Role-Play Debate for course EngC 1015

I agree with the new "Silicon Valley" in Bangladesh that is litterally pouring billions of dollars into the Indian economy and the way capitalism is starting to poke holes in communist armor. The instances you point out can just as easily be seen in highly protected socialist systems (see southern India, where they live in mud, and the 12% unemployment rate in France). How do you propose employing 15 million unemployed in Tibeten China, a place with no infastructure, for more than next-to-nothing and day. Is the government going to tell coperations, "Sorry, you can't expand and employ 5,000 more people, these people need their farm." Either way you push it, problems arise.

I don't have much time so I'll just comment on the minor issue that the only reason they're working for little to nothing when companies outsource is because jobs weren't available prior to the outsourcing or that wages were even lower before. Outsourcing helps the countries that we go to, the major downside is that Americans lose jobs; the solution is to wait and let new fields open up. The beauty of the United States is that the distribution of wealth, however falsified, is set up dynamically enough that we have the ability to maintain economic strength even in an unemployment crisis. Why should the government subsidize small farms because it turns into a bunch of sunk costs with multinational conglomerate competition. And lastly, even if the polls say that people oppose doesn't mean that it's the right thing; the polls show that well over half the people in this country don't believe in evolution, and I may not like those results because they ask relatively small amounts of people and most of whom are probably uneducated on the matter.

I want to first start off saying, the world will never be perfect, problems will always exist. You have to look at this at a different perspective. Yes you are right that people work for almost nothing and farmers are losing there jobs. But before, there was even more unemployment. Those problems are not because of globalization but because of the high population in a country. It is not possible at this time to employ such a large number of people, all with a descent and fair wage. However, if anything, those people now have a better opportunity to make something of themselves because of globalization. Look at India for example. The poverty rate in india was much greater before companies started moving there. Now India is a booming market, the unemployment rate is much lower from before, and the standard of living has increased greatly. And that is all because of globalization.

I completely agree with Shah. There will always be problems in the world, so we can't try to eliminate them, because new problems will always arise. What we have to do is try and look at the big picture of things and see what will be best on the whole. I also agree with Mark Dillie that the worst side of globalization is the fact that many Americans are losing their jobs. However I would like to point out that it was very untasteful of Dillie to bring up a whole different and very controversial issue (evolution) and to knock people who don't believe in it when it is not even the issue at hand.

I completely agree with these last few comments. Had it not have been for globalization, countries like India would still be far behind developed nations. Because of globalization, they are starting to catch up. When huge corporations move jobs over to India, first of all, no one is forced to work for them. People line up for jobs like these because they are mostly white collar, well paying jobs. Yes, losing American jobs hurts, but so would being unemployed in a place like Mumbai. I think we need to stop thinking of ourselves just as U.S. citizens, and start realizing that we are world citizens first. What's good for the U.S. is not always going to be good for the rest of the world, and conversely, what's good for the rest of the world isn't always going to be good for the U.S. We just have to suck it up and deal with it.

I am both for and against globalization. I definitely agree that it's horrible having millions of poor people working in our large companies that have outsourced... BUT what would happen to those individuals that are working now if that company wouldn't have relocated to their area? I think a person/families need to be desperate before they take some job that pays poorly. At least those people have a job and can put food on the table. Isn't it true that if a corporation is going to relocate they need to pay the homeowner a substantial amount of money. If this happens, the family can always relocate and start over even though generations of memories would be left behind and new ones would begin. Since there are so many underdeveloped nations, I think companies that outsource are almost doing them a favor by giving them job oppurtunities although the workers receive very little. Americans tend to be loosing some of their jobs due to outsourcing, but at least we have millions of job oppurtunities and possibilities where many foreign countries have a slow economy.

I don't have a problem with the jobs actually being moved to an underdeveloped country, but you have to look at what kind of jobs these are. One of the problems I have with it is that the jobs that are being offered by larger companies like Wal-mart or Apple are horrible. They offer no benefits, no incentives, and no security whatsoever. And the worst part about them is that they are un-unionized so that doesn't allow the workers to get what they rightly deserve. This is the same problem with the farmers. Yes maybe 5000 are employed, but what type? Also un-unionized and offering no benefits. The problem with sending jobs overseas is that there are no workers rights, no unions, and nothing from stopping bloodthirsty capitalists from exploiting these people.

When talking about NAFTA in the context I was, I was not talking about true and false like with evolution. We are talking about policy that is being pressed onto nations that don't want it, as the polls state. And why is this happening if a populous doesn't want it? Capitalism at its finest. Policy being bought by big corporations looking to pad their pockets a little more. These policies were not voted upon through democratic institutions like they should have been.

This should be a lesson to anyone who wants to have a policy instituted, just throw a bunch of money at it and slap on a fancy name that tricks people like "Free trade". We should be working for fair trade, not exploiting our fellow workers.

Be very careful when you tread into what jobs are being created. Understand this: Capitialst systems have much more to gain from a highly educated high-tech workforce than a simple labour force. India's new crop of computer wiz kids are running circles around American programmers, mostly becuase they can throw numbers at a problem (Its a billion after all) but also becuase they have so very much more loose than their American counterparts. This has caught the eye of high-tech American companies like Mircrosoft, IBM, 3M, HP, Intel and the like. Bottom line: White collar jobs are being moved to India, China, Mexico and Russia, not just the "low end" jobs. The middle-class in India is exploding. Same with China.

What these governments are doing with the wealth is another story. The most progress is being made where the money is poured back into infastructure, so that in time, it will be the India's, China's and Russia's of the world that outsource to other countries and build them up. The biggest diffrence in the coutries that are expanding with the use of this new capital is the emphisas on education. The smarter the workforce, the better the jobs--these countries know this. This is not exploitation. This is progress.

By the way, free trade is being tried. Thats why our trade deficit is now $543 billion dollars. Yeah that worked.

My point was merely a statement regarding inconsistencies in polls, not to bring up another debate. It was relevant to me because it just came up on the news a few hours prior. It was all statistics, nothing more.