And all too often the jobs brought by inward investment don t pay well enough to compensate for these losses. Sweatshop workers don t dine on Big Macs, but on rice. Such detailed questions are asked all too rarely even by agencies and institutions with a remit to support the poor but the grand trends of the past decades , backed by anecdotal evidence from communities all over the world, bear out a pessimistic view. In such circumstances, even where globalisation has accelerated economic growth, this does not necessarily mean that wellbeing has improved. The result is that resources are over-used, but not to meet the needs of those with least.
Natural capital is converted to financial capital with no regard for ecological system limits.
Neo-liberal economics assumes that all types of capital are convertible. But in the real world we need clean air and clean water, an poverty relief and a stable climate, livelihoods and a functioning environment we cannot trade off one for another. We need economics based on an understanding of limits, and the distributional consequences of global limits which includes much enhanced control over resources for poor communities. Second, neo-liberal globalists claim that economic globalisation increases consumer choice and increases healthy market competition. We have already seen one way in which it reduces choice eliminating social provision of services by privatisation.