Triangle Business Daily

Globalisation is not working for the poor?

I am for the motion. Please give me new ideas and comments on this topic. I need not have to prove that Globalisation is bad, but the thing to prove is that it is particularly not working for the poor. The rich is becoming richer and the poor is becoming poorer. So the world is mad which is aligning towards globalisation.

Public Comments

1. I do not think you can say that globalization is not working for the poor. Example: The US and Europe have huge subsidies on agriculture, which increases production of these goods in the US and in Europe. Other countries cannot simply compete in the ag sector. This is not in the spirit of globalization. If the US lowered it subsidies, the poorer countries would be able to sell their products at higher world prices and truly compete on the world market. Thus, what we see now is not really globalization!
2. Why doesn't globalization help the poor? It makes commodity goods cheaper.
3. Nonsense. The poor countries are becoming richer. Who have you been listening to? This matter came up at the trade talks. The poorer nations refused to deal. They want to eliminate agricultural subsidies but won't remove tariffs on other goods they import from developed nations. They are very protective. Globalization is nothing more than change. Are you afraid of Change?
4. Globalisation is bad for the poor. A case in point: agricultural subsidies. The European Union and America subsidize agricultors, thus rendering African crops uncompetitive. France buys no African produce because it protects its own, rich agricultors. Since African nations are unable to sell abroad, this aggravates poverty and underdevelopment. Rich countries will never eliminate subsidies, as demostrated during the Uruguay and the Doha commerce talks.
5. im not poor i give to the needy yes i do get richer is it a bad thing