Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Finally A Solid And Fair Article On Immigration  
User currently offlineDerico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4312 posts, RR: 11
Posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1936 times:

Sept. 11, 2006 issue - The fire that swept through a Buenos Aires textile plant on March 30, killing six Bolivian immigrants, left behind more than wreckage.

The victims of the sweatshop blaze had no permits to work in Argentina, and their deaths pushed the government of President Néstor Kirchner to start up an innovative program that encourages illegal immigrants to register with local authorities.

Known as Patria Grande (Greater Fatherland), the scheme offers a two-year residence visa to foreigners who have no criminal record and can prove they are citizens of countries affiliated with the Mercosur trading bloc. The response has been overwhelming: more than 200,000 applications have been processed since Patria Grande was unveiled on April 17, and each weekday morning hundreds and even thousands of undocumented immigrants queue up outside consulates and other government-approved offices to fill out the requisite paperwork.

"Overall, this is a step in the right direction," says Juan Carlos Acero, a 26-year-old native of La Paz who moved to Argentina in 2001 and now works as a construction laborer. "This will benefit those of us who work hard and support our children."

It benefits Argentina, too. Officials contend that in addition to reducing black-market labor and discrimination, the registration program will help make Argentina's porous borders more secure, and bring in much-needed tax funds. "I think this is a good idea that deserves to be studied," says José Miguel Insulza, secretary-general of the Organization of American States in Washington.

Argentina's openness derives in part from the South American nation's historical background: millions of immigrants from Spain, Germany and Italy arrived in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and the same country that gave refuge to Nazi war criminals after World War II is also host to the largest Jewish population in the Western Hemisphere outside of the United States.

The Patria Grande program is a product of principle as well. When he took office three years ago, Kirchner identified immigration as one of the human-rights issues he would emphasize, and under his leadership about 400,000 foreigners have been granted residence visas, more than double the number between 1993 and 2003.

Some skeptics argue that legalizing undocumented foreigners, estimated to number between 700,000 and 1 million, takes jobs away from native Argentines. That's a touchy issue in a country where unemployment soared to 22 percent during the 2002 depression.

But government officials counter that a booming economy has slashed that figure in half, and most Argentines don't want the menial jobs in construction and agriculture that foreigners are willing to take.

"To have registered and legal migrant workers doesn't diminish work opportunities for Argentines," argues government immigration chief Ricardo Rodríguez. "On the contrary, it helps to improve working conditions and salaries." And that's not all: immigrants who sign up with Patria Grande also gain access to a spectrum of social services, like public schools and hospitals. When it comes to humane immigration policies, Argentina would seem to have few peers.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14640268/site/newsweek/%20.

-------------------------------


I would disagree that this plan as is a long term solution... The long term solution is to control the border because Argentina cannot absorb all the poverty in the region (1 million illegals for Argentina is like 10 million for the USA, but 40 million ajusted for the GDP differences).

But the article says exactly what I have been saying and proposed. And it really puts into perspective the fact that North America and Europe are not the only 'generous' socities when it comes to immigration.


My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTurbo7x7 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 266 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1917 times:

Immigration, illegal or otherwise, is the flip side of "outsourcing" and is part and parcel of the phenomena of globalization. Global free-market capitalism doesn't care about border sovereignty or the endangered standard of living of native workers. But there's no turning back the clock on globalization now, it's too late for that; best to get in on the game before you become a victim of overwhelming macroeconomic trends and forces. . .

User currently offlineDerico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4312 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1911 times:

I have severe reservations not with capitalism, but with global market capitalism. I think the largest multinationals (regardless of where they are from), are having too much power. I think something has to be done to tax them far higher amounts if as a corporation you operate in x amount of countries, for starters. Right now multinationals have no checks and balances whatsoever, to the point the can exploit workers even in the 1st world, and the 2nd world, and of course the 3rd world of more undeveloped countries.


My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
User currently offlinePar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7382 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1907 times:

Is this similar to the Guest Worker program the Bush Administration proposed that received international condemnation?

User currently offlinePSA53 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3072 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1900 times:

Quoting Derico (Thread starter):
But government officials counter that a booming economy has slashed that figure in half, and most Argentines don't want the menial jobs in construction and agriculture that foreigners are willing to take

Does Argentina have a minimum wage?Here in California,I may take a
menial job.The wonderful politicians,in a election year here in the state,
voted from a $6.75 to $7.50 per hour as of January 1,2007 and to $8.00 the next year.Govererment is continuing to give employers and employees alike permission operate illegally.

