Decision Matrix: Pros and Cons of Globalisation
|
|
Pros
|
Cons
|
Globalisation promotes an economic growth on a global scale. With globalisation, it creates jobs for areas that aren’t as economically developed, allowing them to develop economically. Despite the poor conditions that many may have in China or Vietnam, it allows the country to grow economically as branded companies are hiring workers from these countries to produce the products.
|
Globalisation has made illicit trade larger, having extreme consequences on the world’s economy such as corruption, and making jobs redundant, resulting in others losing their jobs, for jobs that pay less. For example, in the Philippines, pirated DVDs are being sold, therefore stores that sell original copies of movies aren’t attracting as much customers as before, as there is a cheaper way to purchase movies.
|
Due to the low cost in labor that some companies may need to pay due to having workers from lower economically developed countries, this allows their products to have a lower cost. This is an advantage to the consumers as some prices of the products may decrease.
|
Globalisation has led to the exploitation of the poor. Adults and children are constantly exploited and are forced to work in unsafe environments because they are in need for money to support their family. An example would be Nike exploiting their workers, it was said that “it was revealed that workers in one of its contracted factories in Vietnam were being exposed to toxic fumes at up to 177 times the Vietnamese legal limit” (Wazir)
|
“There is cultural intermingling. Each country is learning more about other cultures.” (Collins) One example would be in the Philippines. Due to the increase in technology and accessibility in transportation, it allows others with different cultures to visit or even migrate to the country. Brent International School is a very diverse school allowing others from different areas of the world to interact with each other and learn their culture.
|
One of the biggest problems that we face today due to globalisation is that the richer population is becoming increasingly richer while the poor stay poor. While richer families are using globalisation to their advantage by expanding their companies locally or internationally, such as SM and Henry Sy in the Philippines, they are gaining more money. However, it can be argued that the poor do get slightly richer because they are usually working in these companies such as SM. “All of Sy’s businesses employ and exploit contractuals who are made to work hard yet receive meager wages and minimal benefits and have no job security nor union rights to speak of. Contractual salesladies, bank tellers and construction workers – these are the people who contributed immensely to the rise in Sy’s profit” (Olea)
|
Due to globalisation, transportation is more accessible and interacting with others is easier, therefore shrinking the world. Globalisation allows us to interact with others from different areas of the world, and travel to other countries in a few hours.
|
Globalisation has created attempting crimes easier through technology. One general example is using social networking websites to obtain information about certain people. Because many are oblivious to the ability many may have from obtaining information on the internet, they will carelessly post their personal information. Therefore others can take their information and use it for crimes, etc.
|
Poverty reduction: “China: Reform led to the largest poverty reduction in history. Between 1990 and 2005, poverty rates in the country fell from 60% to 16%, leaving 475 million fewer people in poverty.”
|
As much as globalisation may be an advantage to countries, it can be a disadvantage to other countries as some countries cannot be part of globalisation. “Many countries in Africa have failed to share in the gains of globalisation. Their exports have remained confined to a narrow range of primary commodities.”
|
Websites Used:
I LOVE your comment about Henry Sy. I just want to clarify something that I think is an important point to touch on. I would say in this case its not that the rich are getting rich while the poor stay poor because lets face it, some of the people who ARE employed by SM do have much more money than they would have if they were not working for SM. What is happening here is that the rich individual is just earning more money, faster. Each person, both the average SM working and Henry Sy himself, are gaining in wealth but the main idea like Olea implies is that Sy is "using" people through the lovely means of capitalism to earn his wealth whereas the average SM worker is just happy to have a job. Maybe a better quote for this example would be that "the rich are getting richer faster than the poor?" (Barnes) Now you gotta quote meeeeeeeee!
ReplyDelete