For US citizens wanting US PROTECTIONISM because that is the only way we rebuild our US cities with an economy designed to benefit all citizens and their ability to start, grow, and feel a lifelong stability in that business the last major public policy in achieving this is infrastructure development. We shared a few articles from Maryland and Baltimore pols and their direction with these infrastructure plans. Whether it is rail tunnels, telecom and energy conduits, ports, interstate and road construction---these are structures vital to ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS and how they are built and operate determine whether our citizens and their businesses will be able to compete and/or stay in business for the long term. Baltimore has these few decades been a city of PATRONAGE for all business structures for the 99% because policies were leaving people unemployed, underemployed leaving no consumers for small business. This attack on American wage and quality of life leads to extreme poverty for 99% and no consumers for anyone wanting to start a local business. We all know what third world economies look like for small business owners---they are almost all MICRO-LOAN subsistence businesses.
WE HAVE BALTIMORE POLS BOTH CITY HALL AND MARYLAND ASSEMBLY BREAKING DOWN ALL AVENUES OF WAGE MOVING FORWARD TO THIRD WORLD WAGES NO MATTER THE POSING AROUND $15 AN HOUR.
Our government was always the biggest buyer of small business products just to maintain and grow local economies. Today almost all government purchases are from global corporations. US PROTECTIONISM comes with this commitment to buy local as we know strengthening and broadening local economies LOWERS the price and becomes competitive with global corporations.
PLEASE DO NOT FALL INTO THE PUSH TO EVER-LOWER WAGES TO GROW SMALL BUSINESS---PLEASE DON'T FALL FOR THE PUSH TO BUY AT THE CHEAPEST PRICE.
I shared the article of our Mayor PUGH working with Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration....NTIA. This is ONE WORLD ONE GRID and the INTERNET OF THINGS has PR and marketing as usual that these policies are DEMOCRATIC----WILL INCLUDE ALL GLOBAL CITIZENS---when in fact we already know it will be highly exclusive to global corporations and the global 1% and the information WE THE PEOPLE will be able to access will be only that information the global 1% want us to receive. We are well on the way with national media controlling all our local media and all this filled with FAKE NEWS. Take away our TV, Radio, print and move all online----under a GLOBAL GOGGLE---
THERE IS NO PATHWAY TO US PROTECTIONISM for WE THE PEOPLE with these infrastructure development plans MOVING FORWARD. We should have a city full of citizens bringing rolling protests every day for weeks and months JUST OVER THIS ISSUE.
THERE CAN BE NO US PROTECTIONISM FOR OUR LOCAL ECONOMIES WHEN MOVING FORWARD IS BUILDING ONE WORLD ONE GRID FOR GLOBAL CORPORATIONS AND GLOBAL BANKING.
Here we see what will continue to be the stance with global Wall Street pols----NO REGULATION OF INTERNET=====THE OPPOSITE OF INTERNET AS A UTILITY which is NET NEUTRALITY.
Critical Read
NTIA: The internet of things doesn't need new rules
'The rise of IoT, it said, will place more pressure on already stretched spectrum resources'.
Is this the future of the Internet of Things?
Global Agenda
'Do conservatives realize our founder fathers were strict trade protectionists and reviled the concept of "free trade" like Trump'?
Below we have the most obvious attack on US PROTECTIONISM----global Wall Street. As John Adams states---nothing kills prosperity more than banks. When 2008 economic crash revealed the massive global Wall Street frauds WE THE PEOPLE should have been out en masse every day for weeks and months in protest of an Obama appointing the same Wall Street fraudsters and Clinton era people bringing these frauds. Then we watched these several years as the next massive global banking fraud----US Treasury bond and municipal bond debt unfolded. That occurred because we left global Wall Street CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA NEO-LIBERALS AND NEO-CONS in office.
