The Instigator
BigMac
Pro (for)
Losing
17 Points
The Contender
headphonegut
Con (against)
Winning
20 Points

On Balance: Globalization has a positive effect.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
headphonegut
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/15/2010 Category: Science
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 9,916 times Debate No: 12038
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (6)

 

BigMac

Pro

I would first like to start by defining a few terms:
<> process by which regional economies, societies, and cultures have become integrated through a globe-spanning network of communication and trade. (http://en.wikipedia.org...)

<> the exchange of services and goods.

Globalization is occurring directly under our feet, shaping the future of our world. Due to Globalization, no longer are persons restricted from being successful because of their location or situation. For the first time ever: Intelligence is more important to success than birthplace/social status.

For example, a lowly boy from the slums in India with the intelligence of Einstein will no longer be trapped in the habitat he is born into. But rather, through globalization, he will be able to harness his intelligence in schools and universities and even get a job in a major corporation. Since Globalization has spread corporations throughout the globe in a search for labor and markets, many people who would otherwise have been stuck on the family farm can make a living by working as a consultant for a corporation, or an accountant for a large bank like

As Thomas Friedman said in his best selling book, The World Is Flat, Globalization has increased competition worldwide for everything from basic household necessities to telemarketing. All jobs are up for grabs, allowing only the smartest and the brightest to succeed, thus allowing for more productivity and success worldwide.

So what do we tell our kids? how will they be able to get jobs in this extremely competitive world? Friedman states that global job markets will not completely lack job security, and in order to succeed, we must become masters of one of these "Untouchables" in order to succeed.

the Untouchables include:
- Synthesizers: those who create new products by combining technologies.
- Explainers: the experts who can inform people on the ins and outs of this new flat world.
- Localizers: the people who take the technology of the world and bring it down to a local scale for use by everyday people.
and a few more.

Competition and productivity go hand in hand. Competition forced miners to double the amount of iron ore they dug per hour, as told in one case study. In another, competition forced concrete companies to become more efficient or go under, according to Chad Syverson of the University of Chicago. And nothing increases competition for goods, services, and jobs as much as Globalization does. So with an increase in competition, there will be an increase in productivity, and thus a more progressive and forward-moving world.

As people become more able to collaborate, compete and share with others of different cultures, religions, educational backgrounds and languages through globalization, the cause is the near elimination of location-determined success, a greater increase in the world job market, and a huge increase in global productivity.

I wish my opponent good luck and thank you for accepting.

Sources:
http://www.chicagobooth.edu...
The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the 21st Century
headphonegut

Con

Hello and thank you for this intriguing debate. Well "Big Mac" you certainly made very convincing arguments I hope I can keep up.
question: wouldn't the "lowly boy be at a disadvantage in India wouldn't he be prone to leprosy and malaria wouldn't he be be unable to compete with rich folks who have money the boy might have great ideas but how is he even going to communicate with people and share them and how is he going to make money? how is he going to go to a university if he has no money, he has no home because in India lowly means the lowest of the low he is prone to disease because a corporate company hired him to cut down trees and he will die when a tree falls on top of him or by the food he eats because corporate company's made farmers by their hybrid plants that can only survive with their hybrid pesticide which unfortunately the farmer has no money because they plants cost him to much now he doesn't pesticides so he sells his crops and the lowly boy buys some of his crops which eventually leads to his demise.

R1- What my opponent didn't tell you about globalization is that farmers are killing themselves in (India) that Europeans are losing jobs and that is posing a problem for them since the companies are outsourcing work to the Asian countries since the cost of labor is low and profits the company considerably. There is immense pressure on the employed Europeans who are always under the threat of the business being outsourced. Corporates are building up units in other countries equally well equipped as they have done at their own country, thus transferring the quality to other countries. There are some experts who think that globalization; along with the positive aspects is also leading to the incursion of negatives like communicable diseases and social degeneration. There is also a threat of corporates ruling the world because there is a lot of power, which is invested in them due to globalization. For nations that are at the receivers end are also giving up the reins in the ends of a foreign company which might again lead to a sophisticated form of colonization. Friedman was selling a dream a classic American dream when he wrote his book, he came across as be what you want to be and in the process endorsing globalization, but quite frankly the world isn't a fair place it's quite cruel.

