首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
GLOBALISATON For many, the surprise of finding a McDonald’s outlet in Moscow or Beijing provides no greater symbol of the sp
GLOBALISATON For many, the surprise of finding a McDonald’s outlet in Moscow or Beijing provides no greater symbol of the sp
admin
2011-02-08
42
问题
GLOBALISATON
For many, the surprise of finding a McDonald’s outlet in Moscow or Beijing provides no greater symbol of the spread of globalisation. Used to explain all manners of economic, cultural and political change that has swept over the world in recent decades, globalisation is a term that continues to cause intellectual debate. Some see it as inevitable and desirable, but it is a contentious issue with an increasing number of individual citizens around the world questioning whether or not the implications of globalisation, in terms of international distribution of income and decreasing poverty, are effective.
The beginning of globalisation is inextricably linked to technological improvements in the field of international communications and a fall in the cost of international transport and travel. Entrepreneurs and power-brokers took advantage of these advances to invest capital into foreign countries. This became the basic mechanism for globalisation with the trading of currencies, stocks and bonds growing rapidly.
Breaking down the barriers through the free movement of capital, free trade and political cooperation was seen as a positive move that would not only improve living standards around the world, but also raise political and environmental awareness, especially in developing countries. Predictions were that nations would become more outward-looking in their policy-making, as they searched for opportunities to increase economic growth. Roles would be assigned to various players around the globe as capital providers, exporters of technology, suppliers of services, sources of labour, etc. Consequently, countries and economies could concentrate on what they were good at and, as a result, markets would experience increased efficiency.
The process of economic globalisation was without doubt led by commercial and financial power-brokers but there were many others who supported the integration of world economies. As multinational companies searched for new work-forces and raw materials, non-government organisations and lobby groups were optimistic that in the wake of global business, indigenous cultures might be given a reprieve with an injection of foreign capital. This would, in turn, provide local employment opportunities. By spreading trade more evenly between developed and developing nations, it was touted that poverty would decrease and living standards would rise.
Governments saw the chance to attract multinational companies with tax-breaks and incentives to set up in-country, effectively buying employment opportunities for their constituents.
By the late 1990s, some trepidation started to surface and globalisation faced its most public setback. The spectacular economic collapses in Korea, Brazil, Thailand and other countries were considered, rightly or wrongly, to be caused by the outwardly-oriented trade policies that globalisation espoused such as the growth of exports. These countries had enjoyed record growth for a relatively short time, but when faced with difficulties, the growth appeared unsustainable. The vulnerability and risk associated with reliance on exports and international markets was made clear.
Meanwhile though, through the 1990s and early 2000s, multinational companies continued to do well financially. Profits were increasing, keeping shareholders happy, but the anticipated spin-offs were not being felt at the workers’ level or in local communities in the form of increased employment. These successful companies did not want to share the benefits of the increased efficiency they were receiving as a result of introducing their own work practices. The multinationals were setting their own agendas, with governments, in many cases, turning a blind eye fearing that they might pull out and cause more unemployment. Free trade was now accused of restricting governments, who were no longer setting the rules, and domestic markets felt increasingly threatened by the power that the multinationals had.
The negative consequences of globalisation have now become a concern for many protest groups in different nations. If the concept of globalisation was meant to benefit all nations, they say, then it has failed. Rich countries, like America, continue to grow richer and more powerful with many of the head offices of multinationals based there. The economies of some developing countries though, especially in Africa, are making only negligible if any progress in the war against poverty. As a result, protestors are confronting the advocates of globalisation on their own doorstep as power-players meet at economic summits in already-globalised cities.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) maintains that globalisation has succeeded in establishing a more equitable share of world trade and remains optimistic that the gulf between rich and poorer nations, given the right conditions, will be considerably lessened in the future. They point out that no country can afford to opt out of globalisation and, indeed, would be foolish to attempt to do so. They maintain that ’non-globalising developing countries’ have made slower progress than ’globalising developing countries’ in the past two decades. Moreover, they suggest that developing countries with huge debts be assisted so that their economies can catch up with richer countries and integrate more effectively at an international level.
Regardless of what IMF affirms, if the benefits of globalisation are to be more evenly spread, the goal of reducing world poverty needs to be re-prioritised. If this means imposing rules and standards on multinational companies that are acceptable internationally, then this will need to be done sooner rather than later. At this stage, the multinationals and their shareholders appear to be the only winners. The backlash against globalisation has already begun.
The shareholders of multinational companies are likely to contribute towards a more even distribution of wealth. ______
选项
答案
NOT GIVEN
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/2KVO777K
本试题收录于:
雅思阅读题库雅思(IELTS)分类
0
雅思阅读
雅思(IELTS)
相关试题推荐
Ifpisaprimenumbergreaterthan11,andpisthesumofthetwoprimenumbersxandy,thenxcouldbewhichofthefollowin
When5consecutiveoddintegers,eachgreaterthan34areadded,whatisthesmallestpossiblesum?
Richard’ssalary,whichisgreaterthan$10,000,is75percentofSandra’ssalary.Ted’ssalaryis80percentofRichard’ssalar
When5consecutiveoddintegers,eachgreaterthan34areadded,whatisthesmallestpossiblesum?
Ifx=7,thenis3x+7greaterthanorlessthan5x-6?
Aisha’sincomein2004was20percentgreaterthanherincomein200WhatistheratioofAisha’sincomein2004toherincomein
xisanintegergreaterthan1.QuantityA:3x+1QuantityB:4x
随机试题
简述领导者树立法治观念的基本要求。
要选择光标所在段落,可_______该段落。
A.1级B.2级C.3级D.4级E.5级肢体能抬离床面,但不能对抗阻力,其肌力级别是
有关病毒标本的采集和运送,不正确的方法是
输卵管壶腹部妊娠其多见的结果为
王女士夫妇今年均为35岁,两人打算55岁退休,预计生活至85岁,王女士夫妇预计在55岁时的年支出为107万元,现在家庭储蓄为10万元。假设通货膨胀率保持3%不变,退休前,王女士家庭的投资收益率为8%,退休后,王女士家庭的投资收益率为3%。王女士夫妇一共
对被辞退的人员,3年内不得再录用为人民警察。()
2014年我国实施“单独两孩”生育政策,出生人口1687万人,比上年增加47万人。2016年实施“全面两孩”生育政策,出生人口1786万人,比上年增加131万人;出生率与“十二五”时期年平均出生率相比,提高了0.84个千分点。201
高校云集了我国众多的高科技人员和研发团队,是我国科研的“富矿”。近年来,在国家鼓励创办研究型大学的政策指引和支持下,在“大众创业、万众创新”的推动下,高校的重大科研成果不断涌现,有的弥补了一些领域的空缺,有的则站在了世界科研领域的巅峰。这些重大科研成果,有
判断下列句子使用的修辞手法,正确的一组是:①事实先生跑将出来,给这些空谈家一瓢冷水。②然而几个人既然起来,你不能说决没有毁坏这铁屋子的希望。③有几个“慈善”的老板到菜场上去收集一些菜叶,用盐一浸,这就是他们难得的“佳肴”。④为什么语
最新回复
(
0
)