How And Why One Should Reform The Global Economy

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.

Some research said that the global economy is a way that can easy to affect to other countries when a country has an economic problem. However, the global economic crisis usually is based on an influential country that has the economic problem and affects the countries who besides this country in a short time. Finally, these countries affect the whole world of the economy, this is the globalization of economic crisis. In another hand, the benefits of globalization in economics is more than the negative of globalization. Globalization can make people have a life that is high quality. Because of the globalization, some of the counties lower the level of other countries’ business to come into native

to the effectiveness of this “global economy,” or in terms of the subject of this essay, the modern

In being so, liberalism possesses both economic and political components. Economic liberalism argues that, increasing economic interdependence would lead to a more peaceful international realm. Political liberalism bases itself on the belief that ‘A just world order assumes the establishment of republics ’. Thus, political liberalism as practiced by the United States during Cold War becomes a critical proponent of democracy promotion by noting that overlapping national interests will allow for a tamer international environment, engendering the notion that democracies do not engage in wars. Although democracy as interpreted by liberal theory on its own does not lead to free market, it may create the necessary infrastructure for such an event to occur. The promotion of democracy, to a great extent, increases economic interdependence through the alignment of core national values and therefore decreasing the probability of hegemony between the states. However, The notion of liberalism was undermined in the literature of the United States foreign policy after the Cold War. Even though the states were economically interdependent during the Cold War yet they engaged in rivalry for resources to the extent that if, assumingly, the “World Trade Organization” came to be perceived as a corrupt institution,

Global Political Economy is essentially a study of a political battle between the winners and losers of global economic exchange. In fact, understanding global economy relies on a clear knowledge of the process of political competition. Political power possessed by actors regulates economic activity and in turn this creates the basis for and affects political power. Through, critical analysis of the concept of global political economy it becomes clear that there are three prominent theories that form GPE, mercantilism, economic liberalism and Marxism.

Skidelsky examines the concept of globalisation after the 2008 Global Financial crisis. Through his article he considers the many factors of today’s globalisation such as free trade, democratisation but also the weakness of the situation today. However, Skidelsky’s view for the future of globalisation is not what it looks like today, but rather a pessimistic view on globalisation.

First, the pre-conditions of both crises show the poor financial conditions of the private sector, which made the people even more vulnerable once the crisis struck. Second, the causes of the crisis and the accompanying economic theories (i.e. laissez-faire, deregulation, Keynesian) show that deflated market speculation to boost the economy can do more harm than good for the individual citizens and the economy in general. Third, in terms of the effects of the crises, it shows how the U.S. economy had become vulnerable but globalized than ever before. The Great Recession exposed the flaws of the U.S. financial system once complete deregulation was implemented. Lastly, in terms of recovery programs, both crises reflect the importance of the government to further break or make the economy.

In the book Rewriting the Rules of the American Economy written by Joseph E. Stiglitz, is able to capture the attention of the reader by bringing the problems with the economy to light as he also discusses the solutions that can help restore the economy. I think the problems that are very prominent in The US’s economy today are so unsatisfactory that as a society it is easy to be very aware of what is going on. The United States has always been thought of as this great and equal country where people have always wanted to live because of this big idea that comes along with living in The United States. The big idea that the land of the free also offers people this chance at The American Dream. Sometimes this idea does not always come true. Instead

The underlying problems that caused the financial crisis of 2008 began building before many economists and policymakers are willing to admit. Since the laissez-faire policies of the Reagan administration in the 1980s, inequality and unemployment heightened. “Between 1976 and 2006 (...) ation-adjusted per capita income increased by 64 percent, for the bottom 90 percent of households it increased only by 10 percent. For the top one percent of households it increased 232 percent,” (Wisman 2013, 932) causing an income gap. Another arsing issue was globalization after World War II. The economy’s structure changed and outdated previous economic policy. Manufacturing jobs were outsourced because labor was cheaper abroad; the US imported more goods than it exported, causing a trade deficit.

