If (((neoliberal globalism)) is so evil, why does it produce successful economies?

If (((neoliberal globalism)) is so evil, why does it produce successful economies?

Because it's not evil and is objectively the best thing to happen to humanity.

It turns out an image board for sharing anime pictures isn't the height of intellectual discourse and isn't really representative of anything outside of other image boards for sharing anime, who knew.

>inb4 economy isn't everything

That growth isn't due to globalism, it is due to Chinese people achieving civil liberties. While China suffered from tyranny and oppression at the national level under Mao, soon we will see tyranny and oppression emerge at the global level. The TPIP mixes up free trade (good) with dubious laws to control the internet, among other things. That is the jist of it, but "globalism" is a politicized term nowadays.

Neoliberal globalism is a scam that raises the GDP but lowers the value of labor immensely. When free trade is established between two places with radically different costs of labor, the inevitable result is that labor is outsourced until the two regions establish equilibrium. In short, the total efficiency of the economy goes up, but for a region that was already doing well it doesn't necessarily mean higher quality of life for the average person, in fact in many cases it means worse.

Modern western workers cannot compete with third world slave labor economically. Free trade between those two places, without barriers or additional incentives means lowering wages and raising unemployment in the West to send jobs out East.

The result is what you see around you. A generation with the cheapest consumer electronics and luxury goods ever but who can't afford to buy a house, marry, or raise children because the entire rest of the economy is fucked and the cheaper prices for foreign goods sent back doesn't mean shit when you have no money to buy them.

The system is just a way for international corporations with no loyalty or feelings of obligation to any given country to maximize their profits with no thought to the devastation they leave in their wake, while playing into the extremely corrupt governments that exist in the west, where mass immigration is encouraged to provide cheaper slave labor for businesses and poor desperate people who will vote for government programs for the State. Meanwhile businesses continue to buy politicians who favor corporate policy while politicians in return benefit from the corporations funding them.

The GDP isn't the only measure of prosperity Mr Goldberg.

>it is due to Chinese people achieving civil liberties
?????????????????
?????

if you want an actual answer

it's good if you aren't white. basically it's like economic communism, it tries to produce a standard of living the same everywhere. that's why wages are dropping and things are getting shittier in 1st world countries

well off 1st world countries is not on the agenda, everyone having the living standard of mexico is the dream for them

Why don’t we kill all those evil poor people who reduce our wages?

Deng Xiaoping's market reforms

because every time a nation moves too far to the left or right of the liberal status quo it is violently torn down or economically isolated

You fell for a meme.

The third reich had an astounding economic renaissance too, will neo-libs support the Nazis?
Also it doesn't necessitate the free movement of people or the atrocities that follow yet the power-brokers who facilitate global integration maintain that it does.
People quite like cheap Chinese goods, just not there daughters being raped by pakis and their neighbors being mowed down by arabs.

>why does it produce successful economies?
Such as?

neoliberalism creates meme economies based on sectors that aren't actually productive like marketing, finance, middle management, and so forth

you make more money in the short term, but that money is concentrated in areas that are already wealthy and isn't actually based on anything concrete

an actually decent economic system would focus its attention on improving domestic industry by putting lots of effort in infrastructure and research (especially automation), distributing the gains to society as a whole. neoliberalism, on the other hand, just asks people in the third world to provide for their society less efficiently than is possible, "freeing" its people to make bazillions pf dollars by basically gambling.

>a "successful" economy is the measure of the goodness of a system
I want the world to burn

Successful for whom?

Everything about this answer is nonsense, but it is a good illustration of the mentality of people who use "neoliberal" as an insult.

According to that graph, everyone.

>the economy should be bad

neoliberalism has done more to break down national barriers, elevate the poor and redistribute wealth among the 90% than socialism could ever dream of

>why

Biggest red flag of bait on Veeky Forums

>astounding economic renaissance
>The 3rd Reich
Pick one, please. The Reich's economy relied completely on plundering conquered lands.

Umm, where are these successful economies? The people are poorer than they were 20-30-50 years ago. The only difference is in technology

because you ignore everything thats east
china is in a growing bubble, the USA is knee deep in depth and its like quicksand for the rest of the world

not to mention the so called "shitholes" you outsource your production to

what a great success indeed
hope westerners are ready when the rest of the world comes for them, shitstains

>I want to live in a shithole

workers get a lot more bennies while wages stay a good fraction ahead of inflation, seems like a good deal

That's not civil liberties at all. You can find out about Deng's policy on civil liberties on June 4th, 1989.

His reforms were entirely about economic liberalism.

>Successful
Neoliberalism failed since 08. Now everyone is picking up the pieces

>there are only two possible states of an economy: either a shithole or "successful" by contemporary neoliberal standards

>The people are poorer than they were 20-30-50 years ago.

