without rights, so not great

    all those who no one cares for? those who live in the slums in bombay no one cares for them and because the rich are gettin richer the rich couldnt give a toss about them
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zizero)
    No one forces you to work for Nike/Gap.

    No one forces you to eat a Big Mac.

    No one forced Indonesia to ask for World Bank help.
    But under some circumstances, they might be the only solutions left and they might have no choice but to take them.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speciez99)
    the sad fact is that the opening of markets often leads to the exploitation of the workers in the country and so the world banks policy is not helping

    who is gettin the higher standards of living here? us yes, taking advantage of the poor

    those working for multinational companies - ok they have got employment but they are being paid nothing and having to work without rights, so not great

    all those who no one cares for? those who live in the slums in bombay no one cares for them and because the rich are gettin richer the rich couldnt give a toss about them
    Did anyone care about the fate of the people in the slums of Bombay before globalisation? No, because no one knew about their fate.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jediknight007)
    But under some circumstances, they might be the only solutions left and they might have no choice but to take them.
    So, under those circumstances, without Gap/Nike/McDonald people would have no perspective at all.

    If people are starving and McDonald offers them the only food they can afford, how can you accuse McDonald of doing something bad? MacDonald are saving lives everyday.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zizero)
    No one forces you to work for Nike/Gap.

    No one forces you to eat a Big Mac.

    No one forced Indonesia to ask for World Bank help.
    the big mac was abit of a joke i suprised u took it seriously. the other however werent. if your poor you take any job you can get. admittadly nike and gap pay more than local trades but is that suprising when we are talking about such large organisation, but that doesnt stop them being unethical, they can pull out at any time leaving a work force without jobs they had depended on and still pay nothing compared to workers in developed countries, they could far more than they do considering the amount they make in profits

    and with regards to indonesia your wrong ill explain for you if you want or you could trust me
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    everybody interested in economics/politics/globalisation then I would advise reading Small is Beautiful, by EF Schumacher.

    cheers
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speciez99)
    nike and gap also pay ridicolous salaries in order to achieve enormus profits so their directors can buy their 8th house where ever, it would be far more responsible in terms of sustainable development to increase the workers pay and cut profits

    macdonalds is corrupting peoples taste accross the globe

    no by econonmic policy im talking about schemes like the descisons made on the policy of indonesia in the 1960's by the world bank which lead to it being importing american food stuffs heavily and thus destroying the lively hood of the indonesian farmers in order to achieve food and line the pockets of the United States
    it's true the conditions are quite disgusting in comparison 2 western work practices but......the thing is u have to look at the alternative for these people, something is better than nothing! extremely sad but unfortunately true!

    what i do hate about globalisation is the loss of culture, around the world all the cities are becoming the same, sum1 told me there's a mcdonalds in mecca
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    in gaps code of conduct it says it the domortories must be safe from fire ect structually sound ect... but because it ensures the domitories arent on the factory site they arent liable if all the workers burn to death in their sleep.

    do 36 hour swifts sound good to you? no negioations of course.

    nike workers get 4% of the retail value of the shoes they make

    still want to justify nike and gaps actions in the 3rd world

    (Original post by nero076)
    everybody interested in economics/politics/globalisation then I would advise reading Small is Beautiful, by EF Schumacher.

    cheers
    arrrg i found that such a horribly boring book! i love development economics/politics but no this book just defeated me grr

    sorry if you liked it, i even opted for the feminism option to get away from bloody schumacher and his buddist economics, you can see i was desperate
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by feltree)
    Entering 2004, globalisation has made it possible to communicate among us through webs like this, to buy asian commodities, or to travel abroad easier than before, but... we do accept that there are certain shortcomings, don´t we?

    The gap between developed countries and non developed is getting wider and wider day in day out
    Countries are losing their identity, culture, values, etc.

    What´s your opinion about this?
    Have you ever wondered why in EVERY country in which democracy has been around for a while, the average standard of living is better than in EVERY dictatorship? The united arab emirates have more Oil per person than Norway, yet the living standards are only a fraction of the Norwegian ones. Why does millions of people starve in China when the country is capable of launching an man into orbit ? Mugabe caused a famine by forcing white land owners to leave their farms. This would not have happened in a democracy. The most common reason people die in the world is because the governments of their contries surpress them, using money and equipment they have gotn from the western world as foreign aid. If you want to increase the standard of living in the poor world you will have to have a firm policy to press forward democracy and human rights. Giving dictators billions in foreign aid woant help the population at all.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by majik)
    what i do hate about globalisation is the loss of culture, around the world all the cities are becoming the same, sum1 told me there's a mcdonalds in mecca
    Culture is not lost, it is transformed. Furthermore, you can hardly claim that the culture in Japan is the same as in Britain. Things seem to be the same because Japan's high living standards cause the country to seem more familiar to us than Iran. Just because more and more humans have access to the same goods, it does not mean that they are becoming the same humans. People will always be both different and similar.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    Culture is not lost, it is transformed. Furthermore, you can hardly claim that the culture in Japan is the same as in Britain. Things seem to be the same because Japan's high living standards cause the country to seem more familiar to us than Iran. Just because more and more humans have access to the same goods, it does not mean that they are becoming the same humans. People will always be both different and similar.
    Have you travelled to Japan recently? I did it last summer, you should go there and take a look on japan young people attitudes, who are losing the ancestral traditions of that country, ´cause they only wanna be like Europe young people. They don´t have any respect for traditions, and it is mainly due to the globalisation phenomena. In the end, we all will have the same ideology, same way of thinking, and what it´s worse, same personality. It´s my point of view, based in my experience in the countries I´ve visited

