Globalization Poverty and Economic Development

Name
Instructor
Course
Date
Globalization, Poverty, and Economic Development
Response 1: Stiglitz on Globalization
Globalization by its very nature aims to achieve an increased interaction among the world’s countries through an elaborate economic process that has both the cultural and social constructs. But as Stiglitz rightly observes, globalization can create a scenario whereby powerful countries win over the economic, social, and even cultural dynamics of less developed nations. More importantly, Stieglitz posits that the resulting inequality in such countries can be resolved by first understanding the causes of the inequity together with unraveling the reason behind the lapse in globalization (Stiglitz 15). As such, it will be possible to understand both broader and specific issues that arise from the gap between the increase in productivity and the commensurate wages. Furthermore, enhancing the capacity of the financial sector, curbing market power, reforming corporate governance, improving the bargaining rights of employees as well as increasing the minimum wage is crucial to bridging the gap of inequality (Stiglitz 17).
Response 2: Marber on Globalization
Admittedly, globalization has been more fundamental than it has been detrimental to the world. Whereas rich countries are more likely to benefit from the impact of globalization than their undeveloped counterparts, globalization has been crucial to enabling their connectivity and ability to trade together. In my opinion, Peter Marber is right in arguing that globalization has improved the living standards of people and reduced the poverty levels significantly.

Even so, there is a school of thought that maintains that globalization has broadened the gap between the wealthy and the poor both at individual and national levels. However, I believe that the argument should be based on how much more globalization can be realized than as opposed to the extent with which it is causing harm to the globe. The benefits of globalization are numerous, but as Marber observes, it has increased the capacity of human capital and economic outputs thereby creating a resultant rise in Gross Domestic Product (Marber 30).
Response 3: Levinson on Economists and Sweatshops
Levinson reckons that sweatshops may be disparaged in the rich countries yet they are crucial inaugural steps towards economic development; especially, in developing countries. Indeed, his assertions are correct except that the notion of sweatshops is one in which workers do the donkey work and receive very little regarding remuneration. Worse still, workers in developing countries are more often than not subjected to poor working conditions that often make them susceptible to harm or even disease from inhaling fumes or working without protective gears (Levinson 11). I believe that if standards are enforced in the work environments, then the benefits from development in poorer countries will spread across the population. At the moment, the government and the most influential in society are the only ones who enjoy the lion’s share yet it is the poor worker who uses more energy. Therefore, enforcement of standards, laws, and regulations is key to restoring equality.
Response 4: Sachs on Geography
In most cases, the geographical location of a country will matter a lot on how it develops. Nations that are strategically located are bound to attract more development than those are in parts of the world that are not easily accessible by road, air or sea. Therefore, Sachs is right in asserting that geography matters when it comes to how much nations benefit from economic development. Nevertheless, what is not immediately clear is whether countries with poor geography are doomed. In principle, I dispute this fact because such countries are open to development and can join the rest of the world through connectivity by air, sea, and road developed anew for purposes of accessibility, ease of doing business, interaction, trade, and cultural exploration. Therefore, countries with perceived poor geography are not doomed, but have the potential of becoming important global economic destinations.
Works Cited
Jeffrey D. Sachs, “Government, Geography and Growth: The True Drivers of Development,” Foreign Affairs, September/October 2012, 142-150.
Levinson, Mark. “Economists and Sweatshops” Dissent; Fall 1997; 44, 4. ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection pg. 11
Peter Marber, “Globalization and Its Contents,” World Policy Journal, Winter 2004/2005. 29-37.
Stiglitz, Joseph. “Overselling Globalization.” Globalization: What’s New. 2005 Columbia University Press. Pp. 1-21.