In the Global Perspective class, we had been analysing a text that talks about the Global Trade and the World Trade currents. After reading, we had to answer four questions that were related to the topic. The questions are:
1) Do you consider these sorts of relationships to be an inevitable part of global trade?
2) Should factors such as the environment, human health, or the gap between rich and poor play a greater role in international relations, whatever the cost?
3) What is your own opinion about the issue?
4) What more can you find out about this issue? Make a summary of the different opinions you find.
1) From my point of view those sorts of relationships are not (or shouldn’t be) an inevitable part of global trade. I consider that from that to happen, the functioning of the world trade should completely change for good, benefiting to all of its part, both the More Economically Developed Countries and the Less Economically Developed Counties. The MEDCs are those countries or continents, such as USA, Europe and China, that lead the global trade.
They are the ones that buy the half-priced raw material in the LEDCs and then send the good to be manufactured in other countries where they can find cheap labour. The LEDCs are the countries mentioned before, from where the trade leaders obtain the cheap raw material and hand labour and also where the goods, ones sold and used, end up there, harming the environment of the country. This relationship between the “powerful” and the “submissive” could be changed if only the ones who lead the market stop taking advantage from the other countries only to benefit themselves and gain more money than they invested in producing that good. If they could only do that, then this kind of relationship in the global trade wouldn’t exist. The problem is that if USA, Europe and China follow this idea, they would stop being leaders and not even in their craziest dream, they consider that as an option..
2) I consider that factors such as the environment, human health, or the gap between rich and poor SHOULD play a greater role in international relations, no matter the cost.
The World trade powersare completely benefit the most from the Less Economically Developed Countries. They can’t care less how much damage they are producing to those countries, they only care about their own economy and to gain more money in order to become more powerful than they are.
The damage they caused to the poor countries comes in different shapes and sizes. One the one hand, there is the environmental deterioration they caused by taking all their raw materials and by dumping all the goods and products, ones used, there. Most of the times, those dis
carded products contain many toxics not only harmful for the environment itself but also for the people that live on that contaminated area. As the toxics spread through water and contaminate both water sources and food, people end up severe ill and sometimes dead. It’s interesting to see how selfish the World powers are, they didn’t even care that their actions are having awful consequences.
One the other hand, the gap between the rich and the poor becomes clear through all this. The rich countries don’t take into consideration what happen to the poor countries whenever they decide to do something.
So that is why I consider that the factors previously mentioned should have a greater role in international relations. In fact they should the biggest role.The countries which are now harming the only environment in which humans can live and making people get sick and die should stop being egocentric and start thinking about the others. If things were like this, then, conflicts between countries wouldn't exisit.
3) My opinion about the issue has been clarified all through the previous answers. I personally believe that the leaders of the Global Trade don’t care, even a little, about what they are causing to the countries from where they obtain the raw material, the cheap labour and where they dump the product ones used. They don’t care people dying or getting sick from working in inhuman conditions and from eating or drinking contaminated food or water by toxics from the discarded phones, tablets,etc. Moreover, they don’t take into consideration that they are polluting the environment too, the only place where humans (THEY) can live.
In a way, by damaging others they are damaging theirselves too. They are exhausting and contaminating all the natural resources they need to produce the manufactured good which means that in a future they won’t be able to produce anymore. Besides if they let people die they will have less hand labour to work on the manufacture of their goods. To sum up my idea, I believe that if the powerful countries don’t become aware on time about all the damage there are causing to the world, then, we shouldn’t expect much for the future.
4) Many opinions are held towards this issue of the Global Trade and how the richer countries benefit from the poorer ones.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/49524713/globe-puzzle.0.jpg)
One the one hand, there are people that argue that the phenomenon of globalization and commercial Trade are developing the world for good and that poverty rates are rapidly falling in those countries which decide to integrate the Global Market Economy. The access to capital in the poor countries that decide to integrate the global Trade, is helping them to spread the use of new technology, knowledge and opportunities. Due to this, many people are coming out of poverty in countries such as India and Indonesia. The integration of the poorer countries let them, not only to expand their economies, but also share them with other countries that might be on their same position or even better. As economies begin to experience growth in those countries, more industries and jobs would be created and people opportunities to get a better life will increase to a great extent.
One the other hand, there are many debates between people in which they argue whether the globalization is a contributor to inequality or not. Most of us believe that when the rich countries transfer parts of the production process to poor countries, they used uskilled workers that aren’t paid with fair wages. Neverthless, many people claim, and prove through studies, the opposite: that the multinationals employ skilled workers that are paid good salaries. According to them, the inequality is given by the globalization as it creates a gap between good paid workers of the multinationals and the poor workers of the local firms in the poor country. Other people affirm that the process of globalization doesn’t contribute to inequality; in fact, it has positive changes on the world as it gives to opportunity to the Less Economically Developed Countries to expand their markets, join the Global Trade and fight against this issue of inequality.