    Regards
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan )
    Have you ever wondered why in EVERY country in which democracy has been around for a while, the average standard of living is better than in EVERY dictatorship? The united arab emirates have more Oil per person than Norway, yet the living standards are only a fraction of the Norwegian ones. Why does millions of people starve in China when the country is capable of launching an man into orbit ? Mugabe caused a famine by forcing white land owners to leave their farms. This would not have happened in a democracy. The most common reason people die in the world is because the governments of their contries surpress them, using money and equipment they have gotn from the western world as foreign aid. If you want to increase the standard of living in the poor world you will have to have a firm policy to press forward democracy and human rights. Giving dictators billions in foreign aid woant help the population at all.
    equaliting dictatorship to poverty is a very shallow notion. it plays little or no reason for the poverty of most people: eg consider india democratic country - has loads of people living in absoulte poverty in slums in the edge of cities like calcutta. so what you are saying is clearly not the case in most examples. aid can be tied to certain projects so that it isnt spent on arms and in the case of india and bangladesh would certainly help. you are using very large generalisation in your answer to defend the undefencable and it shows. what is needed more than aid tho is just a fair trade system which decreases the gap between the rich and the poor rather than increases it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    what is needed more than aid tho is just a fair trade system which decreases the gap between the rich and the poor rather than increases it.
    What do you mean a fair trade system? Market economics will ALWAYS ensure that a developed country is in better trading condition than a developing country.

    Take European farmers. They're so bloody efficient that we have the CAP to control (normally limit) production. Without the CAP and the US's equivalent the developing world would be producing so much food that we'd have to plough it into the ground.

    What do we do? Get rid of these controls and give/sell the excess to the develping world? How would that help farmer in Bangladesh.

    Do we ban tracters and go back to a horse and plough? Co's that's the only way we'll ever be able to trade fairly with the developing world.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speciez99)
    equaliting dictatorship to poverty is a very shallow notion. it plays little or no reason for the poverty of most people: eg consider india democratic country - has loads of people living in absoulte poverty in slums in the edge of cities like calcutta. so what you are saying is clearly not the case in most examples. aid can be tied to certain projects so that it isnt spent on arms and in the case of india and bangladesh would certainly help. you are using very large generalisation in your answer to defend the undefencable and it shows. what is needed more than aid tho is just a fair trade system which decreases the gap between the rich and the poor rather than increases it.
    It can be extensively debated to what extend India is a democracy. Furthermore, that a country becomes a democracy doesnt mean it will change poverty status over night. The truth is however that close to every country which has been a functional democracy for a longer period of time has better living standards than the dictatorships of the world. Im not saying countries should not help the population in these countries (in ways which do not support a dictaorial government), Im just saying that it is not the case that these countries are poor because of the western worlds market policies. It may be the case in some specific situations, but the main reason people live in poverty today is dictatorial governments. Im not saying that dictatorship and poverty is the same thing, but it sure has a VERY strong conection.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by feltree)
    In the end, we all will have the same ideology, same way of thinking, and what it´s worse, same personality.
    Do you and I have the same ideology? Do we think the same way? Hardly! People are different. Just walking around between the different departments at a university and chatting to people should disprove yoru idea that globalisation cause people to have the same personality. Furthermore, you have to remember that people must be free to chose their personal values by themselves. If someone choses, by his or her own free will, to change his ideologies that can hardly be considdered to be a bad thing as long as it does not contradict human rights (I would not like to see the entire world becoming Nazis or smth like that). Also, I quite honestly do not see why it would be so horrible if people had more similar cultures. It would sure decrease the number of culture based conflicts in the world.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    Also, I quite honestly do not see why it would be so horrible if people had more similar cultures. It would sure decrease the number of culture based conflicts in the world.
    because it's nice to have a little bit of variation. i dont want to be the same as everyone else in the world, have the same traditions, the same food (mmm food) as the entire world.

    you cant deny that nowadays, people are changing to be more like someone else (perfect example - people in London becoming more American, or French people becoming more American, or Indian people becoming more English... ) AND ITS NOT GOOD! I like a little mix, but there should also be great variation! its what makes the world go round.

    PS Pencil Queen - we buy Fair Trade bananas (cant find the apples tho)
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    "we buy Fair Trade bananas (cant find the apples tho)"

    "The Fairtrade system incorporates the principle of 'cost internalisation' (i.e. including the cost of social rights and environmental protection in the price paid by the consumer). Under the FLO (Fairtrade Labelling Organisations International), the producers are guaranteed a minimum price that is calculated to cover full production costs plus a reasonable margin to meet basic needs. A substantial premium is also paid which can be put towards social and environmental improvements"

    In other words. Fairtrade bananas are heavily subsidized bananas. An inefficient producer is being paid to produce bananas that are more expensive than bananas produced by a more efficient producer. Doesn't sound much like "fairtrade" to me.

    If this principle was applied accross the board the world would have stopped spinning economically years ago.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The whole point of business is to create wealth and prosperity. Which is what improves the general way of life for everyone. Gloabalisation is something that aids this, and I dont understand the big argument over the issue.

    Go back to your tree hugging.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.