Globalisation

When did you realise that globalisation has had a profoundly positive impact on human beings?

>Globalisation, more than anything else, has reduced the number of extreme poor in India by two hundred million and in China by three hundred million since 1990
Jeffrey Sachs, “The end of poverty”

The only people who think economic globalisation is a bad thing are commies and the alt-right. This is fortunate, however, since these two groups of people are completely irrelevant. La Penn was destroyed in France, Britain is floundering in its own mess, and Jared Kushner has sidelined Steve Bannon completely.

Do what you will, for we neo-liberals have already won.

Other urls found in this thread:

nationaleconomicseditorial.com/2017/02/19/german-economy-immigration/
bild.de/geld/wirtschaft/fluechtling/nur-jeder-50te-findet-einen-job-43786808.bild.html
zeit.de/2015/47/integration-fluechtlinge-schule-bildung-herausforderung
faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/unternehmen/mittelstand-als-hoffnungstraeger-fuer-fluechtlinge-14323607.html
businessinsider.com/r-number-of-migrants-claiming-benefits-in-germany-surges-by-169-percent-2016-9
dw.com/en/germany-spent-20-billion-euros-on-refugees-in-2016/a-38963299
anyforums.com/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

The problem with Globalism is that it benefits the global poor at the expense of the local middle class, and is therefor always going to be opposed in rich countries.

And don't come back.

im brave enough to say it:

"globalism has a mixed legacy".

Cry me a river "apolitical" fag

how come /pol/ sucks at falseflagging

WRONG

The middle class are secure in positions that aren't effected as much by outsourcing and derive income from foreign investments. Merchants, professionals, etc aren't being made poorer. The working class are who experienced the negative effects of globalization the most.

The global poor didn't really see much benefit either. China is the only country that really saw massive gains but that's because they didn't exactly play by the rules and had an activist state.

You can have global trade without mass migration.China and Japan does a fair amount of global trade, yet they don't allow mass migration.

I would argue that free trade actually decreases mass migration, because it makes poor countries richer thus decreasing incentive for people from poor countries to migrate to rich countries.

>American industrial workers weren't middle class

Even putting that aside, professionals are being made poorer by outsourcing and by importing lower skill, lower wage "skilled" employees on visas.

>they didn't exactly play by the rules

What rules? Show me where it's written that you're only allowed to take part in a globalist economy if you give private actors complete autonomy.

In short, fuck off Davos Group.

Why should I think it's a good thing that China and India are getting richer and more powerful?