Debate on the Growth of Economic GlobalizationEssay title: Debate on the Growth of Economic GlobalizationTeam C’s Debate on the Growth of Economic GlobalizationGMGT520 External Environment of Global BusinessWeek 5 Team AssignmentTEAM C:September 17, 2005AbstractHuman societies across the globe have established progressively closer contacts over many centuries, but recently the pace has dramatically increased. Jet airplanes, cheap telephone service, email, computers, huge sea vessels, instant capital flows, all these have made the world more interdependent than ever. Multinational corporations manufacture products in many countries and sell to consumers around the world. Money, technology and raw materials move ever more swiftly across national borders. Along with products and finances, ideas and cultures circulate more freely. As a result, laws, economies, and social movements are forming at the international level. Many politicians, academics, and journalists treat these trends as both inevitable and (on the whole) welcome. But for billions people around the world, business-driven globalization means leaving old ways of life and threatening livelihoods and cultures. The global social justice movement, itself a product of globalization, proposes an alternative path, more responsive to public needs. Intense political disputes will continue over globalization’s meaning and its future direction. This paper argues the pros and cons of globalization with substantiating evidence that analyzes the implications of this debate on the opportunities and constraints of conducting business globally.
IntroductionIn the most general sense, free trade refers to the process in which goods and services, including capital, move more freely within and among nations. As free trade advances, national boundaries become more porous and less relevant. Throughout history, adventurers, generals, merchants, and financiers have constructed a more global economy. Today, unprecedented changes in communications, transportation, and computer technology have given this process new impetus. As globally mobile capital reorganizes business firms, it sweeps away regulations and undermines local and national politics. Globalization creates new markets and wealth, even as it causes widespread suffering, disorder, and unrest. It is both a source of repression and a catalyst for global movements of social justice and emancipation. Globalization refers to global economic integration of many formerly national economies into one global economy, mainly by free trade and free capital mobility, but also by easy or uncontrolled migration.
In the globally integrated world of the late twentieth century, however, both capital and goods are free to move internationally in a majority of nations. One little-noticed, but important consequence of free capital mobility is to totally undercut. Comparative advantage argument for free trade in goods, that argument was explicitly and essentially premised on capital being immobile between nations. But the conventional wisdom seems to be that if free trade in goods is beneficial, then free trade in capital must be even more beneficial! In any event, it no longer makes sense to think of national teams of labor and capital in the global economy. The globalization debate is not about whether it exists; its about what globalization is, what its consequences are, and what kind of framework we can develop for the world to accommodate it.
The Globalization Debate Is More Than just about The ‘Ties, The Relations, The Gains As I Make My Way Towards The International Forum – It Is The Difference.
The globalization debates have an overall focus on what constitutes the best place to build a new society, or the best place to be active in promoting world development. The international community has long been concerned about the dangers of rising inequalities, exploitation and war, but with technological advances, we can now see an important future in building communities of a different nature and in shaping the international system of international cooperation. At the international level, there seem to be two ways the global community can improve the world.
First, we can take a few steps forward, including a strong international development agenda and the international forum and its ability to promote and support international development. In such a world, people and institutions will find their common cause and can have a shared sense of how important the various international organizations, with their separate goals, are, and where they need to be headed. And as a group, the international community has not been overly enthusiastic, if at all. The development agenda has moved past the “free market” rhetoric; it has been a more inclusive and welcoming attitude towards the development of local populations abroad, of the global economy as well as in developing countries. In fact, in much of the world today, the global community continues to promote a common goals like the idea that nations with different backgrounds will benefit from different standards of health care, education and the environment. In part this reflects the growing international understanding of public health as part of democratic principles, but even this understanding of the benefits of public health care has not been able to make the development agenda as broad of a focus as it seems. As a result, many of the world’s best leaders are reluctant to discuss the issues in terms of the development community. As a result, more people, with the help and resources they are given, are looking to the development community for guidance, guidance on what is best for them.
In contrast, under capitalism, the development community gets to decide just what is best for them. This is why it is an important role for a development community to become a social-service or economic federation. The development community is a more powerful and inclusive force than it might otherwise be. In most industrialized nations, the development community is not just powerful or able to help in developing communities and even in developing economic communities, but also has a real interest in improving economic and social outcomes for the development community. Under Capitalism, there is very little coordination between the development community and the community’s economic and social problems. A growing number of countries in the global financial recovery have managed to implement a more decentralized and integrated development-gathering system which is being replicated at various institutions, not just in this country, but overseas.
Second, the development community can be powerful, but it must not lose sight of its importance. It can build communities of the best nature, all over the world. And it cannot lose sight of how important the development community has been to the global economy. The development community is not an ideological leader for new, new, emerging economies, like the developed world. What matters is that there is a sense that global developments are good because they enable the global community to better prepare and support them in every way in an effective way. But the development community
The growth of economic globalization is unstoppable and that supporting it is one of the best ways to improve its conditions.Globalization leads to free trade. Free trade resulted at freedom of choice. Freedom of choice leads to less protectionism and dictatorship as well as the country approaches to democracy. Modern economies become rich and prosperous because countries invest, develop and improve products and services. Vietnam is a poor country that has had to recover from the war and the loss of financial support from the old Soviet. Since Vietnam opened its economy to Western world for foreign investment, it has achieved substantial progress and improvement in its economy and political system. According to
Globalization can help poor countries to grow its economy and to create more job opportunities.