US PROTECTIONISM cannot be driven by banking and debt. This is what brought the US FED into place at the time of ROARING 20s Wall Street frauds-----US citizens and pols had the knowledge of keeping a central bank away----they had the knowledge of keeping freemasonry out of government because they were educated and remembered why we fought The American Revolution. Those folks saying that was then and this is now are either DELIBERATELY MISLEADING OR NOT EDUCATED ON AMERICAN HISTORY.....WORLD HISTORY. Most citizens understand it is bad to lose national, state, or local sovereignty and along with it rights as citizens.
WE ARE WATCHING AS THE ENTIRE PLANNING DESIGN FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IS BEING DONE BY GLOBAL CORPORATIONS AND GLOBAL BANKING.
"Banks have done more injury to the religion, morality, tranquility, prosperity, and even wealth of the nation than they can have done or ever will do good." - John Adams
'This pattern even predates American independence. During the colonial period, the British government tried to force its American colonies to become suppliers of raw materials to the nascent British industrial machine while denying them any manufacturing industry of their own'.
I like John Hagerman's response to basic common sense economics as being FLAT EARTH.....that coming from a global neo-conservative Stanford IVY LEAGUE grad.
Do conservatives realize our founder fathers were strict trade protectionists and reviled the concept of "free trade" like Trump?
Rob Weir, Politically libertarian, personally conservative
Answered 23 Feb
Yes, most conservatives understand that knowledge of modern economics was not widespread among the 18th century agrarian gentry who founded the country. I suspect this is understood, on some level, by most people, regardless of political orientation.
Gregory Norton, studied at Stanford Graduate School of Business
Answered 23 Feb
The first widely-accepted explanation of why trade protectionism was harmful was not published until 1776, and the founders were probably too busy to read it. Further amplification and explanation of the benefits of free trade (and the harm of protectionism) was not published until the 1840s, when the founders were dead.
I suppose anyone who is familiar with the history of economic theory realizes that.
How many people realize that today’s protectionists are the economic equivalent of flat-Earthers, 170 years out of date?
John Hagerman, studied at Augsburg College
Answered 3 Mar
The previous answer that dismissed the founder fathers fears about free trade prompted me to answer this question with a different take.
To simply dismiss the founding fathers as ignorant of modern economic theory is to sidestep the question. The founders of this country were very aware of the effects of trade policy. To be specific, they were very aware of the unfair trade practices of the British Parliament and King George. Many members of parliament, as well as the king, owned stock in the East India Company. This in itself might not have been a problem, but when they passed a law giving a special tax cut to the East India Company that was designed to make them money, at the expense of American businesses, the colony pushed back. The Boston Tea Party is an example of that push back.
When the crown decided to impose the Stamp Act as a way to force the colonies to pay the costs of maintaining British occupying forces, while at the same time again benefitting the East India Company at the expense of American business, that was too much for the colonies and the revolution was on.
In writing the constitution those founder fathers were very aware of the corrupting power of unfettered corporations and tried to write a document that would protect our citizens against the power. Unfortunately, when Reagan came along the conservatives forgot the lessons of two hundred years and decided to pursue policies that returned nearly unfettered power to corporations at the expense of the people.
This has resulted in money corrupting our politics and the dividing of our country.
_______________________________________
Here is a wise citizen educated in public policy as regards the effects of not only monopoly but multi-national corporations on his nation's economy. The US is a first world, developed nation MOVING FORWARD to being brought to this developed nation status. When global corporate campuses and global factories fill our US cities our economies become just like that of this developed nation and its citizen.
These few decades of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA has seen gradual movement towards this decline staging re-occupation of our national economy. National, state, and local global Wall Street pols have been and are today writing all the economic policies creating an environment for these global corporations to operate free from any US laws or oversight. That includes PROTECTIONISM for our local small, regional, corporations in US.
'Some people think that globalization plays a major role in the progress of developing nations because of the presence of these companies. Definitely, they are not the basis for the progress of developing countries. Multinational companies’ presence has more serious negative impacts on developing countries’ labor rights, human health and economy'.
