World is Mad.. Globalization is not working for poor, in the context of Education & Health conditions. Justify

Question

You have to justify that globalization is only for rich and it isn't for poor, taking the examples of Health & Education conditions of the countries.

Answer 1

IT IS NOT SO, GLOBALISATION ALSO HELP POORS HOWEVER THAT MUCH HELP IS VERY LESS, ALMOST NEGLIGIBLE.

Answer 2

Globalization is not working for the poor? Globalization helps the poor more than anything else ever has. Industrialized nations recognize the plight of poor countries and send aid (millions worth) every month, they try to stabilize countries (like Somalia) so that the PEOPLE in those countries can become more independant, they build schools and provide necessary healthcare. Things that were not happening before globalization. Yes it seems that it isn't helping...after all they are still poor...that is the fix it now attitude, anything worth doing is worth doing right and will take time, so give it time, it may take a few lifetimes before they are able to take care of their own.

Answer 3

Globalization is the agenda of politicians. Nowhere in the world, politicians are selfless and business people somehow goad the politicians to expand their business in all countries. Nowadays we see advertisements in the media wooing Indian students to foreign education. It is not free. A hefty sum has to be spent for that. Likewise Health sector has become mostly commercial. You can see foreign pharmacy companies are vying with each other to get a foothold in third world countries for exploiting the poor. It is no better than British Colonization. nagarajan.

Answer 4

Globalization helps the poor in many ways. Along with globalization and market economy we have to address the poverty issue from a genetical angle also because poverty is partly genetic. Simple distribution of money/wealth is only a temporary measure. A genetically gifted person is bound become rich in due course.

Answer 5

i VERY MUCH APPRICATE YOUR QUESTION AND CONCERN OVER THE ISSUE OF GLOBALISATION FURURE IMPACT tO ANSER THIS I ORGANISED AN INTERNATIONAL CONFERANCE ON HUMAN RIGHT AND POVERTY THAT HAS BEEN PUBLISHED IN 5 VOLUMES BY THE BARKATULLAH UNIVERSITY BHOPAL CONTACT THERE PROS SN CHOUDHARY wHAT EVER WE AL NATION SIGN FOR HUMAN RIGHT WHAT WE COULD ACHIVE GLOBALLY FOR THE POOR IS NEGLIGIBLE AND THEIR HUMAN DIGNITY WHAT TO TALK OF HEALTH AND EDUCATION
BE CONCERNED WITH YOUR QUESTION LIFE LONG AND KEEP ASKING TO ALL CITIZEN OF INDIA AND THE WORLD

Answer 6

Globalization in India, expressed in terms of a freer flow of goods and services, capital, technology, and information, owes itself to a macroeconomic crisis that erupted in 1991. Until then, India’s economy grew and developed within a highly closed and protected domestic market, relying to a large extent on domestic production of goods and services, domestic savings, and indigenous technology.

Its links with the global markets were weak and limited. In 1990, India’s merchandise imports formed 0.67 per cent of the world’s total exports. Foreign direct investment (FDI) in 1990 amounted to US$162 million. Average nominal tariff on imports was 125 per cent, with a peak rate of 353 per cent. Domestically, the public sector controlled and managed the key strategic sectors of the Indian economy.

In 1991, triggered by a large and unsustainable spending during the 1980s and a sharp fall in foreign exchange reserves, combines with the possibility of a default on repayment of external debt, the Government of India opted in favour of a policy of macroeconomic stabilization and structural adjustment. A stabilization policy meant reducing the fiscal deficit, improving the balance of payments position, and controlling inflation, without causing any adverse impact on real income and output.

Accordingly, the Indian rupee was devalued and a programme of fiscal retrenchment
and credit squeeze was undertaken. Several import controls were kept in place so as not to affect the balance of payments position. However, as part of structural reform, policies governing external trade were liberalized, initially by moving from a system of quantitative restrictions to price-based mechanism, and later by introducing a negative list that described goods, which were subjected to import controls, and reducing the import tariff. Industrial licensing except for a short list of industries relating to security and strategic concerns was abolished. Conditions for foreign direct investment were relaxed. Globalization may have an adverse effect on social rather than economic goals. ‘Globalization may be good for economic prosperity but is definitely bad for social goals... Globalization may be economically benign but...it is socially malign’.
According to the latest data, work participation rates in rural India for both men and women have declined since the early 1970s, although the decline has been more pronounced for women (Mahbub ul Haq 2002). If this decline can be attributed to globalization, it seems clear that policy-makers will need to work hard to develop policies to reverse the trend.

Table: Work Participation Rates for Men and Women in Rural India (Percent)

Men Women
1972/73 54.5 31.8
1977/78 55.2 33.1
1987/88 53.9 32.3
1989/90 54.8 31.9
1990/91 55.3 29.2
1993/94 55.3 32.8
1994/95 56.0 31.7
1995/96 55.1 29.5
1997 55.0 29.1
1998 53.9 26.3

Source: Mahbub ul Haq (2002)

In the unorganized sector, although agricultural employment fell from 76 percent of the total in 1961 to 65 percent in 1993/94, the relatively slow rate of decline means that even in the era of globalization the agriculture sector will continue to be the main source of employment for years to come.

But it should be noted that the interests of a particular section of Indians need not match the real interests of all other sections of Indian society. Other sections of society may benefit only to the extent that a fraction of this new prosperity trickles down to them. Some may not benefit at all, while some may even be adversely affected. In addition, globalization may have hidden consequences that may negatively impact the quality of life even of those prospering through globalization.

But the greatest danger posed by unrestricted globalization is that it may exacerbate the problems of nagging poverty and uneven development, and create grave infra-structural mismatches. It is already evident that the Indian economy has become more dependent on imports which has brought with it constant pressure on the value of the Rupee, leading to recursive bouts of high inflation.

And rather than expand India's manufacturing strength and develop new capabilities and technological development in India, globalization may in fact put India at a global disadvantage in key sectors of modern industry leading to an economy that is always chasing scientific and technological advances that occur in other nations.

Another aspect of non-selective globalization is that a few select sectors - namely consumer goods, automobiles, and software have attracted almost 90% of all foreign investment. There has been very little investment in the production of advanced electronics, computer or telecom hardware, aircrafts, advanced industrial materials, capital goods and modern tools and equipment, or robotics. These are the areas where India is completely dependent on imports and is likely to fall further behind. Rather than steer production in areas of cutting-edge technology, state governments have been falling over each other in giving MNCs more concessions to produce more of what India is already producing!

Answer 7

The first sentence of your question is the answer.