Globalisation does not mean one way in fact it works both ways. Initially the developed countries will be dumping their products onto the poor countries where the industry is not much developed but those industries which are being hit due to this would improve their skill and bounce back and not only sell their products in home land but also sell the same in the developed countries and they have the biggest advantage of price because their labour in definetly cheaper than that of the developed nations. Now itsel we can see that most of the American countries are outsourcing their business to Oriental countries just to gain the cheap labour provided by these countries. Therefore globalisation is something like mixing and ultimately a homogenious mixture would be the result.
2006-10-09 00:53:00
·
answer #1
·
answered by ssmindia 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
We need to define globalisation first . Globalisation is the process of increasing international integration in economic, political, social and cultural spheres, whereby actions beyond national boundaries constrain and influence national outcomes. The interaction is seen in the form of increased flow of goods and services, increased flow of capital, increased cultural and political interactions, migration of people and many others.
So according to this definition of globalisation we need to consider first whether the economic resources of poor countries are not exploited by the rich countries. Secondly it depends whether civil wars that affect poor countries will continue to exist . If these wars do not stop poor countires will not be integrated in the global market .
China is on the way to good economic development as compared to other poor countries and is well integrated in the globalisation process .
so to sum up i would say that ;
1. STOP CIVIL WARS WHICH IS A DRAWBACK TO ECONOMIC GROWTH .
2. POOR COUNTRIES HAVE TO MANAGE THEIR ECONOMIC RESOURCES IN A MANNER WHERE THEY WOULD NOT BE A LOSER THEMSELVES.
3. POOR COUNTRIES WILL HAVE TO TRAIN THEIR LABOUR FORCE BECAUSE ACCORDING TO NGO`S AND THE UNITED NATIONS, THE LITERACY RATE IS VERY LOW AS COMPARED TO RICH COUNTRIES.
2006-10-10 00:43:05
·
answer #2
·
answered by jeanca 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of coarse globalization helps poor countries. Think about it this way. Before we went there to offer them work, these people didn't have work. They also didn't have any skills. So in order for it to be worth us going there to employ them, they must offer us cheap labor. If the labor wasn't cheap we couldn't afford to hire them. Training an entire culture is expensive. Once we are there, the people get trained and develop new skills. This makes them more valuable because they are more efficient (and cheaper to train) than they were b4 so their wages go up. In time, people's quality of life goes up and a country like Japan emerges.
In order for all this to work, the countries government must have policies that make it easy for companies to invest in their country. Examples things governments can do are: free trade with little regulation, the ability and willingness to build infrastructure such as roads and power plants, and ability to maintain stable currency so companies can have a predictable value on their investments.
2006-10-09 01:42:06
·
answer #3
·
answered by goose1077 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
It should, but it really depends on the policies of the countries that are taking advantage of the globalization.
If the country desires a strong middle class, this can help the poor. If a country focuses more on the rich, globalization will only make the rich richer and build up the middle class a little bit.
2006-10-09 01:09:35
·
answer #4
·
answered by Ted Jordan 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
globalisation only help the developed country and not others
it like selling cheap handphones to a headhunter tribe knowing
that they have only generator supply of power
force them to catch up with the world in a destructive path
2006-10-09 01:01:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by kimht 6
·
0⤊
1⤋