Multinational Companies: A Curse to Developing Countries?
Posted on January 20, 2010 in Business and EconomyThasomini Palaniyandy:
In this twenty-first century, multinational companies have become the central institutions of developing nations. The government of a country should be concerned about food security, industrial production and other commodities that the country needs for its citizens. These concerns encourage developing nations to implement transnational corporation to fulfill their necessities.
Globalization connects people from all over the world, specifically, through advance in technology and transportation. Removal of trade barriers encourages multinational companies to start new branches in developing nations. Although multinational companies have become ubiquitous in the developing world, there has always been an uncertainty about them, in both positive and negative ways.
Some people think that globalization plays a major role in the progress of developing nations because of the presence of these companies. Definitely, they are not the basis for the progress of developing countries. Multinational companies’ presence has more serious negative impacts on developing countries’ labor rights, human health and economy.
Peoples’ common concept is that multinational companies’ existence in developing countries provides employments to the populace. In this globalized world, the integration of these companies allows people to earn money by on own, without relying on others. However, people, forget to consider labor exploitation, where labors receive low wages, work in hazardous environment without protection, and are deprived of labor rights. For instance, women perform two-thirds of all work, if it includes unpaid labor, but they receive only ten percent of the total wages paid worldwide. People consider globalization as a tool for the development of women. If globalization provides a better environment, why are women still getting low wages and are treated as slaves?
These global companies are profit minded and they search for cheap human power, exploiting laborers’ rights in developing countries, especially of women’s by giving them fewer wages and by misusing their rights. Thus, presence of multinational companies is promoting the existence of a callous environment for employees in third world nations.
Next, in developing world, food selling companies are omnipresent, which creates a general perception among people that it will make life easier. Globalization leads multinational companies to promote consumerism. There are many fast food companies, such as Mc Donald’s and KFC, in the developing world that provide alternative foods and makes life easier. However, does anyone notice the consequences of this consumerism? People consider fast food easy, and become addicted to it, which is unhealthy. Multinational corporations promote a certain kind of consumerist culture and spread western lifestyle among the people of developing countries; 115 million people suffer from obesity-related problems as well. The consequences of obesity for adults are well known. Obesity increases mortality from many causes, including cardiovascular disease and cancer. As a result, fast food companies are not making life easier, but they are also making death easier and life miserable in developing countries.
Finally, it is said that existence of multinational companies mitigates poverty in developing nations. Most of the countries are involved in free trade, and they exchange commodities with each other. As the trade barriers are reduced, the rich nations dump cheap products into poor countries, and the multinational companies act as catalysts for this process. Conversely, the process of globalization has exploited manufactures in developing countries, and has caused massive disruptions in living conditions.
As multinational companies have emerged in developing countries, local producers have to compete with these large companies, adversely affecting the local economy. Moreover, these multinational companies also use the national resources of these developing nations such as natural resources, infrastructure and human power. For example, some companies are making furniture by destroying forests in developing countries, which devastates the natural environment and affects the local furniture producers as well.
In conclusion, globalization challenges the progress of developing nations by adversely affecting the life of labors, the nations’ health and economy. Multinational companies’ existence in third world nations has many drawbacks, which are often disregarded by people. As rich nations utilize developing countries resources, the present form of globalization must be changed and developing countries must free themselves from the grasp of multinational companies for real growth.
WE HAVE BALTIMORE POLS BOTH CITY HALL AND MARYLAND ASSEMBLY BREAKING DOWN ALL AVENUES OF WAGE MOVING FORWARD TO THIRD WORLD WAGES NO MATTER THE POSING AROUND $15 AN HOUR.
Our government was always the biggest buyer of small business products just to maintain and grow local economies. Today almost all government purchases are from global corporations. US PROTECTIONISM comes with this commitment to buy local as we know strengthening and broadening local economies LOWERS the price and becomes competitive with global corporations.
