3 ms·
I think most economists would say that the purpose of globalization was to make the nation better off, and that the nation's values, systems and leadership woul
by sarah180 7y ago
I think most economists would say that the purpose of globalization was to make the nation better off, and that the nation's values, systems and leadership would be called on to distribute those gains in a way consistent with that nation's values.
Perhaps the real issue here is not one of trade, but of the collapse of unions, the dramatic change in the nature of our media, broken leadership structures, and a lazy mindset that views capital and markets as the goal rather than the tool.
- ThomPete 7y agoWell, nations are part of everyone in globalization no? Not sure I understand the distinction. The issue wasn't of trade but of a small group of people who benefitted from exporting jobs abroad to sell products at home and then still avoid paying the taxes.
- sarah180 7y agoIncreasing the wealth of a nation doesn't mean increasing the wealth of everyone in that nation. A nation can distribute those gains in wealth and power in a way that provides no utility to many of its citizens. Trade has made nations richer. Economists were not wrong about this. What many were wrong about is the thesis that the social & market structures in developed, "stable" democracies would ensure that those gains eventually improved the utility of everyone—the proverbial "rising tide that lifts all boats." The standard claim is that markets may not immediately fix issues, but over time they will converge on an efficient distribution of resources. Yes, this is a late reply.