Globalization

Con did not rebut the claim that globalization will reduce discrimination or wars, so those stand. Overall, globalization is the main factor in the decreasing global poverty rates mentioned above, because these countries' people did not have enough money to have their economies grow without producing products to be exported to other countries or if they didn't receive investments from foreigners. For example, the majority of Chinese would still be working rural jobs, such as farming, if they never exported goods across the globe. This was all mentioned in my previous post. Using the definition from the source Con sighted, the Dependency Theory is "[Dependency is]...an historical condition which shapes a certain structure of the world economy such that it favors some countries to the detriment of others and limits the development possibilities of the subordinate economics...a situation in which the economy of a certain group of countries is conditioned by the development and expansion of another economy, to which their own is subjected." (1) The problem with this belief is that it has been proven false numerous times across the globe. The most obvious examples were the very famous examples in Eastern Asia, notably South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore. (2) South Korea is a particularly interesting example because to its north is the economic failure of North Korea. After the Korean War though, both countries could be considered economic failures. However, they went in two very different directions. South Korea opened up to globalization, while North Korea did the exact opposite. (3) In fact, the less North Korea traded with other nations, the more its economy suffered. (4) One may say that North Korea's economy is only like that because of poor management, which although is true, the self-imposed isolationism was clearly a huge factor in North Korea's economic failures. (5) Another example that goes against the Dependency Theory is that India saw its economy really begin to grow when it became more open up to trade and foreign investment. (3) India's economic growth contradicts the Dependency Theory's beliefs regarding comparative advantage and mobility because outsourcing (a mobile form of capital transfer), was a huge part of India's economic growth. (3) Finally, not including African countries with oil, the 3 most successful economies (Egypt, South Africa, and Tunisia) have relied on trading for their growth, but the countries that haven't, such as Zimbabwe, have seen their economies suffer. (3) Even though an economic crash in a wealthy country, such as the United States, would hurt countries in poverty, the only real chance these poor countries have to become wealthy, is from wealthier countries. This has been discussed throughout the debate. Although sound economic policies are obviously important for economic growth, no matter how well a poor country's economy is run, if they don't globalize it is unreasonable to assume they will grow. Looking at the example of Japan in my previous post, although their economy was well run, the heart of their growth came from exporting goods. (6) Therefore, poor countries need to export, because their people are too poor to buy things other than the essentials, so they need to bring in money another way. The whole argument that "the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer" is downright false. Yes, the rich often benefit from globalization, but all the data I've referenced shows that the poor are not getting poorer. Also, governments can do many things to promote domestic growth of small businesses, while still having corporations help lower poverty rates across the world. (7) Overall, the facts show that globalization is the primary factor in reducing poverty across the world, which as Con quoted, should be "our ultimate goal". 1-https://www.mtholyoke.edu... 2-http://www1.tau.ac.il... 3-http://en.wikipedia.org... 4-https://www.aei.org... 5- 6-http://www.brookings.edu... 7-http://smallbusiness.chron.com...