PLEASE DO NOT FALL INTO THE PUSH TO EVER-LOWER WAGES TO GROW SMALL BUSINESS---PLEASE DON'T FALL FOR THE PUSH TO BUY AT THE CHEAPEST PRICE.
I shared the article of our Mayor PUGH working with Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration....NTIA. This is ONE WORLD ONE GRID and the INTERNET OF THINGS has PR and marketing as usual that these policies are DEMOCRATIC----WILL INCLUDE ALL GLOBAL CITIZENS---when in fact we already know it will be highly exclusive to global corporations and the global 1% and the information WE THE PEOPLE will be able to access will be only that information the global 1% want us to receive. We are well on the way with national media controlling all our local media and all this filled with FAKE NEWS. Take away our TV, Radio, print and move all online----under a GLOBAL GOGGLE---
THERE IS NO PATHWAY TO US PROTECTIONISM for WE THE PEOPLE with these infrastructure development plans MOVING FORWARD. We should have a city full of citizens bringing rolling protests every day for weeks and months JUST OVER THIS ISSUE.
THERE CAN BE NO US PROTECTIONISM FOR OUR LOCAL ECONOMIES WHEN MOVING FORWARD IS BUILDING ONE WORLD ONE GRID FOR GLOBAL CORPORATIONS AND GLOBAL BANKING.
Here we see what will continue to be the stance with global Wall Street pols----NO REGULATION OF INTERNET=====THE OPPOSITE OF INTERNET AS A UTILITY which is NET NEUTRALITY.
Critical Read
NTIA: The internet of things doesn't need new rules
- By Mark Rockwell
- Jan 13, 2017
'The rise of IoT, it said, will place more pressure on already stretched spectrum resources'.
Is this the future of the Internet of Things?
Global Agenda
- Digital
- Future of the Internet
- ScienceThis article is published in collaboration with SAP Community Network.
Imagine that your home security system lets you know when your kids get home from school. As they’re grabbing an afternoon snack, your kitchen takes inventory and sends a shopping list to your local supermarket. There, robots prepare the goods and pack them for home delivery into an autonomous vehicle – or a drone. Meanwhile, your smart watch, connected to a system that senses and analyzes real-time health indicators, alerts you to a suggested dinner menu it just created based on your family’s nutritional needs and ingredients available in your pantry. If you signal your approval, it offers to warm the oven before you get home from work.
This scenario isn’t as futuristic as you might think. In fact, what Gartner calls “the device mesh” is the logical evolution of the Internet of Things. All around us and always on, it will be both ubiquitous and subtle — ambient intelligence.
We’ll do truly different things, instead of just doing things differently. Today’s processes and problems are only a small subset of the many, many scenarios possible when practically everything is instrumented, interconnected, and intelligent.
We’re also going to need to come up with new ways of interacting with the technology and the infrastructure that supports it. Instead of typing on a keyboard or swiping a touchscreen, we’ll be surrounded by various interfaces that capture input automatically, almost incidentally. It will be a fundamental paradigm shift in the way we think of “computing,” and possibly whether we think about computing at all.
The Internet of not-things
The foundation will be a digital infrastructure that responds to its surroundings and the people in it, whether that means ubiquitous communications, ubiquitous entertainment, or ubiquitous opportunities for commerce. This infrastructure will be so seamless that rather than interacting with discrete objects, people will simply interact with their environment through deliberate voice and gesture — or cues like respiration and body temperature that will trigger the environment to respond.
Once such an infrastructure is in place, the possibilities for innovation explode. The power of Moore’s Law is now amplified by Metcalfe’s Law, which says that a network’s value is equal to the square of the number of participants in it. All these Internet-connected “things” — the sensors, devices, actuators, drones, vehicles, products, etc. — will be able to react automatically, seeing, analyzing, and combining to create value in as yet unimaginable ways. The individual “things” themselves will meld into a background of ambient connectedness and responsiveness.
