In your opinion is globalization inevitable?
97251
Yes. The overall benefits are also positive.\n\nThe people who gain are the people who understand the new rules of competition and the master imperative of continuous learning. Continuous learning and the importance of knowledge have been written about since the early 90s by writers such as Peter Drucker. The people who will succeed under globalization or in the new global economy are the people who understand and master technologies and also perhaps more importantly, who understand the value of knowledge and intellectual capital in today’s rather cerebral economy. (Where knowledge accounts for more and more of the growing value in products and services).
1132907
No.  As long as there is greed and stupidity in the world, there will be people willing to capitalize on those traits.
349707
Yeah... I think you will see movements in that direction for many contenents... the African Union is in talks... but how knows if that will happen.\nI think it would be better for them because no one country has the infastruture to be very competitve in a global economy, but together they could make waves and get some things done
221489
You're question is very interesting.  As you know we are in a globalized world.  This is not the first wave of globalization--it's the third.  The other waves happened centuries ago.  Anyway, because something is sold to someone living outside the borders of the US, doesn't necessarily mean that you will lose your freedoms.  They still have to operate under American law & standards here in the US.
708098
So far, economic globalization has hampered diversity in several ways around here. \n\nIt's reduced the number of options people in my community have for work. Most of us, no matter what we invested in our education, or what sort of vocational credentials we have, have had to take jobs in the low-paying retail or food-service sector.\n\nAs our wages dropped, so did the amount of taxes we could pay for public services, and so the condition of our neighborhoods has deteriorated badly. Crimes against property, violent crime, and vice crimes, have increased in the area.\n\nThe people who could afford to move have moved out of state to the few places left where they could find high-paying work. I know of several college graduates who've had to move overseas (one moved to India) in order to work in their field of interest.\n\nHuge, cheap, "big-box" retailers, who outsource the production of their goods overseas, have moved into the area and replaced most of the independently-owned shops, because we could no longer afford to purchase quality products from local producers and retailers.\n\nHonestly, I'm a little worried about economic globalization.
29005
There is little chance of true globalization any time soon, with the rapent xenophobia that is striking in so many nations, the borders being gaurded against the fear of terrorism and the hatred of anything "foreign" will shut out the utopic future of a united world.
510846
We are living through the disadvantages right now, but in the long run, it's all wine and roses. To reverse a quote from Frederic Bastiat, the most excellent 19th century French economist, "Where trade crosses borders, armies soon won't", aiee, (isn't that cute?) globalization ultimately leads to world peace.
106822
We'd just end up fighting over lovers. It's human nature to be violent. We need to learn to love war on a smaller scale, like maybe with our neighbors. At least then we would know who we were fighting and what it was about. Globalization just promotes remote-control wars with people we don't know while we don't even talk to the people we live next to. We need to stop trying to get rich through growing exploitation of the weak or the weak-minded.\nBuy less, buy local, including weapons. Join the Pitchfork Party. We only do business with people we can reach with a pitchfork.
591532
All be the same-doubtful. we are, and will always be different. However, i do think everyone will hear of mcdonalds or famous people one day. Technology is expanding. Anyone who lives in developed countries or has acces to the internet will have. Progress economically will match peoples knowledge. One day, everyone won't be able to drive for a few hours without passing fast food restaurants
780400
I don't think inevitable is the right word.\n\nBecause humans exist in a world where resources are unevenly distributed, there will always be competition and aggression, hence we will always have some form of "warfare."  If a country uses nukes, the choice will probably be a rash one because most developed nations with nuclear capability are well aware of the ramifications that come with using nuclear weapons.\n\nFortunately, the massive stockpiles of cold-war era weapons have been dismantled, so the likely hood of full-scale nuclear annihilation has been greatly reduced.  Of course, we still have more than enough weapons to do great damage, but the major nuclear powers in the world today are far more stable and responsible than thirty years ago.  Another consideration is that with our rapidly developing global economy, borders have become much less important.  Resources are more accessible now than they were thirty years ago.\n\nThe major problems come from unstable, dictatorial players like Iran and North Korea because the governments in those countries are oppressing the people in order to maintain power, and the rest of the world finds this offensive.  As those countries develop nuclear weapons to assure our "non-interference", tensions increase, and the likely hood of a pre-emptive strike by one of these countries becomes a frighteningly real possibility.\n\nIt's unlikely that any of these countries would be able to build a stockpile of nuclear weapons, or delivery systems to threaten the US, so it would probably be an isolated attack against one of their neighbors.  Were this to happen, you can almost guarantee an immediate united global military response to remove the aggressor for the good of the planet.\n\nYou could imagine that such a scenario would entail massive, round-the-clock conventional air strikes to destroy any and all offensive military infrastructure, and communications.  Once this was done, a traditional ground invasion would follow with a significant, multi-national invasion force that would quickly overwhelm their defenses.  Once the govt. leaders were captured or killed, it's likely the populous would capitulate quickly.\n\nSince we've never had a nuclear upstart launch an attack, it's likely that support for such an invasion would be overwhelming.  Most sane countries do not want psychos running around with nuclear weapons.\n\nMeantime, yes, we need to do as much as possible to make sure these countries do not continue to advance their offensive nuclear technologies.  In this scenario, the ends (peace) do justify the means.  Any means.
