Historically speaking Essay

Globalization is one of the to the highest degree recent phenomenons invariably to strike humanity upon its entrance to the 21st century. Historic aloney speaking, globalisation itself has been rough for decades long before it was conceived as a field of study of initiation-wideistic trade. Some economists and historians contend that the concepts of globalization select been prevalent even during time when the Silk Road started in China up to the Roman Empire.Some, however, argue that globalization began during the 19th century when the prevalence of the Industrial Age was at its high-velocity and that trade between Europe, their colonies and the Americas were growing steadily. Major advances in technology, especially during the twentieth century, eventually led countries to lower trading costs hence, highlighting the inevitability of the expansion of trade within the International Community. Still, globalization, as a term, was neer used by economists at least not until t he early 1980s.Furthermore, all its concepts and ideas were neer really fully understood by the academic friendship until the early 1990s. Fortunately, after seven years into the 21st century, much of the knowledge base is already aw ar of its contexts and aspects from outsourcing to currency trading via wireless applications. Still, despite our knowledge of globalization, we disregardnot deny the fact that we know less about its implications for the up flood tide. Globalization, as a field of study, is a volatile subject that, even with the assistance of genuine data and information, is almost ultimately unpredictable. disdain the existence of a infinite of books, journals and articles pertaining to the topic of Globalization, we fuelnot deny that we have yet to fully understand its future trends. Indeed, a major advancement brought by sophisticated technology washbowl ultimately change, once again, the face of the International Community thus, affecting international tr ade and ultimately affecting the globalization of the world. On a get on note, third world countries that would eventually perplex first world countries in the future may end up shifting the international equilibrize of trade and commerce for first world countries.As such(prenominal), it is very tempting to imagine what the International Community would be like if, for some(prenominal) small chance, the African Continent booms like Asia. If such an event occurs, will globalization be the cause for it? Alternatively, will globalization even allow such an event to occur? People who are against the advancements of globalization argue that globalization exclusively if benefits the rich north and detriments the poor south. This is evident from the fact that countries in the northern hemisphere tend to play in a neo-imperialist devise among the countries in the southern hemisphere.Anti-globalization movements insist that the prevalence of globalization except office the prevale nce of multinational corporations (MNCs). They contend that these corporations, while providing employment for the local population, only encourage more poerty in the country. Multinational corporations, upon entering a country, immediately eliminates local competitors thus, destroying the balance of power between local and foreign. As such, the country becomes subject to the influence of foreign countries that originally holds these multinational corporations.This automatically becomes a sort of leverage for foreign countries (which are, most of the time, rich countries coming from the north) against the country holding their MNCs. On the other hand, people that are for the advancements of globalization argues that free trade the main tool of globalization encourages more fruit for developing economies compared to protectionism. Primarily, globalization allows several countries access to several goods and services that they could never produce or emulate from other countries.F urthermore, they contend that globalization encourages contest among local and foreign businesses. Though unfair at times, supporters of globalization birdcall that encouraging competition allows small businesses to grow, to become more in effect(p) and to become more versatile. The arguments of both sides are truly credible. Indeed, globalization, as a concept, is considered by many as a double-edged sword though benefiting the user, it can, if perfunctory enough, harm him/her as well. Globalization has many facets.As such, it has many implications some we are aware of and some arent. still according to one scholar, doubting Thomas Friedman, globalization has one important implication that has been very prevalent over the past couple of years but has only recently gained attention. In 2005, Thomas Friedman a columnist of Foreign Affairs and the New York generation published a book entitled The World is Flat. According to Mr. Friedman, the world is becoming smaller and tha t the competition between countries in different separate of the world is becoming or being leveled.One example that he noted was that the economies of India and China, two emerging economic superpowers in the eastern hemisphere, are now becoming so becoming so advanced that they can now compete with the economic powerhouses of the west. He further claimed that, ironically, much of the west, most especially the Americans, werent ready for such events unfolding. Indeed, the unexpected booms of India and China have made the Asian continent an attractive place for foreign investment. some other important point is that both countries huge populations have played a vital role in the labor market both in manual labor (i.e. manufacturing) and professional labor (i. e. information technology). Not only do these two countries outshine the United States in term of ratty labor, but they in addition outdo the American population in terms of efficiency and productivity. Simply said, employ ers are getting the same level of productivity and efficiency from both Chinese and Indian workers, but at a lower cost. This, according to scholars, has proved very detrimental to Americans. Not only does this threaten the employment of future American workers, but it also threatens the thrift of the United States on the long run.As such, how can one comprise himself from such negative advancements to ones own country? On a more ecumenic level, how can the populace protect itself from such a deadly competition? As an American Citizen and as a soon-to-be professional entering the world of emulous employment, I can and so come up with several answers to that question. First, as a country, the United States mustiness make huge investments on education. Improving the work force of the country is assertive if we are to face foreign competition.One important thing that we can put into consideration is the introduction of language classes in our academic system. encyclopaedism the language of foreign countries can surely make our general workforce a seemingly good investment for foreign companies. Yet another(prenominal) note is the introduction of new laws which will, in some way, discourage early days students from dropping out of school. An example of these laws is the prohibition of issuing drivers licenses to adolescents who have dropped out of school for no particular reason. By doing so, the general workforce of the country will remain efficient and highly educated.Despite the rapid growths of China and India, it cannot be denied that much of their population remains on a lower floor the poverty line. As such, this problem becomes a drain on their rescue (for the simple reason that the government has to continuously spend huge sums of coin on anti-poverty programs and such). Ironically, this could play both a huge dis wages and an advantage at the same time for the United States. For one, since people live in very poor conditions, corporations can take advantage of them by gainful them low salaries which, for the population, could seem very high.On the other hand, the good documentation conditions of the American population can imply the demand for high-paying jobs which, of course, corporations would not prefer. Alternatively, this could also serve as an advantage for the United States since the American workforce compared to the trashy yet impoverished populace of India and China are more efficient and educated thus, implying more productivity and growth for the corporation. Education is one thing. But as a person whos about to enter into the competitive world of employment, how can I prepare myself against the competitive nature of foreign workers that will most likely ensue?