Incensed About Inequality & Is Globalization Reducing Poverty and Inequality?

Incensed About Inequality by Martin Wolf

In this article, Wolf argues that "Globalization has not increased inequality" and in doing so argues that globalization has had positive impacts on equality. He discusses various examples of how levels of inequality has fallen, mainly through international integration. Beginning with an overview of the improvements in India and China, Wolf states that these improvements are part of why such a large proportion of the world's population has enjoyed such a large rise in their standards of living. is interpretation of global equality is based on the broad view of current conditions in the world, and discourages the importance of inequality on a local scale. He says "Moreover, it is also perfectly possible for inequality to have risen in every single country in the world while global inequality has fallen." He argues that inequality among individuals across the world has fallen mainly because of the growth of the "Asian giants". He also notes that those countries who are still transitioning from communism, as well as Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East, have not enjoyed rapid growth. Wolf states that extreme poverty is now the affliction of less than a quarter of the human population, and has been falling in the last twenty years. Other positive impacts of globalization that he discussed include lower infant mortality rates, more investment in education, reduction in fertility rates, growth in food production, and the decrease of child labor.

Upon reading this, I question where the World Bank got its data, as well as what their studies were based on. If surveys only take into account the growths in Asia and developing countries, it would appear that things are improving. I, however, would argue that inequality has increased and wealth is concentrated in few countries while encouraging the repression of less economically stable or less developed countries. His argument implies that the current system is decreasing inequalities and we should continue on this path of globalization and put value on the growth of developing markets. But what about the argument for humanity? The impacts of major market growth have been ignored, and the less developed countries are "left with the bag".



Is Globalization Reducing Poverty and Inequality? by Robert Hunter Wade

Wade, in contrast with Wolf, questions the arguments of the World Bank about inequality. He states that although conditions of extreme poverty have probably fallen in the last twenty years, it is not an immediate indication of the decrease in inequality. He states that the statistics reported by World Bank are stated in a way and based on information that creates the illusion that conditions have improved. However, he notes that if you take China out of the picture, inequality has been increasing and absolute income gaps are widening and will continue to do so.

I think Wade verbalizes a more realistic argument, and in asking the reader to question the statistics is implying that perhaps globalization has not had a positive impact on equality worldwide। He would probably be an anti-neoliberalist and argue that the increasing gap between the rich and poor, as well as Global North and South must be addressed. Overall view of how economic "growth" needs to be questioned, and reminds of the book Deep Economy in which the continual growth of economies as experienced in America must have upper limitations and we should shift from the constant, now unconscious, pursuit of growth and consciously replace it with concepts of sustainable development. If we are to create a world in which humanity can flourish, we must understand the implications of our world markets to the full extent and consciously recognize the disparities that are created.

Various arguments are posed to support views of globalization that will increase support for growth of markets and neoliberal economics. As we have read in The Short Introduction to Globalization, there are many varying arguments based on sometimes shallow understandings and inaccurate data that are promoted in order to maintain public support.

पास
Mandy Simmons

From One Earth to One World

From One Earth to One World
World Commission on Environment and Development

The article discusses the connection between economic actions and the environment. The need for humanity to fit into the changing planetary system in a new way is recognized and the idea is to incorporate the idea that "our cultural and spiritual heritages can reinforce our economic interests and survival imperatives." The article goes on to point out various global challenges, including the failures of 'development'. These include a rising number of hungry people, illiteracy, lack of safe water and homes, and a struggle to maintain wood fuel to cook and keep warm. The article then turns its focus on the environmental trends that have been a part of this failing development. Issues include destruction of forests, acid precipitation, carbon dioxide, depletion of ozone, and increased chances of cancer for humans and animals. It is said that "it is impossible to separate economic development issues from environmental issues". It connects these issues to the increase in world poverty and international inequality.
A main focus of the article is the World Commission of Environment and Development, whose goals are to: re-examine the issues and formulate realistic proposals to deal with them, international co-operation, and to increase understanding of the commitment to action of individuals and organizations. It is emphasized that the issues we are facing currently cannot be compartmentalized, but rather should be recognized as one. Economic activity must begin to take into account its impact it has on the ecosystem and earth's resources. Unfair use of resources between nations has been recognized and the richer nations have been exploiting poor nations for their resources. Some of the poorer countries have been mistreated to the point of not being able to produce anything on their lands anymore. Richer nations have been able to hold power over poor by creating trade barriers. Military spending worldwide has also become an important part of how nations interact and maintain resources. In essence, our practices up until now have been unsustainable and in order to ensure future generations livelihood.

In the Commission's hearing it was the young, those who have the most to lose, who were the harshest critics of the planet's present mismanagement.

