Globalization Generates Poverty Essay

Globalization allows important processes to occur and be maintained more efficiently and important ideas to become reality in an environment where they otherwise may not be. There is a certain irony involved in this however that must be mentioned. For example, globalization is going to allow the world to work together to hopefully solve our apocalyptic environmental predicament in a best case scenario. Of course however, this predicament is a result of globalization(1, Conclusion). Still, it allows the human race to push forward, which at this point we must recognize as a necessity of our species in a time where progress of the human race is growing rapidly. In my opinion this is a progress is written in our DNA, and globalization has allowed us to accomplish truly incredible things(2, Conclusion).

That this was also the decade in which globalization came into full swing is more than a minor inconvenience for its advocates” (Rodrick). If globalization is supposed to present an advantage to developing countries, why have there been so many setbacks? Indeed, both sides will have its winners and losers regardless of which side of the development coin they live on, but for the most part globalization has lifted millions out of poverty, improved the standard of living, and increased life expectancy rates all while keeping developed nations relatively competitive to their developing counterparts. Globalization’s value is that it seeks to create an economic equilibrium in the world, where parties are free from barriers and can benefit from one another through a more efficient allocation of resources. This allows all participating nations to contribute to an integrated economy and where all nations willing to embrace globalization have the potential to benefit. Regardless, the path to successful integration to the global economy has not always been easy. There is contention towards globalization as some argue that it is detrimental to developed nations, while many developing countries that were forced to hastily open up their markets and integrate failed. However, if implemented properly, globalization has proven that it can benefit all parties involved and that the potential gains outweigh the losses.

"Since 2006, more than 500 Bangladeshi workers have died in factory fires, according to Clean Clothes Campaign, an anti-sweatshop advocacy group in Amsterdam. Experts say many of the fires could have easily been avoided if the factories had taken the right precautions. Many factories are in cramped neighborhoods and have too few fire escapes, and they widely flout safety measures. The industry employs more than three million workers in Bangladesh, most of them women.

There is good evidence that globalization has resulted in a considerable increase in world trade over the past 20-30 years. Costa (2008) claims that the globalization makes services, goods, people and ideas move throughout the world more easily. He also maintains that cross-border world trade will play a more and more significant role in global GDP. By 2017, it will approximately occupy 15 percent. Nevertheless, Lin Y. (2006) argues that the globalization also has serious drawbacks. He considers that globalization does harm to both developed and developing countries. Through globalization, few people in developing countries gets benefit. Most of them are still as poor as before because the change of there is so tiny. He also claims that although

From an average American's perspective, globalization is a win-win situation for everyone involvedt. But we fail to see the other end of this situation, where lower-class families around the world are faced with troubles. In countries such as Indonesia and India, American companies purposely set up factories and take advantage of the population by giving them wages below minimum wage to manufacture their products. Families are forced to send their children to work in these factories in order to make enough money to survive. When there is only enough money to put food on the table, living conditions are poor and necessities such as clean water are not as available as they are for us Americans. In other countries such as Colombia, the drug

Poverty, the state of being extremely poor, affects a large proportion of the global population who are unable to access adequate levels of food, shelter, healthcare and education. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that reducing poverty is considered to be a net positive without addressing the concept from a variety of theoretical lenses. The World Bank quantitatively defines those living in poverty as individuals with less than “$US1.90 PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) per person, per day”, by these metrics global poverty has decreased significantly, from approximately 44 percent of the global population in 1981 to an estimated 9.6 percent in 2015 (WB PovcalNet, 2016). Although this is an impressive improvement there are still many people living in poverty around the world. This essay will examine some of the methods used to combat poverty, as well as how it has changed over time. These methods include both free trade, fair trade and their alleged opposition to each other as well as comparing domestic and foreign aid.

The remaining divergences over globalisation, growth, and poverty may be summarized in six correspondent tensions: i) while "strong globalizers" believe that more liberal trade is always better, "cautious globalizers" defend that total trade liberalisation may come with great social costs and that policies should be case specific; ii) while one side holds that governments should put minimal barriers on FDI, the other states that barriers are important to secure welfare gain; iii) while one side defends that the way in which growth is achieved is irrelevant, the other stands that growth-aimed policies must be sustainable in order to reduce poverty; iv) while one side defends that unilateral liberalisation is good for developing countries, the other contends that developed countries must improve access for developing countries exports before their further liberalisation; v) while for one side education and health must be privatized given the governments inefficiency, the other states that public provision of such services is the only guarantee that all the poor have access to them; and, finally, vi) while one side defends that liberalisation will work as a catalyst for the necessary political reform, the other defends that it may have a detrimental political

