Scandals Of Paternalism: Do People Point To When People Resent?

For some people, globalization is so feared it is synonymous with world destruction. In the end, for all we know, maybe this will be proven before it is over. In reality however, there are many good things that have resulted from globalization(1, Premise). Let’s for a moment focus on the economy, even though there are many other advantages that have been brought forward that will also be discussed. Many Americans do not appreciate how efficient our markets are, in this case efficiency in reference to supply and demand is number one. These efficient markets allow economies to grow. As many have learned in a global world, when one economy grows, it spurs growth in all the other economies

‘Newly industrialised countries have been and continue to be, the driving force of globalisation.’ To what extent do you agree with this statement?

In conclusion, the topic of free trade is difficult to debate and often controversial as it has advantages but also disadvantages. Nonetheless, the drawbacks outweigh the benefits as it one, contravenes basic moral ideologies, two, makes the rich, richer, and the poor, poorer, and three, jeopardizes our declining environment. All in all, free trade will neither support nor sustain our country to be ethical, prosperous or

“It is as important to examine what we forgo, as well as what we will get if we choose one alternative over another.” In other words, before a change is implemented into an economy, careful consideration of all other alternatives and their possible outcomes must be thoroughly examined. However, unforeseen outcomes often arise due to the imperfectability of humans.

The patient is Bob (name has been changed to protect confidentiality), a 15-year-old boy with leukemia who is taken care of by the nursing team, including myself in the oncology department of a general hospital. Bob was diagnosed with leukemia at the age of eleven years old and has been receiving treatment, consented by his parents ever since then.

However, I do not necessarily agree with everything he says. I found Thing 7 “Free-market policies rarely make poor countries rich” particularly disturbing and pessimistic to say the least. Indeed, history has shown that most of the nations that are doing well today were protected by various policies that might have contributed to their growth. However, that does not mean there is no hope for emerging economies, especially in Africa. In reality, some of these countries have no resources, and those that do, cannot deal with the openness of the market, a factor that has been promoted greatly by globalization (Mason, 2010). But that does not mean they have to excel in the same areas as other nations used such as manufacture, as Chang (2010) suggests in thing 11 “Africa is not destined for underdevelopment”. However, focus on emerging fields such as the services industry could be their way out. Maybe, all they need is a little nudge to the right direction, a little more boost for resources, and we can have economies running on tourism-generated revenue. In addition, his lack of insight on sustainability, one of the most important aspects of the economy, is

By not discussing the state of our middle class at home, Friedman effectively neglects the most pressing concern for a majority of Americans. Aspects of this discussion can certainly be inferred from the reading, but the lack of explicit conversation suggests the author is more interested in representing the optimistic view of globalization. He is clearly aware of the downsides, but in many respects, allows the reader to put the pieces together for themselves.

Throughout chapter 5 from The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century the author, Thomas L. Friedman, explains to his readers that free trade was becoming a big issue in national politics. Friedman uses chapter 5 to focus on David Ricardo’s free trade theory of comparative advantage. Thomas Friedman states, “Having listened to the arguments on both sides, though, I come down where the great majority of economists come down – that Ricardo is still right and that more American individuals will be better off if we don’t erect barriers to outsourcing, supply-chaining, and offshoring than if we do” (264). Friedman makes it clear that he believes America, as a whole will benefit more by sticking to the general principles of free trade. Thomas Friedman continues on in chapter 5 by explaining the counterarguments of people who do not agree with David Ricardo.

Every society should answer three economic questions, which are what to produce? , how to produce? , for whom to produce? The reason why a society should choose what to produce is because a product of one society’s choice is not necessarily the choice of the other choice. A society should decide how to produce goods, it is due to the fact that not all societies have the same resources, some societies may have a lot of people in them so, if they want to produce a good, they can use their human resources to accomplished their task, in the other hand societies with a low populations but a high amount of machines, can use their resources to finish their task. Some countries may be able to provide items that other countries can not, because

Every democratic government must find a balance between Libertarian Political Philosophy and the Philosophy of Paternalism. However, in order to understand how the Libertarian Political Philosophy and the Philosophy of Paternalism work in today’s democratic governments, we must understand what the definition of these two philosophies are. Libertarian Political Philosophy (Libertarianism) is a form of philosophy that revolves around the rights of people and a maximization of freedom for them. Paternalism, however, refers to the restrictions and laws that are placed on citizens by some sort of government or agency. For as long as governments have existed, there has been much tension between the two philosophies. It is understood by most people that no person can have unlimited freedom, even if they are the person in charge of the controlling agency.

Governmental power contradicts with how our society functions as a whole. In today’s society the government influences the lives of many with how we need to treat others. For example, in 2016 after the presidential elections, a young African American girl by the name of Nida was bullied and terrorized for the color of her skin. A young boy had told her that her family was going to get kicked back to their country now with a new president sending illegal immigrants back to their home country (Kowalski).

Being part of Generation Y I've had faster access to more information than any other generation before me. Therefore, with more information comes more questions. We as a species always want to know the who, what, when, where, why, and how? To me these are the five simplest questions that sum up economics. It can have such broad interests, but at the same time be refined in its pursuit of answering whatever is being questioned. Much like myself I have broad interests but like to be able to define myself by what I am doing. I believe it will be the best way to utilize my imagination, and life experience coupled with a traditional education to answer the questions I have about why the world works the way it does. Because some of my heroes are men like Leo Tolstoy, Allan Watts, Chuck D, Joe Rogan, and Noam Chomsky; I was always going to be one of those men that always asks why? It wasn't till a few years ago after I was listening to the song "Wake Up" by Arcade Fire that it really hit me what I wanted to do. In the song are couple of lines that really hits my soul which are "We're just a million little god's causin' rain storms turnin' every good thing to rust!" Ever since I listened to that song it summed up all I've read, watched, or heard in regards to different schools of economic thought, politics, and the human condition as

Is it fair that our future generations suffer the consequences of our ignorant behavior? Must we choose wealth over future generations? This is a global dilemma that should be carefully put into perspective. Human keeps on pulling natural resources and stores are filled with unwanted lines of products. Sadly, most people tend to concentrate on fast results/short term. Preserving the environment is the only answer to save our future generations from the impact of global warming (AtKisson).

Our present, highly internationalised economy is not unprecedented—“it is not an act of god, like a virus or a volcano, but the result of economic actions taken by human beings and thus responsive to human control” (Global Squeeze Ref); it is the state of the international economy that has accelerated since modern industrial technology (Hirst & Thompson, 2003). It is the great story of our era (Curtis, 2008):

“Globalization is today's reality. Like it or not, the move to a world economy is a fact of life. At some point in the 1990s the process achieved critical mass and people started to sit up and take notice. Many were apprehensive.