That's not true. The vast majority are richer.

>Neoliberalism failed since 08.

You mean the last 8 years of steady economic growth and falling unemployment?

Correct.

I'm talking about the developed countries only, not Africa or Asia who are emerging economies and that has nothing to do with liberalism.

>I'm talking about the developed countries only

It's still true.

No, it isn't. Not for the average pleb. People are riddled with debts, they can't pay for college, health insurance, working nine to five as a waitress to pay their bills, so on and so on. I'm on my phone and can't be arsed to post images, however the developed worlds wealth is mostly in the hands of 50 people or less. And every year that number is decreasing.

>If (((neoliberal globalism)) is so evil, why does it produce successful economies?

Because it is actually a disaster: the actual slavery is hidden in third world countries (look at every manmade object in your house: chances are that they were built by workers that have so little rights that they would be considered slaves in a Western contemporary society; also if it's electronic you can be sure that forced child labour was involved), and the very few jobs that don't migrate in these shit countries get worse by the year (converging on the worker's conditions typical of the aforementioned countries).

It looks shiny and efficient, but behind it there is, as usual, blood, torture and slavery.

Okay, I'm going to start dumping various charts, tell me when to stop.

but if we organize charity everything will be so much better!
and tell those dirty barbarians to embrace democracy, thats what they are doing wrong!

...

...

...

>: the actual slavery is hidden in third world countries

lol nope, those "slave" jobs are highly sought after and the main reason global poverty has dramatically declined.

Some extrapolations from current trends now

...

>in the second and third world, people yell how neo liberalism, imposed on them by THA WEST is enslaving them and exploiting their resources
>in first world countries people yell how they're being exploited by neo liberalism and cheap 3rd world workers
Really activates the almonds. It's almost like you're both wrong.

you will die in cancer middle class little shit
along with your family
átok

>Neoliberal globalism is a scam that raises the GDP but lowers the value of labor immensely.

So what? If somebody is too lazy or stupid to expand their skill set to remain relevant, I see no reason why the rest of society should have to slow down to accommodate them.

Just to show it wasn't a one-time thing.

or both right since between the 2 theres is 1 entity that profits from all of this
and you will never become one of them no matter how hard you try

...

Let me guess, (((they)))?

>pajeet does the same codemonkey job for less than donald
>somehow pajeet is less skilled than donald
>pajeet instantly upgraded his skillset the moment he moved 3000kms westwards

what a fucking joke you are

...

not jews, but youll never become a millionaire, mr temporarily embarrassed millionaire

note how debt is barely increasing compared to wealth

No, i know i'm not going to become one. I'm speaking from the perspective of a post communist country. I just want my country to be a better place to live, and the mindless drones who want to go back are depressing.

No one told me to stop so far

and you really believe some western company using your ppl will be the way forward?
that their wealth somehow will trickle down to you instead of being sent back home?

have you fucking learned nothing?

>you need to be a millionaire to benefit from neo-liberal capitalism

Should we throw all those "exploited" workers out on the street to starve just so we can say that they are not longer exploited?

this is Veeky Forums not Veeky Forums fuck off with this trash

>Fuck off with your facts, I'm trying to complain about things I don't understand!

>make a factually false economic claim
>hurr fuck off with your data

Kill all white people.

White people are the only reason these countries are successful.

An increase in economic activity is an increase in economic activity. Everyone benefits.
Much better than being completely enslaved by your government. The government takes from you to pay wages, and then the government pays you as wages. Over half of all employed people are on government payroll

get triggered by this post?
so you decided to dump your ZOG propaganda

Dude.

i didnt say that
you are actively trying though, so no need to be facading as some good samaritarian

I'm actively trying to what? Are you so illiterate that you are unable to elaborate on any point? It's not rich people holding you back, it's your vocabulary.

no its not true
if i build a bicycle road
i benefit, because im getting the money for it from whoever wishes that to be built
my worker benefit from it, but since i wish to benefit myself the most, i will keep that down as much as possible, maybe mongorian horse archer workers will be the cheapest

and once its done, it does fucking nothing, no wealth, not better infratructure because we arent in the 19th century roads were a rarity, its a one time business things that might set me free for life if its a big enough project

>american shitstain about literacy

top kek
die

Only developing and failing countries practice neoliberalism, having it largely forced upon them by the developed world.

No one in the developed world practices neoliberalism. They all have public services, welfare, trade regulations, production regulations, et. al.

Neoliberalism is essentially designed to cut down on the size of a nation's government and redirect all its resources into private (read "foreign owned") businesses through austerity, forcing them to take loans which are granted only if they promote infrastructure for those same foreign investments, all while preventing the use of any trade barriers to protect themselves from exploitation by larger economies and producers.

