Opposing Argument
• Greater Competition for Scarce Resources
Proponents of globalization argue that the spread of prosperity is better for the world economy as a whole. That sounds great and rosy, but the truth of the matter is that prosperity of the global economy may come at the expense of prosperity of the national economy. In this sense, globalization is bad for the U.S. because it hurts domestic economic interests. Martin Wolf covers some of the main points of the disadvantages of globalization in his article in the Financial Times. Essentially, power and natural resources are limited. Globalization empowers developing countries, but because there is a limited amount of power available, the U.S. becomes less powerful as a result. Also, …show more content…
That being said, the real question is not whether or not globalization is bad for the U.S., but how the U.S. can best position itself to reap the benefits of globalization. A common solution proposed by opponents of globalization is that the U.S. should pursue protectionist policies to protect U.S. workers. Trade protectionism is expensive and could actually be harmful for U.S. consumers. A classic example covered by Roach in this class as well as in his book Unbalanced: The Codependency of America and China is the current multilateral trade agreements the U.S. holds. China is often used as a scapegoat for opponents of globalization who say the U.S. should increase tariffs or cut trade with China (by far largest trade deficit of the 100+ deficits the U.S. enjoys), but what these opponents fail to realize is that it is only because of globalization that the U.S. is able to continue growing right now. With the massive savings shortfall in the U.S. economic growth would not be possible without importing surplus savings from abroad and having these deficits. Globalization is good for the
• Greater Competition for Scarce Resources
Proponents of globalization argue that the spread of prosperity is better for the world economy as a whole. That sounds great and rosy, but the truth of the matter is that prosperity of the global economy may come at the expense of prosperity of the national economy. In this sense, globalization is bad for the U.S. because it hurts domestic economic interests. Martin Wolf covers some of the main points of the disadvantages of globalization in his article in the Financial Times. Essentially, power and natural resources are limited. Globalization empowers developing countries, but because there is a limited amount of power available, the U.S. becomes less powerful as a result. Also, …show more content…
That being said, the real question is not whether or not globalization is bad for the U.S., but how the U.S. can best position itself to reap the benefits of globalization. A common solution proposed by opponents of globalization is that the U.S. should pursue protectionist policies to protect U.S. workers. Trade protectionism is expensive and could actually be harmful for U.S. consumers. A classic example covered by Roach in this class as well as in his book Unbalanced: The Codependency of America and China is the current multilateral trade agreements the U.S. holds. China is often used as a scapegoat for opponents of globalization who say the U.S. should increase tariffs or cut trade with China (by far largest trade deficit of the 100+ deficits the U.S. enjoys), but what these opponents fail to realize is that it is only because of globalization that the U.S. is able to continue growing right now. With the massive savings shortfall in the U.S. economic growth would not be possible without importing surplus savings from abroad and having these deficits. Globalization is good for the