743294
It has to do with Globalization.\n\nGlobalization is basically a free enterprise market between all participating nations. Think about it...\n\nIf you have a country that is in direct competition with another nation but your workers require wages that are far less than other nations, who has the advantage?\n\nSo yes they are the future.
744643
The reality is that globalization is a positive for all players involved.  Right now, the rich countries are enjoying all the benefits without taking any of the risks and globablization does not benefit every single person anyway.  The concept is that if country A can make everything cheaper than country B, both countries can benefit by letting each do what it does best.  A may pay more to B for some things than they could make it themselves for, but A will make more money by selling other products to B.  B makes money, both by selling its goods and by purchasing A's products.  The down side is that each country must focus on its specialty and re-deploy resources from industries where it doesn't have a significant advantage.  That means that you really shouldn't be making clothes or growing wheat in N. America or Europe.  That is something that can be done better in S. America and Africa, freeing up American and European capital and labor to focus on industries where it has an overwhelming advantage.  But if you are a farmer or work in a clothing factory, you probably see if differently.
71023
Globalization\nFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.\nJump to: navigation, search\n\nGlobalization is the changes in societies and the world economy that result from dramatically increased international trade and cultural exchange. It describes the increase of trade and investing due to the falling of barriers and the interdependence of countries. In specifically economic contexts, the term refers almost exclusively to the effects of trade, particularly trade liberalization or "free trade" (however, see "meanings" below). More broadly, the term refers to the overall integration, and resulting increase in interdependance, among global actors (be they political, economic, or otherwise).\nA picture taken in Dubai International Airport, in the United Arab Emirates showing some of the characteristics of globalization. Here, the corporation McDonalds is marketing their "McArabia" meal, consisting of grilled kofta.\nEnlarge\nA picture taken in Dubai International Airport, in the United Arab Emirates showing some of the characteristics of globalization. Here, the corporation McDonalds is marketing their "McArabia" meal, consisting of grilled kofta.\n\nFrom 1910 to 1950, a series of political and economic upheavals dramatically reduced the volume and importance of international trade. But these trends reversed starting with WWI and continuing through WWII, when the Bretton Woods institutions were created (i.e. the IMF and the World Bank). After World War II, international trade dramatically expanded, fostered by international economic institutions and rebuilding programs. From the 1970s, the effects of this trade became increasingly visible in terms of benefits and disruptive effects.\n\nIt is useful to distinguish economic, political, and cultural aspects of globalization, although all three aspects are closely intertwined. The other key aspect of globalization is changes in technology, particularly in transport and communications, which it is claimed are creating a global village.
294543
First define what you mean by globalization. If you mean material wealth then no. However, I would think that the more mankind interacts with one another that we can't help but evolve religion as any structure within our societys. That's assuming that you view religion that way and not as some sort of absolute doctrine that shouldn't change.
408458
No. It is global. Could be anyone from anywhere on earth.
796434
The impact can be described in one word... globalization. Globalization reforms are actually going to boost India's economy enormously and make them a viable global market competitor to be taken very serious.
945931
There has been an increase in globalization in the United States as well as in rest of the world. This has resulted in many good things as well a lot of economic dislocation and unemployment.  It is not completely evil as you seem to assume. Read Thomas Friedman's "The Lexus and the Olive Tree".\n\ncc