The World Commission on Environment and Development recognized many major problems that are directly connected to the system we now live in. These numbers indicate a need to change to a more sustainable lifestyle. It is proposed that to meet the essential needs of humanity a new era of economic growth of nations is required. This includes the assurance that the poor receive their fair share of the resources and the idea that political systems must ensure citizen participation in decision making on the international level. It goes on to say "Sustainable development is not a fixed state of harmony, but rather a process of change in which the exploitation of resources , the direction of investments, the orientation of technological development, and institutional change are made consistent with future as well as present needs." It finishes by saying that sustainable development must rest in political will.


We live in a world in which few prosper from the work of many, and our political systems enable (supported by economic needs) rich to take from the poor on a global scale. The repercussions of this seemingly selfish behavior includes not only environmental degradation but also cultural. We have allowed our economic goals to blind us to the full impacts of our actions and it is time for the world to recognize the need for change. Sustainable development in my opinion is the only way for humans to continue life even on this planet. Resources are required for life, but they are limited. I think it is so important to begin this process now, before it is too late to revert our destructive behaviors. The U.S. should choose to be a leader on these issues because as one nation raises its standards, others will begin to follow suit. I think the thing that would have the greatest impact on our current system is to switch to a no carbon emissions energy system. This would alleviate global warming and also create new jobs for people in the U.S. The switch to sustainable energy is much more efficient and supports a future for our children. We must also consider using less resources overall, forcing corporations to switch from making one-time use products that are made to be thrown away. This would decrease pollution and put more value on what people buy. A big part of change should also include a shift to corporate accountability in which third world countries are not exploited completely for their resources without putting an actual price to fit the product on what is consumed. Worldwide we should demand fair wages and work to actually help struggling nations to get back on their feet and support themselves. The resources are available; we just have to allocate these resources fairly and efficiently in a sustainable way.

पास
Mandy Simmons

Media and Sovereignty

Media and Sovereignty by Monroe Price

In Price's article, he introduces his topic by posing the idea that as new technology in information exchange are developed there is always a response by those who feel threatened. The article is based around the topic of controls and limits on the information conveyed through media and concludes in an examination of the current situation in India. One main idea presented is that internet has efficiently overwhelmed physical and legislative boundaries to communicate information that otherwise would not be conveyed. This is presented as the idea of "technologies of freedom", which are also said to help in the spread of democracy. Information growth expands the national economy and international trade, and also reduces separatist identities and the possibility of genocide and war. It is argued that the state is having trouble controling this flow of information, and this is threatening the stability of some cultures and communities. Price points out that in theory, one can recognize a "death" of state power in creating law, however in every day reality the laws of the state are needed to fulfill the need for order and security, reguations of decency, and moral controls. The article also posed the idea that the influences of media create a sense of identity for people and the cureent technological freedom may have affects on the physical map as people are exposed to different media. In some countries, it becomes a question of protection or social unrest that may result from miscommunication or the acquisition of information that may cause citizens of a country to reevaluate the current powers and restraints on freedom. Governments must take into account the history and culture of the areas they rule when making decisions about protection from certain types of media.

As I read this, I was troubled by the thought of a power determining the tastes and preferences of the people it rules. How much say should the government or other ruling power have over what is available to people? Should the power remain in its position of its very ability to rule was only acquired based on a specific understanding that was created for its nation by a media source it created? But I recognize as well that we must have a basis understanding of issues such as morals and human rights that is common among a people in order to even have a functioning community to govern, and creating 'peace' for the people who are dominated with the help of media may not be so horrible. As long as people have access to reality and understand the system they have come to accept in a broad understanding of the conditions in the world. I understand that as an American citizen I have a certain identity, but it also means that I must come to accept some things to be truth and may not even be conscious of all of the underlying beliefs that come with being raised in our society. I also think it is important to quickly point out the influences of TNC's in this overall power of media in society in relation to state power. States have allowed this consumer culture to be indulged and spread, and its impacts have been widespread. What would our world be like without media and mass communication at the click of a button? Would there even be such a concept as globalization?

