Monday, September 17, 2012

Why I'm still feeling negative about globalization

After reading both the "yes" and the "no" sides of our packet last night, I maintain that globalization is negative. When I say negative, however, I do not mean to suggest that we should, as a nation, become completely isolated and chop off all connections to the outside world. Instead, I think we are doing it all wrong at the moment, but if we can fix the main issues then we can flourish. Although I could drone on and on about this, I'll focus on inequality. The fact that a Starbucks in China pays its employees $6 for an 8-hour day, when that just covers the cost of two lattes, is pathetic. I don't care if nearby there are worse conditions, the point is that the best standards aren't even up to my personal standards. If we're globalized, then why doesn't the barista in Beverly get $6 after his long day? This world is so unequal, and it is too chaotic for one country to handle. As acknowledged in the "no" argument, we need more countries to step up their game and help control the world if we're going to try and control it at all. While we are fantastic, we are still a bunch of humans and need more help. We need another country to regulate corporations and workers rights. Why should one barista's check pay for 20 lattes while the other one's covers 2?

1 comment:

  1. I completely agree that the no argument in the articles we read had very convincing arguments. It swayed me from leaning slightly toward the positive to being more neutral in thinking there are positives and negatives to it. The example you used of the Chinese workers is definitely helpful in talking down globalization.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.