The path is clearly marked
Think of the trends we’ve seen emerge in recent years:- Sensors and actuators, including implantables and wearables, that let us capture more data and impressions from more objects in more places, and that affect the environment around them.
- Ubiquitous computing and hyperconnectivity, which exponentially increase the flow of data between people and devices and among devices themselves.
- Nanotechnology and nanomaterials, which let us build ever more complex devices at microscopic scale.
- Artificial intelligence, in which algorithms become increasingly capable of making decisions based on past performance and desired results.
- Vision as an interface to participate in and control augmented and virtual reality
- Blockchain technology, which makes all kinds of digital transactions secure, verifiable, and potentially automatic.
- As these emerging technologies become more powerful and sophisticated, they will increasingly overlap. For example, the distinctions between drones, autonomous vehicles,and robotics are already blurring. This convergence, which multiplies the strengths of each technology, makes ambient intelligence not just desirable but inevitable.
Early signposts on the way
We’re edging into the territory of ambient intelligence today. Increasingly complex sensors, systems architectures, and software can gather, store, manage, and analyze vastly more data in far less time with much greater sophistication.
Home automation is accelerating, allowing people to program lighting, air conditioning, audio and video, security systems, appliances, and other complex devices and then let them run more or less independently. Drones, robots, and autonomous vehicles can gather, generate, and navigate by data from locations human beings can’t or don’t access. Entire urban areas like Barcelona and Singapore are aiming to become “smart cities,” with initiatives already underway to automate the management of services like parking, trash collection, and traffic lights.
Our homes, vehicles, and communities may not be entirely self-maintaining yet, but it’s possible to set parameters within which significant systems operate more or less on their own. Eventually, these systems will become proficient enough at pattern matching that they’ll be able to learn from each other. That’s when we’ll hit the knee of the exponential growth curve.
Where are we heading?
Experts predict that, by 2022, 1 trillion networked sensors will be embedded in the world around us, with up to 45 trillion in 20 years. With this many sources of data for all manner of purposes, systems will be able to arrive at fast, accurate decisions about nearly everything. And they’ll be able to act on those things at the slightest prompting, or with little to no action on your part at all.
Ambient intelligence could transform cities through dynamic routing and signage for both drivers and pedestrians. It could manage mass transit for optimal efficiency based on real-time conditions. It could monitor environmental conditions and mitigate potential hotspots proactively, predict the need for government services and make sure those services are delivered efficiently, spot opportunities to streamline the supply chain and put them into effect automatically.
Nanotechnology in your clothing could send environmental data to your smart phone, or charge it from electricity generated as you walk. But why carry a phone when any glass surface, from your bathroom mirror to your kitchen window, could become an interactive interface for checking your calendar, answering email, watching videos, and anything else we do today on our phones and tablets? For that matter, why carry a phone when ambient connectivity will let us simply speak to each other across a distance without devices?
How to get there
In Tech Trends 2015, Deloitte Consulting outlines four capabilities required for ambient computing:- Integrating information flow between varying types of devices from a wide range of global manufacturers with proprietary data and technologies
- Performing analytics and management of the physical objects and low-level events to detect signals and predict impact
- Orchestrating those signals and objects to fulfill complex events or end-to-end business processes
- Securing and monitoring the entire system of devices, connectivity, and information exchange
- These technical challenges are daunting, but doable.
Of course, businesses and governments need to consider the ramifications of systems that can sense, reason, act, and interact for us. We need to solve the trust and security issues inherent in a future world where we’re constantly surrounded by connectivity and information. We need to consider what happens when tasks currently performed by humans can be automated into near invisibility. And we need to think about what it means to be human when ambient intelligence can satisfy our wants and needs before we express them, or before we even know that we have them.
& Technology
'Do conservatives realize our founder fathers were strict trade protectionists and reviled the concept of "free trade" like Trump'?
