Who will be negatively afftected by the globalization and why?

Answer 1

I would tend to think globalization would hurt everyone in some form or another, but would hurt the poor the most. Why? Simply put, because absolute power corrupts, absolutely. If we all start living, thinking and acting almost the same way, then we could be easily controlled by someone who can figure out what our 'buttons' are and how to press them.
The strength in any society, and what has been the strength of our planet, is diversity. One culture develops a problem, another culture has the solution. What happens when we become a single culture and a problem arises?

Answer 2

In the short run, anyone who had some form of trade protection occuring. Globalization has the tendency to destroy either such an industry OR to damage the economy around it. So, for example, lets say the US steel industry receives significant protections. Globalization will tend to make either that protection destructive in the long run for jobs OR harm other American firms well beyond any value the protection provided by forcing them to pay higher amounts for steel for their products than their competitors. So GM would have to pay more for steel than Toyota. US steel companies may not feel it until GM starts selling fewer cars. If GM went out of business then the steel companies might go with them. Had their been no protection GM would have been stronger.

If you are the beneficiary of protection, then you are the next victim. If not you, then your neighbor who will pay more than one dollar for every protected dollar you receive.

The other group most negatively affected are states that have poor education systems. Learning is the strongest way to create wealth. In fact, it is the only way to create sustainable wealth. That is true today, but it was also true in 1810. Factors of production tend toward equilibrium, only new knowledge can dislodge that equilibrium forcing stronger and stronger competition.

On the postive side, it will bring higher wages over time with higher employment. On the negative side, many high wage workers may find their skills exported and many low wage workers will find themselves trapped without prospects because they cannot train themselves into better employment.

Answer 3

The two answers above are the two stupidest answers in the history of the universe.

If you would like to see places that have not had to "suffer" from any globalization, you should visit Rwanda or Congo. Great places I hear.

Closer to the US is Cuba. Cuba has been "spared" evil US Corporations because of the embargo. The result - people float on logs across an ocean to get out of there.

The only people who will be hurt in America are the unskilled and uneducated. You can thank our government owned monopoly on education for that. Do you want the same politicians and bureaucrats that have been running education for the past 30 years to now place trade restrictions based on their "expertise"?

Are you going to raise your kid telling him that if he studies and works really hard, he will someday be able to sew stitches in someone else's underwear. What is truly sad is that poverty stricken people in third world nations have the same job skills as some Americans. And Americans actually complain that they can't have that job. People who set their goals and standards that low will be poor regardless of the existence of globalization.

Anti-globalization is nothing more than an anti-liberty movement sweeping the planet in favor of big centralized governments that attempt to control economies. May God help us all if that succeeds.

.

Answer 4

Gobalization will hurt the ecomonies at first because the local producers would have to restructure there ecomonies to compete on the global scale. The restrucutring of local producers would cause a spike in unemployment and social stability, but that where goverment comes in and helps the unemployed with resources they have available thru job training and unemployment benefits for the developed countries. Also, the poor countries would benefit the most from globalization because it force curropt and autocratic regimes to open up to forgien influences beyond ecomonics. Its a J curve for a poor country to open up to globization, and the country will swing back and forth in opening up or tighting up. In addition, the poor countries should break up personal monopolies of billionares in some countries not willing to compete in the global ecomony, but the goverment would face internel problems from these wealthy people leaving becuase they dont wanna play by fair rules. Neo-Liberalism not the only way to open the ecomony to globalization, and income disparties should taken into account by poor countries to migitate the trarnsitition to a global ecomony. Countries like Africa its more they lack the know how to run a ecomony. Most middle income countries need to stop protecting wealthy people, and making them pay taxes to help the other people have a chance to compete in the global marketplace. The goal of a poor country should be to reduce absolute poverty thru education, healthcare, instructure investments, and try to slowly build a modern safety net for those that will probadly be left behind. The closed ecomony pratices in the past left a lot of nations structural dyfunction explioted by the private monopolies of wealthy people imparing local and global competition. Personally, I like the Swedish and American models of free market models both have there good sides, and drawbacks. Today a smart country cant go back to protectionist and populist practices of the past.

Answer 5

in the not so long run we all will. the multinational companies will move even modest wage countries to slave wage countries. that's what happened to all the jobs that left the us to go to Mexico and then left Mexico to go to china NAFTA and CAFTA are good only for companies not people this is a boat that is sinking we are on the top of the boat but eventually we're screwed too

well, even if everything else he says is true That 's why: companies don't care as long as they keep making money for their stock holders and the politicians don't care because the companies fatten their wallets

who will be affected? we all will and we already are your dad and my dad pay taxes that pay these bozo politicians who support the companies. think how many real jobs have left to go somewhere and we're left with dead end McJobs

and sport you're going to be affected. think about it how much stock does your family own? better ask because a piddling savings account will vanish how are we going to live when were old did you know that medical insurance for old people is over $500 per month but not for company executives and senators and congressman what a racket

god bless america we're sure as sh** gonna need it.

***********
the guy below thinks this is one of the 2 stupidest answers in the universe, huh. well if everything else he says is true, it still doesn't, just look around and see what is happenning he talks about an easy target. Cuba is where we are headed if the people don't remember that we get the leaders we vote for.

The last guy makes more sense, but remember what OPM stands for "other peoples money" Check to see who's looking into your wallet

Answer 6

As globalisation brings huge MNCs, the first prey are the small manufacturers who are not able to compete with these giants. This is true for all sectors, whther agriculture, insurance, or other. Second sufferers are those workers who are unable to upgrade their skills as per the chaning tehchnology. Thus, the labour in unorganised sector stands to lose. This of course assumes that there is no govt. intereference, which is not the case even in the U.S.

Answer 7

I am I hate that when i need customer service the person doesnt speak English clearly and cant help me