globalisation is not working for the poor?

Question

I know globalisation has become the utmost part of our lives but the problem is the benefits of it are not reaching to the poor. They are linfact imited to the upper part of the society. I ave to debate for the motion. please give me new ideas, examples that i can incorporate in y debate.

I know globalisation has become the utmost part of our lives but the problem is the benefits of it are not reaching to the poor. They are linfact imited to the upper part of the society. I have to debate for the motion. please give me new ideas, examples that i can incorporate in my debate. Many of u are understanding my point but i don't want the solution. What i want is the ideas and examples that help me to prove that Globalisation is not working for the poor.

Answer 1

It was never intended to 'work' for the little people. In fact the case can be made that globalization was put in play because the US didn't have enough poor people compared to most other countries. It is about making the super-rich even more rich. The tragedy is that there are many upper-middle class Americans who think that they are going to be 'one of the chosen'. This is about the ubber rich.

Answer 2

If one defines globalisation as increased international trade with the lowering of trade tarrifs, then asks why the tarriffs were in place to begin with, you get your first clue as to the dilema.

Next, new trade competitors will include competing with those thatr are better skilled, better educated and better financed. Without these advantages, one will certainly loose.
And the poor many times are those without these three advantages.

Those that know this and how to leverage this are the winners. Unfortunately the poor can hardly understand the terminology, otherwise they would not be poor.

Without a program for a region to increase worker skills, business financing and everyones education, "globalized" countries loose against the countries that do these things.

Answer 3

First of all, I like your question, and I am on your side. But, the fact of the matter is that it was never meant to benefit the poor in any way. It was also never intended to benefit the middle class in any way. Globalization is a goal, that they having been working toward for a really long time, and it is meant to benefit only the Globalists. Which it, of course, does!!!!! The best thing we can do for the poor, of which I am one, is to get rid of the Globalists, and the Federal Reserve system, and the IRS and the questionable income tax, and the Patriot Acts, etc.,...but that is easier said than done!!!!

Answer 4

I would love to debate this Lucky you!
Globalization: You must define this word to debate it; the intentions of globalization have no standard definitions for implementation or its expansion. One constant is that is inevitable and in democracies the effects will allow the little guy prosperity if they choose to participate. In any economy, those who chose to let opportunity pass them by should not expect to reap any benefits. With understanding there that there is a word called entitlement but that should only include those that are unable to take part in there societies economics and not just because the fact that they exist. To exist is God given, to do something with that existence should be left to that individual, and should not be handed the right to expect anyone else to enrich there existence.
Globalization will take life times to organize also the full participation of all parties that are involved.

Answer 5

Globalization is not for the poor but for the rich who buy the goods generic to member countries.

Answer 6

Have the benefits of anything ever reached the poor?

I mean, I understand your point, but what's the solution?

Answer 7

This video explains it all,good luck with your debate.