During the last decade of the twentieth century, the word ‘globalization’ has become an increasingly prominent feature of political, social, and economic discussion in academic and policymaking circles, as well as in the media. The processes and outcomes of globalization drew attention and debates that had one thing in common. The research shows that nearly everyone agrees that globalization is a trend that is changing the face of the world, and as a result the world society lives in a more ‘globalized’ world. Nearly two and a half decades passed since 1990s, and studies have been conducted to examine the causes and consequences of globalization. Moreover, nearly every person experiences some type of globalization and can testify firsthand the effects it has on their life, society, and the state. The analysis of the effects that globalization dynamics have on the world society indicates that globalization has a significant positive impact via spreading opportunities and wealth across nations, stimulating innovation and productivity, enhancing the economic development of poorer countries, and helping to improve living standards.

The concept of globalization is a complex and peculiar one, failing to be definable by a single, precise definition. Centrally, globalization involves information and goods being exchanged amongst different countries. These interactions and interchanges among countries globally over time is due to an increase in communication and transport networks. Globalization is often divided into three main areas being economic globalization, cultural globalization and political globalization. All three are vital areas to one’s life and globalization is said to have a large impact on each. Although globalization is controversial in the aspect that it cannot be declared just how much of an influence the notion has in the world. Political scientists such as Muhammad Ijaz Latif, Anton Pelinka and Martin Wolf all discuss this issue in their respective pieces as well as differing aspects of globalization such as the role the European Union plays in relation to globalization, the different perspectives of globalization and the challenges of the nation-state in regards to globalization.

Globalization and Its Discontents is an incredibly easy read that provides remarkable insight to some of the world largest public institutions. Joseph E. Stiglitz takes the reader on a journey into this world via his own personal experiences as the chief economist at the World Bank in the 1990s. He draws on examples from the East Asia crisis, the transition from command to market economy in Russia, as well as Latin America to support his argument for change in global public institutions. At first glance, it would be expected that the piece would focus entirely on globalization and the potential problems that are experienced from

The rise of globalization following WWII generated three important factors that define today’s world. McNeill and McNeill agree with Pollard, Rosenberg, and Tignor that multiple economic changes, such as the creation of financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) contributed to the globalization of the world economy. Carter and Warren further this argument by claiming that globalization has caused shifts in the modern economy, namely the rise of Asian economic powers. However, all three historians agree that the rise of globalization goes hand in hand with the rise of inequality in today’s world. Gaps in power, wealth, and access to information have only widened due to the trend of globalization. The final key factor defining our world today are the ongoing processes affecting development countries. McNeill and McNeill argue similarly to Carter and Warren that the end of imperialism generated new nations who quickly realized the free market was a pathway to stability. However, Pollard et al. and McNeill and McNeill place importance on financial institutions like the IMF forcing developing nations to reform their economies to be subservient to the world’s economy. Together, these historians argue that the trend of globalization following WWII caused factors like the modern global economy, the rise in inequality, and the development of new, decolonized nations to be key determiners in the world today.

Globalization is defined as a worldwide development, the process of spreading ideas. More recently, globalization has become more focused on economics, the spreading of capitalism and opening international trade. Globalization through the past 50 years has developed a bad reputation, one that does not benefit countries the way people thought it would. Joseph E. Stiglitz, in his book, Globalization and Its Discontents, stresses that modern globalization is a good thing, but has not been done correctly in the past few decades. The ideas behind globalization have the potential to benefit the world, specifically developing countries. Stiglitz goes into detail about how the problem falls with the misguided attempts of the international economic institutions to solve developing countries’ economic problems. Something has gone very wrong with globalization, and the purpose of this book is to shed some light on where it went wrong. Stiglitz presents the problems with the international economic institutions’ damaging policies and their effects using ethnographic field work and historically comparative methods.

Although it is right that globalization promotes free trade among the states and unites them, but there are also negative outcomes, which states whether rich or poor try to protect their own interests? These negative outcomes of globalization have made the dependency theory significant in describing the state of affairs in the present world. Poor countries attempt to protect their national markets and become self-reliant (Hewison, 1999). Self-reliance can be seen as supporting a strategy of controlled relations with the world economy. Poor nations should only approve relations on the condition that the relations will enhance the societal and financial well being of the larger population. However, endeavour by the peripheral states to oppose the impact of dependency can result in results in financial sanctions and/or military attack (Sen, 2010). One example of such resentment against globalization is “localism“that surfaced during the financial crisis in Thailand (Hewison, 1999). Localism is an illustration of populist response to the changes and disparities created by globalization. Localism gained substantial energy from the Thai King’s speech in 1997, where he recommended a self-contained economy to counter the negative effects