The interactionist, conflict and functionalist theories have been extensively used to guide the sociological understanding of social problems. The different views presented by these theoretical approaches are critical not only in understanding but also in resolving the various social issues. Poverty presents as one issue that every society has to grapple with given its inherent tendency to pose a threat to not only the poor but to the society as a whole (Mooney, Knox & Schacht, 2014). The issue of poverty can always be argued from different sociological perspectives. The functionalist theory claims that social stability is critical and is at the center of adequate socialization and a healthy society. Social integration is viewed as a vital

Almost half of the world lives on less than $2.50 a day. The very poor suffer from lack of access to safe food and water, basic education, and medicine. For many of the world’s countries, poverty is prevalent. While almost half of the world lives in poverty, the rich continue to get richer. In 2005, the poorer 10% only accounted for 0.5% of the world’s share of private consumption, while the richest 10% accounted for 59% of consumption (Shah 1-4). There is an increasing inequality gap. The world has enough resources to feed and shelter the poor but people in the North consume so much. The rich benefit from this inequality while the poor suffer.

So in my previous visual report about poverty I discussed the reasons why Poverty continues to grow and who that affects in our society. To begin off as I had stated in the visual report I live in an area of rural West Virginia where some of our small towns considered at 100% poverty levels. We were once an area thriving with the railroad and coalmines, our town was even once known as “The Heart of the Million Dollar Coalfields” is now mostly doctor’s offices and closed shops. Our town died with the coal mine closings and it will only continue to decline. Unfortunately poverty is an all too real thing for a lot of people in my area. I wanted to see if poverty is something that is seen in every state now, not just ours and to see as well who poverty really hit the hardest. The results I was able to fine were both surprising and informative. In my first line graph the information shows the number in millions in poverty as well as the poverty rates between 1959 and 2010. We see a large dip in the 1970’s after the great depression and higher numbers of people in poverty with the recession in 2010. The next question I had was who does poverty effect. This particular chart goes more into who and what ages that poverty hits the hardest. The information states that females head of households with no husbands, people under the age of 18, native born and whites are the hardest hit with poverty for our country. So, to follow up the previous

Poverty in Developing and Less Developed Countries The world includes less developed countries and developing countries. Less developed countries are countries considered to be poor and often contain many people who are in absolute poverty. Developing countries are countries like India, which are gaining in wealth. There are two types of poverty within the world.

Poverty affects 80% of people in the world. That means over three million people live on less than $2.50 a day. The question today now rises what we can do as a county and as individuals to help.

The World Bank Organization, defines poverty as lacking access to shelter, doctors, healthy food, employment, and education. Poverty is more complex than not having a stable income for acquiring basic resources like shelter, clothing and food. The obvious interpretation of poverty will convince anyone that it is only one sided. There are many causes and outcomes of poverty. The complete opposite of directly suffering from living in poverty is called indirect poverty; this type affects people who have to pay taxes, in order to help those who cannot help themselves. Nonetheless, people directly affected by poverty live day by day, with a constant fear of what the future has in store for them, which in reality, is much worse. The importance of the definition will help one be comprehensive in the different definitions of the word poverty, have an understanding of which definition is the most appropriate for the United States, and that poverty affects children in all four domains of development.

“Globalization is not just one impact of the new technologies that are reshaping the economies of the third millennium” (Thurow 19-31). When speaking of globalization, most people will not have a complete understanding as of what it actually means or what aspects of the world it affects. Globalization promotes free trade and creates jobs. The capital markets attract investors, resort cheap labor, and leads to job losses in some areas of higher wage. While all of this is happening, the world economy is being effected: economically, culturally, socially, and politically.

Overall, world poverty rates continue to stagnate, despite much-heralded growth in China and India. "Today the annual median per capita income in developing countries is $3,000, a figure that indicates only modest progress since 1975, when the median income level was about $2,500. Over this same time period, median per capita income in developed countries increased from about $15,000 to more than $25,000" (Poverty reduction and growth: Virtuous and vicious circles, 2012, World Bank: 103). Furthermore, poverty reduction even in the developing world has not been equal: "while China experienced annual per capita growth of about 8.5 percent between 1981 and 2000, reducing poverty by 42 percentage points, Latin America's per capita GDP declined by 0.7 percent during the 1980s and increased by about 1.5 percent per year in the 1990s, with no significant changes in poverty levels" than $25,000" (Poverty reduction and growth: Virtuous and vicious circles, 2012, World Bank: Introduction). While China's exponential rise in growth is heartening, "China accounts for nearly all the world's reduction in poverty," and "excluding China, poverty fell only by around 10%" (Shah, 2012, Poverty around the world). This contradicts one common theory about poverty: that overall economic expansion and growth will be enough to liberate the world's poor.