Developed countries promote neoliberalism for others, but not for themselves.

...

And your workers will have money to spend, which will increase demand in other fields and so on and so on. Alternatively you will spend some of your money either in that country or your own or a completely different one.
While i agree, trade deficits are a problem, production has to be started somehow. Money doesn't smell, it doesn't really matter where it's coming from.

>forcing them to take loans
Neo liberals are more careful about debt than Keynesians or Communists.

>implying I'm a communist
Why are neoliberals so dumb? Is it because neoliberalism is the default so they've never actually thought about anything?

>8

World unemployment peaked in 2013 and has remained pretty constant since then. Blame Europe and shitholes like Brazil

Growth in what exactly? Public and private debt? Rising inequality? The global financial system should have crashed and burn in 08. The very act of bailout defies the superiority of neoliberalism

If you mean they are more careful about stripping all a government's income so that it's forced to take loans it can never pay back, and more careful about making sure those loans only benefit the companies of those nations forcing the neoliberal policies on the developing country, after making sure the leaders of those nations will play ball with this whole scheme, then yes, they are.

Why are you equating Neo liberals with the IMF?

"Rising inequality" is irrelevant so long as things are improving at all levels. And they are.

Economy isn't everything, let alone GDP on it's own.
And peopl's problem with neoliberalism isn't just economic.

No it's not Jew. No it's not. Huge inequality is terrible for society.

Bailouts are the opposite of Neo liberalism.
Iceland did the right thing, and shoved the financial elites under the bus when they failed, as neo liberalism dictates.

>And people's problem with neoliberalism isn't just economic.

AKA "I am scared of brown people and I want the government to make them go away so I can feel better."

>>in the second and third world, people yell how neo liberalism, imposed on them by THA WEST is enslaving them and exploiting their resources

No they don't. People say that ABOUT them, but I think you'll find people in "third world" countries are quite happy to go from subsistence farming to factory jobs.

Define
"Neoliberalism"
and
"Globalism"

Then define
"Neoliberal Globalism"

After that, we can start having a real discussion. Spamming image macros and claiming they are attributable to ((Neoliberal Globalism)) isn't convincing anyone but the same idiots who think Neoliberal Globalism is some jewish conspiracy theory evil entity.

The IMF is among the key tools in enforcing neoliberal policies on gullible nations (not that the folks at the top in the victimized nations aren't entirely in on it - and won't be quickly replaced if they aren't.)

>absolute poverty only exists and not relative poverty
>high levels of inequality has no harmful side effects

Yeah you should just not do anything, let lives of millions get fucked, and let Bolsheviks/Nazis 2.0 seize power.
Autistic Jews (almost every neoliberal) surely know what's best!
Die.

I am pretty scared of a million more muslims each year here in Germany. Africa alone has 2 billion people and is projected to hit 4 billion by 2030.

Ahh man, I got my numbers mixed up.

1.4 billion*
2 billion*

>>in the second and third world, people yell how neo liberalism, imposed on them by THA WEST is enslaving them and exploiting their resources
Western cucks say this (and in all truth, traditionalist, nationalist and true rightist) but actual 3rd worlds don't say this.

If they did that without bailout, there would literally be the Great Depression 2.0: Now everywhere is as fucked edition. I am actually for jailing them and shit, but the short term bailout was absolutely necessarily to prevent lives from being ruined and people from becoming really fucking poor

I'm not scared of X people, I'm scared of X cultures as well as artificial destruction of my own.
A black guy is not a problem. 2 million recently transplanted Africans are.
Get it through your thick arrogant head. I mean, even best-scenario alternative of neoliberalism is horrific, a consumerist global goo of "culture".
Die.

that fear is totally justified, considering how governments willing to cover up racial crime statistic and turn blind eye towards crimes caused on native population by non-natives

>but youll never become a millionaire, mr temporarily embarrassed millionaire

Actually I'm currently on track to have a net worth of $1 million at about age 37.

"I sacrificed my free market principles to save the free market."
President George W. Bush, December 2008.

(spoiler)the government actions in 2008 were the real saviors of the US economy, not as much Obama's(/spoiler)

I come from a country with a 1$/h minimum wage. I think i know more about the mindless drones who want to go back to the good ol dayz of communism.

Why do autists like OP and /pol/ attribute all good economic and bad economic occurrences to "Neoliberal Globalism"? Do they really think everything good or bad can be the result of one thing?

What you don't understand is that neoliberalism/neoconservatism is almost as toxic as communism. It just takes longer to get there.
You also seem to have studied economics and you arrogantly presume that economics explain everything and that no other factors apply.