Advocating for globalization

Globalization is becoming more and more relevant in today’s society, and has become more significant since Trump has been elected. President Trump has reiterated time and time again that in order to “make America wealthy again”, free trade and jobs being lost to foreign entities has to stop. However, the benefits of globalization in today’s economy outweigh the cons.
One advantage that comes along with globalization, is foreign direct investment. Foreign direct investment is an investment in the form of controlling ownership of a business in a country by an individual or entity based in a different country. Foreign direct investment leads to increased productivity, equipment, funding, and facilities provided by foreign investors can increase productivity in a target country. Foreign direct investment also leads to transfers of resources which allows countries to transfer various knowledges which in turn, give countries access to new technologies and skills.
Another advantage of globalization is the innovation of technology. Today’s world is heavily based off of technology, so the continual growth of technology is essential to the evolvement of society. The reason why globalization brings technological innovation is because it increases competition among companies. So by increasing competition, it stimulates the development of new technologies.
The disadvantages of globalization aren’t as significant as the benefits, but one major disadvantage is the decrease of local culture. Globalization incorporates influences from foreign entities into their culture, and naturally, this dissolves the local culture. Another disadvantage of globalization is the negative effects it has on developed countries. For developed countries, some jobs are being lost because they are getting transferred to lower cost economies such as jobs being lost to China. This is a main argument point for Trump in his campaign in getting rid of globalization.
While there are argue points against globalization, especially in the United States, the benefits are more significant than the setbacks, which make it crucial to continue the practice of globalization.   

Comments

  1. UnknownDecember 8, 2017 at 2:25 PM

    I do agree with you that globalization is important to the development of technology and also unity the globe. However, I feel like it is on too high of a scale right now with focusing on only large businesses. Through this it decreases competition and puts smaller businesses out of business. As a result, I think it would be more beneficial to focus on the use of goods from smaller business which have less negative to the environment, instead of having the system run by multi-million dollar companies.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jared RostkowskiDecember 10, 2017 at 4:25 PM

    Globalization definitely seems to be the future. The innovation of technology will make a lot of people's lives easier and globalization as a whole will help economies grow. The problem that comes with globalization is the decrease in local buying/culture. A lot of people already don't like big businesses, so them getting bigger with globalization will definitely make them more angry,

    ReplyDelete
  3. UnknownDecember 10, 2017 at 5:13 PM

    I think that though the trend in the current administration is away from globalization, we will be forced to buy in completely sooner or later. Like it or not, we are living in an increasingly globalized world and we can't just pretend that it doesnt exist.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Victoria PierreDecember 10, 2017 at 6:33 PM

    Thank you for your insight on foreign direct investment. I personally agree with it because it may help other states to gain certain technologies that they never had access to before. But the reality of the administration we are in now shows that the current sitting president would take that up for debate. I do agree with Sydney and I hope this would benefit small businesses as well.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Blog 3 Jared Rostkowski Why NAFTA is not "The worst trade deal in the history of trade deals, maybe ever"

Why NAFTA isn't “The worst trade deal in the history of trade deals, maybe ever” Jared Rostkowski On September 25th 2016 during the first presidential debate of 2016, then Presidential candidate Donald Trump described the North American Free Trade Agreement as “The worst trade deal in the history of trade deals, maybe ever.” NAFTA is the trade agreement between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, which eliminated tariffs between the three countries. Trump has continued to voice his displeasure with the trade deal, mostly with Mexico. Anyway, NAFTA is not the worst trade deal in the history of trade deals, in fact, it is actually a trade deal that the 3 countries benefit greatly from the trade deal, and we should not pull out of it anytime soon.  So what does Trump dislike about the deal. His main displeasure comes with the fact that many companies from the U.S. are moving manufacturing to Mexico, to take advantage of Mexico’s cheap labor. Trump argued that companies like For...
Read more

Blog Post 4 - Yousuf Sander

Global terror has plagued the international community in increasing frequency and tragedy for the last two decades. The rise of groups like Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Hamas, and others have left thousands dead and given rise to new fear, and an elusive enemy. These groups have used ever more brutal tactics to stage devastating attacks on civilians in both their home countries and abroad. In the early 2000s, the U.S. began a so-called “ War On Terror ” to combat the rise of such groups, only to have the even more dangerous organization of ISIS rise out of the ashes of our own operations in Iraq. These groups are hard to fight and even harder to dismantle, so what are our options in the War on Terror? I believe that the problem stems from the ostracized environment in which immigrant Middle eastern communities exist in the West.   As long as we continue to marginalize Muslim communities in the U.S. and Europe, we will continue to be fostering an environment that makes it easy for terrorist gr...
Read more
Yousuf Sander                          Why Syrian Intervention is a Bad Play for the U.S. Foreign intervention has become a staple policy choice if the United States since the early decades of the 20 th century. Time and time again, we have intervened in order to protect our interests, installing dictators in Latin America, toppling them in the middle east, all in order to protect our foreign interests. However, what is the right course of action when a crisis occurs that does not put our interests at stake? How, as the world ’ s foremost superpower, can we sit by and do nothing as the crisis evolves in Syria? Though intervention may seem like the obvious choice, we must weigh the costs, and our decision must be strategically based and thought out. For this reason, I don ’ t believe intervention is the right option due to the reactionary and impulsive nature ...
Read more