Government is the problem! (Ronald Reagan)

[Edited 2006-09-04 02:49:00]


Tuesday's Off! Do not disturb.
User currently offlineDerico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4312 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1895 times:

Argentina has a minimun wage, depends on the area, but obviously far lower in dollar terms than the US wage. But prices are cheaper, and all income is after tax, health expenses, etc. So it really depends on your social program and the like if it really is disposable income or not.

I think there was no choice as deporting 1 million plus people and families (any child born in the country is automatically a citizen), was just an impossibility. I like this solution, but it doesn't adress the issue of border control. Thousands of illegals cross the border each month, it needs to be controlled.

I'm not familiar with the US proposed program. Argentina has offered multiple amnesty programs since the 1970s. Millions of people have become citizens over that time.



My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1881 times:

I think that Argentina and other Latin American countries also have tremendous problems with the gap between rich and poor.

As described, what globalization threatens to do is make America the kind of country where the middle class is no longer the norm -- where there are rich members of the managerial class, and a very large segment of relatively low-paid workers. This isn't the American way. It may be the Latin American way, but that's completely different.

We cannot afford to destroy the middle class by catering to the Latin American model of globalization.


User currently offlineDerico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4312 posts, RR: 11
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1851 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 6):

You are right on some points, but Argentina has a larger middle class than the upper or lower class, has been for about a century now. It was what made the country different from the rest in the region (with Uruguay). That has changed a bit with the increase in the inequality gap, but that has happened in other countries as well. Argentina has never been a country where there is a small 10% elite and 90% peasants.

This example is not one of a 'latin american' model, you need to educate yourself a bit further on individual countries in the region before making blanket statements. This case is specific to Argentina, the only country in Latin America that has nearly always received more immigrants than it has sent.

This is not a working model for countries that are major exporters of labor, which are basically most other countries in the region.

I think that your country has no choice, to put the head in the sand and not make illegals come out of the shadows or completely seal your borders is the worst possible choice of the three.

[Edited 2006-09-04 17:49:33]


My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1818 times:

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Reply 1):
Immigration, illegal or otherwise, is the flip side of "outsourcing" and is part and parcel of the phenomena of globalization.

Someone here really does not understand the dynamics of outsourcing and globalization, and is just listening to the propaganda passed out either the equally ignorant or those who have special interests to defend in 1st world countries (labor unions, for instance).

Quoting Derico (Reply 2):
I think the largest multinationals (regardless of where they are from), are having too much power. I think something has to be done to tax them far higher amounts if as a corporation you operate in x amount of countries, for starters. Right now multinationals have no checks and balances whatsoever, to the point the can exploit workers even in the 1st world, and the 2nd world, and of course the 3rd world of more undeveloped countries.

Ditto.

Who do you think benefits when, say, Ford puts a manufacturing plant in, shall we say, Bolivia? And who are the losers?

The winners:

- Ford (if they do their job right). They benefit from cheaper labor which will make their products more competitive in Bolivia and in export markets.

- The Bolivian people. The new plant provides additional employment, skills training, and very likely better salaries than they are used to having. This in turn provides upwards pressure on other employers to increase their salaries to avoid all their best people going to Ford.

- The Bolivian Government. Even if they granted Ford a 10-year tax holiday in return for putting a plant in their country, the plant pays a lot of salaries which are taxable. It impoves the country's balance of payments, increases the skill levels of the population (which can be transferred to other industries via the movement of people), lowers unemployment, and after the tax holiday provides a nice profitable, taxable major company (after startup losses) to provide additional government revenue that can pay for schools, services, etc.

The Losers:

- Workers in the U.S. Their jobs are being outsourced, which increases unemployment, lowering pressure for pay raises in the sector.

- Labor unions. They see their membership drop.

The propaganda that you hear everywhere about globalization and exploitation of poor foreign workers is a myth, propagated by people and organizations who have the most to lose - organized labor in the 1st world countries (understandably, of course). But the third world country is a winner across the board.

I have personal experience in this. I oversaw the construction and startup of a Japanese-owned consumer-goods company in India. Our employees recieved salaries twice as high as what they would have gotten in a local company - a lot of them had been unemployed for years. We had people lined up at the factory gates every day trying to get a job. We brought in Japanese and western management and manufacturing techniques, and taught the locals how to use them (In fact, I was the only foreigner stationed there - all my other foreign collegues came in to do installation, training, and left.) Eventually, I trained my own replacement and left as well, with the company in 100% local hands. This company, with hundreds of good-paying jobs simply would not exist without globalization, and the employees would be either unemployed or employed at lower salaries.