R2-we also know that jobs are being lost to global competition. We know that the global environment is being threatened on a number of fronts, from global warming and the deterioration of the ozone layer to the extermination of species and the poisoning of the world's water supply. We see refugees and immigrants by the millions roaming the planet, in search of jobs and protection from armed conflict. We also know that inequality is getting worse: fewer and fewer large corporations own more of the world's productive resources while millions of people are unable to sustain their families. Many of us have a gut feeling that the global economy has gone awry. We would do well to trust our feelings. This booklet addresses this crucial issue: how the globalization of the economy undermines the quality of life in the United States. The decline in our standard of living can be seen in numerous areas:

As U.S. corporations have expanded their global reach they are better able to put the U.S. workforce in direct competition with foreign workers, thus increasing their profits while driving down our wages and general standard of living. Global corporations are better able to use technology to downsize their workforces, thus creating anxiety among working people who no longer feel secure about the future of their jobs. As global corporations become less dependent on any particular nation, they have less interest in supporting any government with taxes. This results in a shrinking tax base and what is referred to as a "fiscal crisis of the state" (the tendency for government expenses to outrace revenues). By using the rationale of "global competition" to drive down the living standards of the majority, the corporate class has shifted more and more wealth from our pockets to theirs. This growing inequality is producing resentment and rebellion-here and abroad.
R3-
"It is true that Europeans are losing jobs and that is posing a problem for them since the companies are outsourcing work to the Asian countries since the cost of labor is low and profits the company considerably.
There is immense pressure on the employed Europeans who are always under the threat of the business being outsourced. Corporates are building up units in other countries equally well equipped as they have done at their own country, thus transferring the quality to other countries. There are some experts who think that globalization; along with the positive aspects is also leading to the incursion of negatives like communicable diseases and social degeneration. There is also a threat of corporates ruling the world because there is a lot of power, which is invested in them due to globalization. For nations that are at the receiver's end are also giving up the reins in the ends of a foreign company which might again lead to a sophisticated form of colonization. Globalization also is responsible for global warming"--- pro and cons

http://www.commondreams.org...
globalization and its discontents* http://muse.jhu.edu...
http://www.commondreams.org...
http://www.globalresearch.ca...
http://www.questia.com...
http://www.globalenvision.org...
http://www.ourfood.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.articlesbase.com...
Debate Round No. 1
BigMac

Pro

Thank you for accepting my debate.

I'm not sure were you came up with the cutting down trees thing... But here is my answer to your "question[s]"

Just because this hypothetical "lowly boy" is the lowest of the low, the globalized world allows him to rise from that set position. He is no longer subject to persecution and immense prejudice (albeit there is still some prejudice, but that is human nature). Due to his intelligence coupled with the new Globalized World, he can discover opportunities everywhere, especially in modern day India, where hundreds of huge modern corporations such as Dell, Microsoft, AT&T, etc. With any intelligence, he can gain a job in any of those companies and earn a great living, move to the suburbs, possibly rise through the ranks of the company and become an executive. In the old world, a boy born in the slums of India would stay in the slums of India. Multi-national corporations are not inherently bad. They provide jobs worldwide, allowing for a better standard of living for all. They do not kill off everyone through falling trees, poisoned food and other preposterous things you suggested.

The loss of jobs in Europe is due to Europe's failure to accept that the world is no longer in the same Post-WWII economy it has been in for the past 60 years. They refuse to evolve with the changing job market and thus has fallen behind in our ever-changing world. Those that have stayed agile and have adapted well, such as India and China, are quickly becoming world powerhouses. If countries in Europe along with the United States can realize that they are behind the pack and are no longer the self-righteous and deserving overlords of the world, they could easily adapt and create tons of jobs. But the citizens and politicians of these soon-to-be former leaders refuse to see that the world is no longer in a labor-based economy.

In order to stay competitive, countries need to alter their economies to fit the criteria I listed above: be Synthesizers, Explainers, Localizers, etc. The government should make it easier to switch jobs by making retirement benefits/health insurance less dependent on one's employer and by providing insurance that would partly cover a possible drop in income when changing jobs. Friedman also believes there should be more inspiration for youth to be scientists, engineers, and mathematicians due to a decrease in the percentage of these professionals being American/European. Countries like India and China are the opposite. They have an enormous amount of avid, young scientists, engineers, mathematicians, etc. Because of this, it is more than likely that they will overcome the U.S. in all those fields within a couple generations. These countries are entering their boom years, while the U.S. and Europe are entering their decline years. Countries need to harness the power of Globalization and use it to their advantage to rebound themselves to prevent themselves from entering into a sharp decline.

The decline in the amount of jobs is due to American lack of attention. We want to believe that there is no country on earth capable of overthrowing us from our perch as self proclaimed head of the world. If we were more willing to adapt and evolve, multi-national corporations would not need to outsource to India or China. We desire too high a standard of living for corporations to be profitable.

