Since Free Traders believe that America should lower its standard of living to help the third world

[Douglas Carpenter]

99. that would all be a valid point if "globalization" was improving the quality of life in the third

Last edited Sun Jan 8, 2012, 01:59 PM - Edit history (1)

world. But for the vast majority of people in the developing world -there is simply no evidence that this is the case. Even the world of "free market" apologist have had to acknowledge that in fact the new economic stresses caused by globalization – does in fact drive the rural peasantry off their land - and create an inflationary spiral on basic commodities and necessities that leaves the vast majority in greater economic desperation than ever while collapsing the traditional economies of small farmers and small businesses. Capital’s race to the bottom in its endless search for cheaper and cheaper labor was simply not satisfied with $3.00 per hour in Mexico or the Marianas when they could get $3.00 per day in the Philippines. But that was not good enough when you have hundreds of millions of Chinese willing to work for $1.50 per day and hundreds of millions more waiting in line desperately wanting such jobs.
What one will see very quickly in any visit to the third world is that, yes there is a new commercial class that is doing quite well. It is very possible that as much as 10% or perhaps even 15% of the population is benefiting while the majority are simply not part of this new economy and have little or no prospect of ever being a part of it – as the inflationary spiral along with the internal dislocation and the collapse of their own domestic economy of small farmers and small cottage businesses which are virtually wiped out over night. Ultimately globalization is simply not sustainable in the long run – as increased energy cost will simply make transporting goods halfway around the world prohibitive and localization will be imposed by necessity.