User currently offlineDerico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4312 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1797 times:

A car manufacturing plant in Bolivia would be a huge improvement for Bolivia, since they don't manufacture cars. Countries that manufacture cars would be improved further if they actually designed the cars. Different levels of assembly.

I think there must a difference between a multinational investing to PRODUCE in a country and a multinational investing to extract a product from a country. That is something I don't see as wrong per say, but in Bolivia, Ecuador, Nigeria, etc, these companies do little in terms of investing in the local infraestructure. Now you might say it's capitalism and they don't have any obligation to do so, but it would help them in the long run in PR and in getting new consumers if those poor countries develop a consumer base for their products.

Though I think we have veered of course on the topic. The question is does globalization include migration of workers in mass to areas where labor is required or not.

Remember in the 1980s and 1990s the USA was a huge proponent of globalization, for the benefits of US multinationals and the like. Countries against this process were criticized. Now we see that the US itself is extremely protectionist particularly in foreign ownership of national industries or infraestructure, and increasingly concerned about immigration.



My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1783 times:

Quoting Derico (Reply 7):
You are right on some points, but Argentina has a larger middle class than the upper or lower class, has been for about a century now. It was what made the country different from the rest in the region (with Uruguay). That has changed a bit with the increase in the inequality gap, but that has happened in other countries as well. Argentina has never been a country where there is a small 10% elite and 90% peasants.

That's an interesting point. I'll look into that.

I've always been told that each of the countries of Latin America are characterized by a small elite of the super-rich and a vast number of poor people. Certainly, if this is a stereotype, I apologize for raising it.

It would be interesting to contrast Argentina and Brazil, for example, to see if either of these countries fits such a stereotype.

Thank you for clarifying this matter. I appreciate it.


User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1774 times:

Derico, since posting the above, I just found an interesting article on Argentina and the issues of inequality and poverty. I think that there are some references to an increase in these factors in that article, which may interest you.

All in all, globalization appears to have had an effect on the Argentinian economy, if the relevant timeline is deemed to coincide, as it appears to, with free trade initiatives begun in the 1990's.

I would appreciate your further comments concerning this matter, as the question of the effects of globalization on all countries -- the U.S., Argentina, or any other -- bears great scrutiny.

Please see:

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:...nequality&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=5

[Edited 2006-09-04 21:35:40]

User currently offlineBarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2238 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1736 times:

Capitalist activity is characterized by the movement of three items: capital, goods and labour. The freer movement of goods is what 'free trade' is about. Free movement of capital is characterized by the desire of capital-rich western nations to deploy that capital in capital-deficient poorer nations, which have high growth potential. The free movement of labour is characterized by both outsourcing and the work visa programs in developed nations.

These issues should not be viewed in isolation. They are interlinked. Those who rail against free movement of labour should also be prepared to face the consequences of less than free movement of their capital or goods. Further, the detriment of each of these components varies. Developed countries might face wage depression due to unchecked free movement of labour or goods, but they cannot comprehend the problems of free movement of capital. On the other hand, developing nations may not see any drawback in the free movement of labour, and to a lesser extent, of goods, but they find free movement of capital a very tentative matter; the 1997-98 crisis demonstrated that.

Therefore, the issues are much more nuanced than just 'offshoring from the west'. Different countries face different issues due to the interplay of the three fluid components within their own economic system, and between theirs and the rest of the world. Globalization is not an easy exercise. Those who imagine India or China simply built factories or IT schools and reaped benefits without any pain are not well informed enough; both nations went through, and continue to go through very painful restructuring of our inefficient once-socialist economies to suit the globalized world; it is because we were so backward to start with that our current development appears to have been so transformatory, and gives the impression that everything has been smooth at this end. But that is not really the case. It has been accompanied by painful but necessary changes from the old ways, and a lot that is taken for granted in the west is still far away.



India, cricket junior and senior world champions
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21691 posts, RR: 55
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1732 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 6):
As described, what globalization threatens to do is make America the kind of country where the middle class is no longer the norm -- where there are rich members of the managerial class, and a very large segment of relatively low-paid workers. This isn't the American way. It may be the Latin American way, but that's completely different.

We cannot afford to destroy the middle class by catering to the Latin American model of globalization.

What Latin American model of globalization? Globalization is a Western creation, and has been for a very long time. If you don't like the results of globalization, it doesn't make sense to criticize the globalized instead of the globalizers.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineTurbo7x7 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 266 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks ago) and read 1707 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 8):

Someone here really does not understand the dynamics of outsourcing and globalization, and is just listening to the propaganda passed out either the equally ignorant or those who have special interests to defend in 1st world countries (labor unions, for instance).