Below we have the most obvious attack on US PROTECTIONISM----global Wall Street. As John Adams states---nothing kills prosperity more than banks. When 2008 economic crash revealed the massive global Wall Street frauds WE THE PEOPLE should have been out en masse every day for weeks and months in protest of an Obama appointing the same Wall Street fraudsters and Clinton era people bringing these frauds. Then we watched these several years as the next massive global banking fraud----US Treasury bond and municipal bond debt unfolded. That occurred because we left global Wall Street CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA NEO-LIBERALS AND NEO-CONS in office.
US PROTECTIONISM cannot be driven by banking and debt. This is what brought the US FED into place at the time of ROARING 20s Wall Street frauds-----US citizens and pols had the knowledge of keeping a central bank away----they had the knowledge of keeping freemasonry out of government because they were educated and remembered why we fought The American Revolution. Those folks saying that was then and this is now are either DELIBERATELY MISLEADING OR NOT EDUCATED ON AMERICAN HISTORY.....WORLD HISTORY. Most citizens understand it is bad to lose national, state, or local sovereignty and along with it rights as citizens.
WE ARE WATCHING AS THE ENTIRE PLANNING DESIGN FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IS BEING DONE BY GLOBAL CORPORATIONS AND GLOBAL BANKING.
"Banks have done more injury to the religion, morality, tranquility, prosperity, and even wealth of the nation than they can have done or ever will do good." - John Adams
'This pattern even predates American independence. During the colonial period, the British government tried to force its American colonies to become suppliers of raw materials to the nascent British industrial machine while denying them any manufacturing industry of their own'.
I like John Hagerman's response to basic common sense economics as being FLAT EARTH.....that coming from a global neo-conservative Stanford IVY LEAGUE grad.
Do conservatives realize our founder fathers were strict trade protectionists and reviled the concept of "free trade" like Trump?
Rob Weir, Politically libertarian, personally conservative
Answered 23 Feb
Yes, most conservatives understand that knowledge of modern economics was not widespread among the 18th century agrarian gentry who founded the country. I suspect this is understood, on some level, by most people, regardless of political orientation.
Gregory Norton, studied at Stanford Graduate School of Business
Answered 23 Feb
The first widely-accepted explanation of why trade protectionism was harmful was not published until 1776, and the founders were probably too busy to read it. Further amplification and explanation of the benefits of free trade (and the harm of protectionism) was not published until the 1840s, when the founders were dead.
I suppose anyone who is familiar with the history of economic theory realizes that.
How many people realize that today’s protectionists are the economic equivalent of flat-Earthers, 170 years out of date?
John Hagerman, studied at Augsburg College
Answered 3 Mar
The previous answer that dismissed the founder fathers fears about free trade prompted me to answer this question with a different take.
To simply dismiss the founding fathers as ignorant of modern economic theory is to sidestep the question. The founders of this country were very aware of the effects of trade policy. To be specific, they were very aware of the unfair trade practices of the British Parliament and King George. Many members of parliament, as well as the king, owned stock in the East India Company. This in itself might not have been a problem, but when they passed a law giving a special tax cut to the East India Company that was designed to make them money, at the expense of American businesses, the colony pushed back. The Boston Tea Party is an example of that push back.
When the crown decided to impose the Stamp Act as a way to force the colonies to pay the costs of maintaining British occupying forces, while at the same time again benefitting the East India Company at the expense of American business, that was too much for the colonies and the revolution was on.
In writing the constitution those founder fathers were very aware of the corrupting power of unfettered corporations and tried to write a document that would protect our citizens against the power. Unfortunately, when Reagan came along the conservatives forgot the lessons of two hundred years and decided to pursue policies that returned nearly unfettered power to corporations at the expense of the people.
This has resulted in money corrupting our politics and the dividing of our country.
_______________________________________
Here is a wise citizen educated in public policy as regards the effects of not only monopoly but multi-national corporations on his nation's economy. The US is a first world, developed nation MOVING FORWARD to being brought to this developed nation status. When global corporate campuses and global factories fill our US cities our economies become just like that of this developed nation and its citizen.
