It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.



page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 06:09 PM
is the emerging trend of a global movement of capital, resources and labour power producing a net increase in the standards of life for the world, or is power and wealth just becoming more and more concentrated?

posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 07:49 PM
interesting question, but imo it's too early to determine the full ramifications of globalism. There are pros and cons to the issue and the answer to your question could be yes to both points.

posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 12:24 AM
it depends on what side of the reform the situation is viewed from. firstly, could the power and wealth of the world be any more concentrated than it already is?

as in all cases of globalism the poor will always be left behind at first, with those living in rural areas locked in the downward spiral of poverty, while those in the major urban centres or trade areas continue to amass their riches. with this comes greed, and the decline of mutual respect and opinion on the common good.

but of course, it's really too early to determine. but from where i'm sitting, i can't complain. although i'm sure the homeless guy sitting under the bridge would beg to differ. har-har. keep a close eye on Chinas development and the integration of the new European states, perhaps that will give you a clearer persepctive.

i think the United States geopolitical policy epitomizes the definition of globalism perfectly.

posted on Dec, 5 2004 @ 12:40 AM

it depends on what side of the reform the situation is viewed from. firstly, could the power and wealth of the world be any more concentrated than it already is?

Umm the wealth has been becoming less concentrated amoung the top nations/unions for quite some time(unless you're talking locally ie the Walmart effect).

List of total GDP by country (Purchasing Power Parity Exchange Rate)
Rank Entity PPP total PPP/capita Population
1. United States 10.40 trillion (1012) 37,600 290,343,000
2. Eurozone1 7.87 trillion 25,300 311,004,756
3. Mainland China 5.70 trillion 4,400 1,287,000,000
4. Japan 3.55 trillion 28,000 127,215,000
5. India 2.66 trillion 2,540 1,049,701,000
6. United Kingdom 1.52 trillion 25,300 60,095,000
7. Russia 1.35 trillion 9,300 144,526,000
8. Brazil 1.34 trillion 7,600 182,032,000
9. South Korea 931 billion (109) 19,400 48,249,000
10. Canada 923 billion 29,400 32,207,000
11. Mexico 900 billion 9,000 104,908,000
12. Indonesia 663 billion 3,100 234,894,000
13. Australia 528 billion 27,000 19,732,000
14. Turkey 468 billion 7,000 68,110,000
15. Iran 456 billion 7,000 68,279,000
16. South Africa 432 billion 10,000 42,769,000
17. Thailand 429 billion 6,900 70,000,000
18. Taiwan 406 billion 18,000 22,116,000
19. Argentina 391 billion 10,200 38,000,000
20. Poland 368 billion 9,500 38,000,000

Source here

[edit on 5-12-2004 by sardion2000]

posted on Dec, 5 2004 @ 08:18 AM
sorry, i should of made it clearer from the start.

what i was referring to is the personal distribution of income. that is the distribution between each individual in an economy, and i'm basing my opinion on that of economist Jan Pen, who published a famous book called 'Income Distribution'.

whilst there is slightly less of a gap between the very poor and the average as seen in the past (c1970), the gap between most people and the rich has risen enormously.

[edit on 5/12/04 by BLUELol]

new topics

top topics

log in