Oh please, what's so difficult to understand about the "dynamics?" Outsourcing and insourcing are both about the same thing: keeping labor costs down. Just as we benefit from cheap goods made in China (but designed here), both you and I benefit from cheap Mexican labor: they clean our offices at night, help maintain our homes, and do all other kinds of grunt work that most Americans nowadays would consider beneath them.

And they do it all at bargain prices. A friend of mine boasted to me the other day he got a Mexican to cut a tree in his property for $3000 when other "legit" businesses wanted $10,000. Fighting illegal immigration is a lot like fighting illegal drugs. As long as there's a demand for their services, these people will still find a way to get up here.

Maybe you thought I had a problem with it but I really don't care all that much, although obviously many Americans a little further down the socioeconomic totem pole do seem to be concerned. I was simply pointing out that this phenomena is pretty much unstoppable now, so people had better start strategizing how to leverage it to their advantage whether through foreign investments or whatever. Otherwise it might take advantage of you.

And if you think organized labor is a "special interest," then certainly it should also follow that upper management or shareholders are "special interests" as well, and you've certainly tried very hard to "defend" those interests on this forum, now haven't you?

[Edited 2006-09-05 21:28:44]

[Edited 2006-09-05 21:31:57]

User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1683 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 13):
Globalization is a Western creation,

No, it isn't. Globalization is a natural evolution of mankind, stemming from the ever-increasing ease of transporting goods and people from one part of the earth to another. Globalization has been a continuous process ever since the invention of the boat, roads, mountain passes, etc. And you can never stop it.

Quoting Turbo7x7 (Reply 14):
And if you think organized labor is a "special interest," then certainly it should also follow that upper management or shareholders are "special interests" as well, and you've certainly tried very hard to "defend" those interests on this forum, now haven't you?

Certainly they are special interests. I would also add that organized labor's interests are quite different than those of workers themselves. But that is a subject for another thread.

The number one loser from globalization is, without a doubt, the lower working classes of workers (e.g. factory workers) in 1st world countries. We've seen this phenominon for many years. There are almost no shipyards or ironworks left in England or France anymore - The Asians can make steel and build ships cheaper. The steel industry in the US is also a small fraction of what it was. The theory is that the reduction of international barriers to trade and the movement of people will bring a leveling of the geographic disparities in living standards. This has worked within the United States, the EU (still in early stages) and other nations who have reduced or eliminated barriers. Eventually the same will happen on a global scale, where due to supply and demand, the differences between salaries for the same job between a 1st world country and a 3rd world country will be no more than the difference between the salary of someone in West Virginia vs California.


User currently offlineDerico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4312 posts, RR: 11
Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1673 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 13):

What Latin American model of globalization? Globalization is a Western creation, and has been for a very long time. If you don't like the results of globalization, it doesn't make sense to criticize the globalized instead of the globalizers.

I would like an explanation of this.

If I reckon to predict that your statement was implying that globalization is a western-EUROPEAN concept since the times of the great explorations and expansion of European style civilization outside of Europe, then that would a be consistent statement. The United States is a direct result of that concept, not a creator.

Thus, I find your statement about the 'globalizers vs the globalized', from the point of view I think you were coming from, null.

Aerospacefan,

Wow... that is a lengthy read. I will try to find some team to examine it, but if I may be so bold I predict that I already know most of what is written there.

I will be as pithy yet concise as possible about your question. Indeed, the 1990s saw a large increase in inequality. The reason behind this stems from the fact that from around the 1960s to the 1990s, Argentina had a very closed economy. As we know this tends to stiffle productivity and innovation as local producers faced no external threats to their products. This also tends to negate the need to make adjustments to business practices and downsizing. Those decades coincide with a decline of Argentina from the highest rankings in per capita wealth amongst the world's nations, to the rather underperforing place the country has currently: of a wealthy 'middle income' country, but not 'high income' one.

When the economy was opened suddendly (and most now agree too suddenly) in the 1990s, there was a flood of mechanization, technological replacement and business downsizing in the private sector, and a huge downsizing in the public sector payroll.

This created a flood of unemployment, yet the economy grew at 7-8% a year. It makes sense in a perverse way: the economy had been closed off for so long that now it was becoming much more productive so GDP grew, but all the obsolete jobs that should have gone to the wayside in a 40 year period, were done away with in 4 or 5 years.

This created a whole new class of 'formerly middle class' now unemployed people. When the economy downturned in 1999 because of an overvalued currency, economic activity further was stiffled artificially. All those factors combined for a severe economic depression comparable to the Great Depression elsewhere in the world in the 1930s, with the consequences we know that economic crisis created (Argentina ironically, was virtually untouched by this great calamity and continued with high GDP growth at the time).

