Added: 8 months ago
From: RenegadeEconomist
Views: 5,538
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (19)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Globalization is good, but incomplete. Free mobility of labor must follow free capital and free trade in goods and services. However, understandably, many citizen in the rich countries don't want to share their wealth with poor countries' citizens. So we either have democracy and global inequality, or we globalize over the objections of the West's citizens, gradually close the gap in per-capita income between nations, and grow from there. Probably a combination of both is what's going to happen.

  • Good riddance to the braying jackass Christ' Hitchens who supported the sanctions and the war of pelf against Iraq. [Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: "We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"; Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it." — "60 Minutes" (5/12/96)]

  • @procommenter what nonsense, it is the fault of S.H. that so many children died if indeed it was that many.

  • i think the whole POINT of globalisation is to "stymie national policies and cripple nation's independent policies" (1:29). this is a proposed holistic method of control through homogeneous uniformity. "they" can't control us if we're all acting differently, thinking differently - but if we all act the same, all think the same way, how much easier is "their" job going to be, right? interesting point about the bretton woods charter breach, too. i'd like to see that breach being prosecuted. pffft

  • Resource based economy....NOW.

  • The fact that the term "Globalisation" has come to mean investor's rights for destroying countries is a victory for propaganda.

    Everyone wants Globalisation, that's why unions call for international solidarity, just not this kind of "Globalisation" where companies can move jobs overseas.

  • @AndroidPolitician thats isn't called globalisation , there is a word i studied in philosophy , ( arabic) damn , i can't translate it , but anyway there is three types checked

  • @saddemgargouri

    What's the world in arabic and just use google translate. I don't think there's a word that can describe global connectedness well that's not "Globalisation".

  • @AndroidPolitician الكوني والعالمي والعولمي , universal , global and another one , perhaps cosmic , as my professor said , each try to unit people , but under different banner . globalisation under a set of economic values , universal demand , a set of human values ( manners or morals ) , sorry for my bad english , i never used english in philosophy

  • @AndroidPolitician Well said.

  • Comment removed

  • Globalization has been in place for a long, long time.

    watch?v=nKD2Zz8x7_k

  • U.S academics and middle class Brits that think they 'know' about economics like to scorn globalisation, but it's really not that bad.

    As Fred Harrison has pointed out, the U.S and W.Europe have benefitted enormously from the influx of cheap foreign goods, but the productivity gains only helped fuel a booming housing market so the overall economic impact appeared negative.

    The U.S especially like to blame the "mercantiltist" Chinese for having the audacity to work hard and export! Silly.

  • @cookdave

    Fred Harrison is a firm advocate of Land Valuation Tax to prevent Boom & Busts and stop speculation in Land which created the 1929 & 2008 crashes.

    The US & EU have had jobs removed to Asia and both always have a high unemployment pool - a message given by the Chicago School of Economics, so they created a pool of unemployed to keep wages down - and rigged LAND by not taxing its value. Rigging the free-market.

  • @NearAbbeyRoad I agree, by allowing land to be privatised the monopolists trap labourers in the cities, this creates a labour a surplus and drives wages down.

    High unemployment is a natural consequence of natural resource privatisation, but the left and right don't want to know because reality doesn't fit with their pre-conceived world view.

  • @cookdave

    With LAND the profits (community created) is creamed off by private landowners. Tax land by its "value" - no needed to nationalize. The planning system crams all into small urban pockets - only 7.7% is settled in the UK. LAND is rigged. LABOUR is rigged by planning regs, wage policies, immigration.

    Use Land Valuation Taxation, relaxed planning, no wage restriction laws, and a strong monopolies commission.

    Hong Kong & Singapore raise 40% & 33% by LVT, giving low income tax.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more