पास
Mandy Simmons

The Declining Authority of States

The Declining Authority of States
by Susan Strange

Strange discusses the decline of the power of the state. She notes that in current times, with the power changing location, many of our previously accepted academic theories do not apply any more. She proposes that we re-evaluate many of the assumptions of conventional social science. Strange argues that the "impresonal forces of world markets" are now more powerful than the states in which power belongs. This may not, however, be very evident because the power of the state in people's everyday lives has been stronger than in years past, for example the provision of employment services. She proposes that the state is less effective in matters that the markets have never been able to provide; security against violence, stable money for trade investment, a clear system of law and the means to enforce it, and a sufficiency of public goods. It is interesting to find that the governments of established states are suffering, however more societies than ever are in line to have their own state. The desire to reach ethnic or cultural autonomy is present, however there have not been political means to satisfy this desire within an integrated world market economy. This appears to only be a western phenomenon, and it is noticed that the Asian state has been able to achieve economic growth, industrialisation, an modernised infrastructure and raised living standards. Much growth on a global scale, and a lot of the cause of the shift in the state-market balance of power, is accredited to swift technological changes. This is key in understanding the troubles that the modern state faces. States face the need to pour massive amounts of money into technological research in order to compete with other countries on the basic wealth level as well as the nuclear level. The repercussions of credit-creation have up until now been vastly neglected from a political standpoint. At this point, the institutions that create and market credit in the world economy are only regarded in terms of their impact on the ability of government to "borrow abroad to finance development or the shortfall between revenue and spending, or between export earnings and import bills." All is accredited to the fact that governments are victims to the market economy. Power has been lost from the sum of power available between capable and incapable states, leaving a "gapling hole of non-authority, ungovernance."

I believe what Strange argues is true, that states have lost much power and states are unable to control as much because the market has taken much of the power. This leads me to reflect on the emergence of transnational corporations and their new-found power on a global level. It is important to recognize these changes as we look ahead to our future, one which will include both these declining states and what I think of as emerging corporate powers. My hope is that some day we will be able to create a "political" entity or institution that can monitor the power of non-state powers and maintain the ability of states to control their own situations. In doing so, these states may keep social programs and work for the hopeful goal of improving the human condition on a global scale. We do not want the conscienceless entities of the market to control the well-being of human beings and I am hopeful that we will recognize the importance of change on a global scale so that individuals and people as a collective again have power over such influential changes.

The Modern World-System as a Capitalist World-Economy

The Modern World-System as a Capitalist World-Economy
by Immanuel Wallerstein

Wallerstein's article was focused around the various aspects of what makes a Capitalist World-Economy. This "world-system", which originated in the sixteenth century, is located primarily in Europe and the Americas. Wallerstein defines world-economy as "a large geographic zone within which there is a division of labor and hence significant internal exchange of basic or essential goods as well as flows of capital and labor." It is important to recognize that this system is not bound by a single political structure but by many; the political structures of various countries of the world. Capitalism is defined as the system that focuses primarily on the endless accumulation of capital. The goal of this system is to continuously gain capital, only to continue accumulating capital in an endless cycle of establishing wealth. Wallerstein goes on to emphasize the need for a market that is not totally free in order for capitalism to continue. This is necessary in order to maintain interest of producers because in a truly free market the buyers can talk down the sellers. Capitalism has been contextualized as the only world-economy that has been successful, perhaps because it is the one that took root and has stuck and become consolidated. Wallerstein also discusses the importance of monopolies within the capitalist system. Monopolies allow producers to produce products at a cheap cost and sell them at a high price in order to gain a greater profit. The use of a patent will often enable a company to create a monopoly because it has the rights to sell a particular product. One important point Wallerstein makes is that the "core" states (those controlled by quasi-monopolies) tend to group themselves in a few states, whereas the "peripheral" states (those that are truly competative) tend to be more scattered.
I think it is important to recognize amount of wealth obtained by those core states.

I recognize America and some European countries as the core states, and those third world countries that are often exploited for resources and raw materials as the periphery. This relates to what has happened as neoliberalism has emerged. As finance markets are de-regulated, companies are able to take up larger parts of the market and become monopolies. Many of these companies already have an advantage in size and productivity, and as they are de-regulated they are able to continue to truly be a part of the capitalist world-economy. We see many transnational corporations essentially gaining as much capital as possible, in an endless greed for wealth and prosperity. On a day-to-day economic scale, this means higher standards of living and more market power for those who own a part of these corporations. It was pointed out as well that the companies that were smaller and could not compete often had little power to influence the state to help them. It is evident even on local levels that this is true. For example, nearly every town in America has a Walmart within driving distance. This places more pressure on local small business owners to match prices (which are lower because of the mass production of large corporations) and often these businesses cannot continue to compete. As these small stores go out of business, I think it is important to recognize the social implications. Products consumed are homogeneous to an extent, and diversity of products is limited to those made overseas. I see this as a possibility for local traditions and arts to decline as well as a break-down of community ties among consumers. We become less than human in a way, and those that relied on the business of the community are left with little or no say. I see our society in some ways becoming solely people of consumption, with little or no conscience about the impacts of our purchases.


पास
Mandy Simmons