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
23
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.
Multinational companies
选项
答案
D
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/nKVO777K
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
Apositiveintegerwithexactlytwodifferentdivisorsgreaterthan1mustbe
A、ifthequantityinColumnAisgreaterB、ifthequantityinColumnBisgreaterC、ifthetwoquantityareequalD、iftherelat
Ifrand5arepositiveintegers,eachgreaterthan1,andif11(s-l)=13(r-1),whatistheleastpossiblevalueofr+s?
When5consecutiveoddintegers,eachgreaterthan34areadded,whatisthesmallestpossiblesum?
ColumnAColumnBThenumberthatisasmuchgreaterthan63asitisle
When5consecutiveoddintegers,eachgreaterthan34areadded,whatisthesmallestpossiblesum?
Ifxispositiveandyistwogreaterthanthesquareofx,whichofthefollowingexpressesxintermsofy?
Theintegervisgreaterthan1.Ifvisthesquareofaninteger,whichofthefollowingnumbersmustalsobethesquareofan
Theintegersxandyaregreaterthan1.If(4x)(7y)=756,whatisthevalueofx+y?x+y=______
随机试题
翳明穴的定位是翳风穴()。
A、银翘散B、新加香薷饮C、羚角钩藤汤D、黄连解毒汤E、安宫牛黄丸首选用于治疗急惊风风热致惊证的方剂是
甲乙丙三人出资10万元设立“星光科技开发有限责任公司”,其中甲出资2万元,乙出资3万元,丙出资5万元。公司成立后,召开了第一次股东会。下列有关这次股东会的情况,哪些不符合公司法的规定?()。
下列关于防火墙的叙述中,错误的是()。
在进口设备抵岸价计算中,关税计算是以()为计费基数。
对个人购买福利彩票、赈灾彩票、体育彩票,一次性中奖收入在1万元以下的(含1万元),暂免征收个人所得税,超过1万元的,按超出部分计算征收个人所得税。()
大盘山国家级自然保护区位于浙江省的()县境内。
下列各句中,下划线的词语使用恰当的一句是( )
在克隆羊的培育过程中,某只白细毛公羊提供了细胞核,某只黑细毛羊提供了去核卵细胞,某只白粗毛羊进行代孕,那么克隆羊的体表的毛和性别分别为:
某国公民李某曾在国外多次进行贩毒活动,并曾被其所属国通缉。某日,李某到我国境内旅游被拘捕,李某即以非中华人民共和国公民,也未在中华人民共和国境内犯过罪为由提出抗议。我国依法可以对李某采取下列哪些措施?()
最新回复
(
0
)