We blame the companies, yet it is our own fault.
headphonegut

Con

R1- well thank you for your response "I'm not sure were you came up with the cutting down trees thing" it's what companies do giant corporates they cut down trees and put kids from the shanty's usually in south America and use kids to do labor for low wages which takes jobs away from us by moving their companies to India or China by the by where does this lowly boy from India live in? also he has a higher probability of dying before ever making it out of the slums http://thaso2.files.wordpress.com... I apologize but I highly doubt that anyone is going to make it out of the slums of India http://www.sonic.net... remember we are talking about the slums, sorry but don't know why you keep on trying to make this "lowly boy's" dreams come true because quite frankly its not going to happen.

R2- better standard of living? if by better standard you mean poverty, global warming, and social degeneration then yes it does cause a better standard of living
terms- social degeneration- Social degeneration is the breaking up of the coordination existing between the various social elements, individuals and the subgroups which cooperate in the social process, by the growth of so many antisocial elements that social unity is destroyed. This comes about by the growth of degeneracy among the individuals who make up society. Therefore, individual degeneracy has a direct bearing upon social degeneration, for degenerate individuals are either unsocial, or antisocial and are unable to cooperate in the aims and purposes of society.
Notice how my opponent uses "not inherently" bad so he concedes that they are bad but not inherently bad. furthermore Multi-national corporations usually want to make money so they usually set up company's in Asia were as I said before is cheaper and there are lower wages so there's a decrease in jobs around the globe.

R3- Europe has changed it's currency and is currently making more breakthroughs in technology than ever before. the
past 60 years Europe has evolved and changed to meet demands however it's still not enough.
"It is true that Europeans are losing jobs and that is posing a problem for them since the companies are outsourcing work to the Asian countries since the cost of labor is low and profits the company considerably."- pros and cons. Bad news China is already a powerhouse nation and India is not nor will be in the future and it doesn't seem that India is becoming more powerful china just seems powerful because all major worldwide corporations are there with low paying jobs. America and Europe are the ones leading the pack trying to create new jobs, new ideas, researching new technology's. This shows you how powerful corporate giants are one fail and the whole world goes to hell. and by the by we are not a labor based economy we are free market economy.

R4- "In order to stay competitive.................prevent themselves from entering into a sharp decline."- opponent
but that's just it there is no competition the company's are the ones who control globalization." As U.S. corporations have expanded their global reach they are better able to put the U.S. workforce in direct competition with foreign workers, thus increasing their profits while driving down our wages and general standard of living. Global corporations are better able to use technology to downsize their workforces, thus creating anxiety among working people who no longer feel secure about the future of their jobs." "There is immense pressure on the employed Europeans who are always under the threat of the business being outsourced. Corporates are building up units in other countries equally well equipped as they have done at their own country, thus transferring the quality to other countries." <(what I said before) I don't know why you're saying it's a countries governments fault when it's not it's major corporations who provide low paying jobs.

Conclusion:
With an overwhelming lack of evidence and many unthought out arguments my opponent fails to even address the resolution he doesn't say why globalization has a positive effect nor how, now hypothetical scenarios are not arguments merely opinions. He makes claims that he doesn't prove and furthermore he fails to refute any of my arguments made which by the way disprove his whole case so therefore because lack of evidence insufficient arguments supporting the resolution, and inconsistency with the arguments the resolution is negated. thank you for your time.
Debate Round No. 2
BigMac

Pro

BigMac forfeited this round.
headphonegut

Con

pitty I extend my arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by BigMac 7 years ago
BigMac
FFFFFUUUUUUUUUUU. im an idiot. got distracted by school work. -__-
Posted by headphonegut 7 years ago
headphonegut
<-------------------------disapointed
Posted by headphonegut 7 years ago
headphonegut
yeah I don't really worry about "grammar/punctuation" I just worry about debating and if grammar or punctuation is a factor on how people vote hey that's fine I don't really care I just want to debate and have fun.
Posted by BigMac 7 years ago
BigMac
were you high as well? haha your grammar/punctuation kinda stinks :3 in middle of second round now...
Posted by headphonegut 7 years ago
headphonegut
@ Big Mac lol i waz drooling through most of my refutation haha
Posted by BigMac 7 years ago
BigMac
mwahahahahahah that is my diabolical plan belle >:D i distract everyone w/ my avi, and then destroy them since they cannot debate as well >:]]]
Posted by belle 7 years ago
belle
i can't even read the debate, i am too hungry thanks to your avatar...
Posted by jaweber1 7 years ago
jaweber1
Agreed.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by whatisx 7 years ago
whatisx
BigMacheadphonegutTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by resolutionsmasher 7 years ago
resolutionsmasher
BigMacheadphonegutTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by BellumQuodPacis 7 years ago
BellumQuodPacis
BigMacheadphonegutTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by belle 7 years ago
belle
BigMacheadphonegutTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:41 
Vote Placed by BigMac 7 years ago
BigMac
BigMacheadphonegutTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by headphonegut 7 years ago
headphonegut
BigMacheadphonegutTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07