The Consequences Of The Illicit Global Economy

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

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.

Commentators contend that globalization has disintegrated national sway and has brought about an exchange of force from states to enterprises or to universal associations. Since the late 1970s, there has been a developing acknowledgment of a belief system, frequently called "globalism," that supports an open market and constrained government impedance in capital and exchange streams. Corporate hobbies have driven this motivation, which they have forced, the faultfinders contend, on the creating

“Drug policy regarding the control of the traditional illicit substances (opiates, cocaine, cannabis) is currently moving through upbeat times in almost all Western countries. Prohibition on the basis of repressive law enforcement not only seems to fail on a large scale, but also to create vast additional costs, problems, and harm for drug consumers, who often find themselves in extreme social, economic, and health conditions” (Fischer 1995: 389).

Peter Kraska, “The Unmentionable Alternative: The Need for and the Argument against Discriminalization of Drug Laws, “ in Drugs, crime an

He also describes how the United States views as a voice and forceful supports of prohibitionist drug controls in international policymaking. In addition, in the United States the discussion on surrounding drug control policy is one of the most extremely disputed matters of our current eras. The author mentions in the article how the strictly enforced US prohibitionist drug was unable to control the Narcotic drugs which happened to create many negative and harmful consequences for the people in the world. The negative consequences that were created when they failed to control the narcotic drugs happened to increase the violence, government dishonesty, and public seizure; therefore, these consequences to the economy growing are very harmful and dangerous. Narcotic drugs have long preserved, which has impacted many people lives in the world. A main purpose of this article is about the unaffordable drug control normally employed by the United States. The United States has spent way too much money abroad and local just thinking that they will be able to decrease the level of illegal drugs; however, they happened to fail at

According to Kristof (2009), the legalization of drugs is another solution to drug trafficking. With drugs more readily available, at lower prices and higher levels of potency many law enforcement personal and politicians favor legalization of drugs. While other experts favor keeping drug production and sell illegal, but decriminalizing possession. Either way if it is legalize it must be regulated. According to Kristof (2009), the United States have inquired three consequences due to the failure of “The War on Drugs”, increased population in jails, empowered criminals and terrorists, and squandered resources that cannot be replaced. With that said, why continue down a road were the drug problem is not getting resolved. Before drugs were prohibited, usage levels were lower among cocaine and heroin users, and states with legalized marijuana have not seen an increase in consumption, according to Kristof

Narcobusiness is entrenched in economies and in lives of people in the drug producing countries. It provides much better income than traditional jobs. Weakening of the state, its inability

Prohibition may shrink the market, by raising costs (most notably the unit price), but even under strongly enforced exclusion, a substantial black market emerges in which production and use continue. And black markets generate numerous unwanted side effects.

Due to the harm and ethical challenges it raises, the current US anti-narcotics policy needs an urgent rethinking to overcome the current drug menace witnessed across the nation. As it stands, the policy generally focuses on blocking the supply chain through a variety of enforcement regulations and agencies. In contrast to this, an alternative method of diminishing the demand through decriminalization stands to provide a more viable means of tackling the challenge. At the same time, this proposed change could help alleviate the negative consequences of both drugs in society and the subsequent War against them, not just across the nation, but as well in the regions supplying the drugs.

It is not a new phenomenon but it is arguably the most significant, yet problematic and controversial change in the modern era. The report will analyze globalization by first scratching the surface and examining the positive claims associated with globalization and the way in which it has cemented economies and countries like Australia and China. The report will focus on three main claims: (1) Globalisation is about the liberalization and global integration of markets (2) Globalisation benefits everyone; and (3) Globalisation furthers the spread of democracy in the world. However, through the discussion will come to light that Globalisation is a doubled edged sword comprising of negative consequences, which at times may question the validity of this

The world is not a large and strange place anymore. The world is a place that is interconnected and intertwined. The world has become from a place that each country and their peoples are separate and isolated to a place that each country and their peoples are part of a global network. Thanks to globalization this is occurring. Globalization is the ‘international integration” or ‘de-bordering’ – “a number of highly disparate observations whose regular common denominator is the determination of a profound transformation of the traditional nation-state” (Von Bogdandy 2). Globalization is connecting different people from different cultures and backgrounds together. More and more corporations are entering new foreign markets to sell their

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.

Supporters of globalization argue that it has the potential to make this world a better place to live in and solve some of the deep-seated problems like unemployment and poverty. But the opponents general complaint about globalization is that it has made the rich richer while making the non-rich poorer. “It is wonderful for managers, owners and investors, but hell on workers and nature.”

“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.