So, to conclude, globalization in Argentina has had many negative effects, but the cause was not globalization per say, it was failed economic policies instituted decades prior.

The economy now is doing much better and for the first time in 50 years the country's exports are rising, imports are rising, productivity is up WITH employment creation, the budget is balanced and so is the trade balance. It was these variables that made Argentina a very wealthy nation some years back, and it can be so again. What the country needs to understand is that the only way to get there is not thru commodities (like in the early 20th century), as now agriculture accounts for only meager amounts of GDP, even though it is still important. Today's road to prosperity is knowledge. And this country seems to finally get it: it's repatriating scientists back to produce in Argentina and not overseas, it is funding science and development, it is lowering taxes on R&D industries, etc. The next step is to reform the education system, but that is a more complex issue.



My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1628 times:

Derico, a most interesting analysis. May I say that indeed, you seem well-schooled on this subject!

User currently offlineDerico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4312 posts, RR: 11
Reply 18, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1620 times:

It would be rather silly I was not. Of course the analysis is also tinged with my personal opinion, some people may not agree 100% with it, but in general lines the actual major linings are not really disputed.

I was reading the other thread about a project in the US stalled.

I would dare to raise again the question that if having the current situation of inaction, where:
- there isn't a total halt to immigration to the US and deportations
- or a total blanketing of illegals to legal status for perhaps a two year period (like the argentine plan for the 1 million plus illegals)

...Is the best course.



My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
User currently offlineIFEMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1616 times:

Quoting Par13del (Reply 3):
Is this similar to the Guest Worker program the Bush Administration proposed that received international condemnation?

No. Bush's "Guest Worker Program" idea is simply a smoke-and-mirrors approach to an amnesty on illegal immigrants. It was/is so monumentally flawed that I fully expect it to get signed in to law, thereby securing the final nail in the coffin of what the United States of America is all about.


User currently offlineDerico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4312 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1612 times:

Quoting IFEMaster (Reply 19):

I'm not understanding you are you for or against amnesties?



My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
User currently offlineIFEMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1612 times:

Quoting Derico (Reply 20):
I'm not understanding you are you for or against amnesties?

1000% against.


User currently offlineDerico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4312 posts, RR: 11
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1608 times:

Ok I got it now~

Thanks for the clarification.



My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21691 posts, RR: 55
Reply 23, posted (8 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1605 times:

Quoting Derico (Reply 16):
If I reckon to predict that your statement was implying that globalization is a western-EUROPEAN concept since the times of the great explorations and expansion of European style civilization outside of Europe, then that would a be consistent statement. The United States is a direct result of that concept, not a creator.

The United States was born from globalization, yes, but that doesn't mean it can't create more of it. I don't know about you, but when I think of globalization, I think of massive, multinational corporations, and the US has more of those than any other country. There was a time at which the US was used as a source of cheap labor and materials for Great Britain. That time has long since passed, and the US is using other countries for the same things that they were once used for.

As far as "globalizers vs globalized", what I was getting at is this: the Western world outsources its labor to developing countries, not the other way around. Granted, several of those developing countries have grown richer over time (as a result of globalization), and now find it more profitable to outsource their labor as well, but you will still not find Latin America outsourcing their labor to the US. The Western world (which includes Europe, the US, Japan, etc.) is the force that drives globalization at the moment.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Interesting Article On India And China posted Fri Nov 29 2002 07:11:37 by N79969
Dialing 911 And Being Placed On Hold? posted Tue Nov 21 2006 08:20:35 by JetsGo
Interesting Article On Israeli Humanitarian Aid posted Tue Oct 24 2006 17:33:09 by Windshear
Excellent Time Article On Senator Clinton posted Sun Aug 20 2006 18:25:47 by Falcon84
Gay Marriage, The GOP And Dircksen's Speech On CR. posted Wed Jul 19 2006 08:20:13 by SFOMEX
Student Loan Article On CNN posted Tue May 2 2006 09:50:56 by Molykote
Lay And Skilling Taking On Water? posted Thu Mar 9 2006 15:39:00 by Dougloid
FDISK, Bios And No HD On IDE Help! posted Fri Dec 9 2005 10:52:01 by Manc
Very Intersting Article On U.S. Propaganda... posted Thu Nov 10 2005 14:35:43 by Alberchico
Interesting Article On Homosexuality........ posted Thu Oct 13 2005 03:04:02 by Alberchico