These few decades of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA has seen gradual movement towards this decline staging re-occupation of our national economy. National, state, and local global Wall Street pols have been and are today writing all the economic policies creating an environment for these global corporations to operate free from any US laws or oversight. That includes PROTECTIONISM for our local small, regional, corporations in US.
'Some people think that globalization plays a major role in the progress of developing nations because of the presence of these companies. Definitely, they are not the basis for the progress of developing countries. Multinational companies’ presence has more serious negative impacts on developing countries’ labor rights, human health and economy'.
Multinational Companies: A Curse to Developing Countries?
Posted on January 20, 2010 in Business and EconomyThasomini Palaniyandy:
In this twenty-first century, multinational companies have become the central institutions of developing nations. The government of a country should be concerned about food security, industrial production and other commodities that the country needs for its citizens. These concerns encourage developing nations to implement transnational corporation to fulfill their necessities.
Globalization connects people from all over the world, specifically, through advance in technology and transportation. Removal of trade barriers encourages multinational companies to start new branches in developing nations. Although multinational companies have become ubiquitous in the developing world, there has always been an uncertainty about them, in both positive and negative ways.
Some people think that globalization plays a major role in the progress of developing nations because of the presence of these companies. Definitely, they are not the basis for the progress of developing countries. Multinational companies’ presence has more serious negative impacts on developing countries’ labor rights, human health and economy.
Peoples’ common concept is that multinational companies’ existence in developing countries provides employments to the populace. In this globalized world, the integration of these companies allows people to earn money by on own, without relying on others. However, people, forget to consider labor exploitation, where labors receive low wages, work in hazardous environment without protection, and are deprived of labor rights. For instance, women perform two-thirds of all work, if it includes unpaid labor, but they receive only ten percent of the total wages paid worldwide. People consider globalization as a tool for the development of women. If globalization provides a better environment, why are women still getting low wages and are treated as slaves?
These global companies are profit minded and they search for cheap human power, exploiting laborers’ rights in developing countries, especially of women’s by giving them fewer wages and by misusing their rights. Thus, presence of multinational companies is promoting the existence of a callous environment for employees in third world nations.
Next, in developing world, food selling companies are omnipresent, which creates a general perception among people that it will make life easier. Globalization leads multinational companies to promote consumerism. There are many fast food companies, such as Mc Donald’s and KFC, in the developing world that provide alternative foods and makes life easier. However, does anyone notice the consequences of this consumerism? People consider fast food easy, and become addicted to it, which is unhealthy. Multinational corporations promote a certain kind of consumerist culture and spread western lifestyle among the people of developing countries; 115 million people suffer from obesity-related problems as well. The consequences of obesity for adults are well known. Obesity increases mortality from many causes, including cardiovascular disease and cancer. As a result, fast food companies are not making life easier, but they are also making death easier and life miserable in developing countries.
Finally, it is said that existence of multinational companies mitigates poverty in developing nations. Most of the countries are involved in free trade, and they exchange commodities with each other. As the trade barriers are reduced, the rich nations dump cheap products into poor countries, and the multinational companies act as catalysts for this process. Conversely, the process of globalization has exploited manufactures in developing countries, and has caused massive disruptions in living conditions.
As multinational companies have emerged in developing countries, local producers have to compete with these large companies, adversely affecting the local economy. Moreover, these multinational companies also use the national resources of these developing nations such as natural resources, infrastructure and human power. For example, some companies are making furniture by destroying forests in developing countries, which devastates the natural environment and affects the local furniture producers as well.
In conclusion, globalization challenges the progress of developing nations by adversely affecting the life of labors, the nations’ health and economy. Multinational companies’ existence in third world nations has many drawbacks, which are often disregarded by people. As rich nations utilize developing countries resources, the present form of globalization must be changed and developing countries must free themselves from the grasp of multinational companies for real growth.
RSS Feed
