Globalization & Price

[August1991]

Whether you are in a park in New York, Toronto or Rome - or in Montreal`s Victoria Square, I don`t think you understand the implication of a price, and a single price around the world.

A price is a number, indicating the terms of trade. It makes clear what people have to give up, to get something else.

Globalization makes this number, well, global. Around the world, everyone knows the price of what they have to sell, or buy.

----

For those who object to globalization, is it better if the terms of trade remain obscure? Or clear?

Edited October 17, 2011 by August1991

[Topaz]

Would you agree that there gap between low and high earners is growing and that the middle is disappearing, which is one of the points of this protest?

[cybercoma]

How does globalization make prices global? Are you implying that the price of an item in Ottawa would be the same of the price of that item in a developing country?

[Moonlight Graham]

The best definition of globalization" that Noam Chomsky says he's ever heard:

"The poor complain, they always do

But that’s just idle chatter.

Our system brings rewards to all

At least, to all who matter."

- Gerald Helleiner, Canadian development economist

[August1991]

How does globalization make prices global? Are you implying that the price of an item in Ottawa would be the same of the price of that item in a developing country?

That's exactly what I am saying. Globalization means that the price of a service or an item is increasingly the same every where in the world.

In the past, the cost of transportation or information made price discrepancies possible. Nowadays, that is less and less possible.

Globalization makes it more difficult for sellers (or buyers) to obscure their price.

Edited October 19, 2011 by August1991

[August1991]

Would you agree that there gap between low and high earners is growing and that the middle is disappearing, which is one of the points of this protest?

Several hundred million people in China and India, as much as 20% of the world's population, have seen their lifestyle rise beyond "dire poverty" to "simply poor" in the past 30 years.

So Chomsky (and the Canadian poet/economist) are simply wrong. For that matter, the Bible is also wrong: "...that there will be always poor persons in the world; that there will be always such with his people". The world has far fewer poor people today than it did in 1981.

Some people in the West (Chomsky et al) might focus on a few very rich people but in the broad scheme of things, the world's people are now living better. And we 6 billion live even more equitable lives.

-----

BTW, I am suspicious of statistics showing that in Canada (or the US), the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. These statistics typically use "household income" to measure changes over time. Households today are different from 30 years ago. Since households today have more single people, I'm not surprised that we have more "poor" households than before.

Edited October 19, 2011 by August1991

[bush_cheney2004]

...And BTW, I am suspicious of statistics showing that in Canada (or the US), the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer...

Indeed, the very definition of "poor" has been redefined and upscaled for a CanAm lifestyle that wastes more resources than are even available to the world's truly poor. American garbage dumps are treasure troves in Asia and the Mideast. Poverty is a very relative term.

[dpwozney]

Globalization means that the price of a service or an item is increasingly the same every where in the world.

In the past, the cost of transportation or information made price discrepancies possible. Nowadays, that is less and less possible.

How has that globalization been working out for the difference, in the price of oil, between WTI and Brent Crude in recent years?

[dpwozney]

For that matter, the Bible is also wrong: "...that there will be always poor persons in the world; that there will be always such with his people". The world has far fewer poor people today than it did in 1981.

Nevertheless, the world still has very many poor people. So how is the Bible wrong in this regard?

[dpwozney]

Indeed, the very definition of "poor" has been redefined and upscaled for a CanAm lifestyle that wastes more resources than are even available to the world's truly poor.

Does this very definition of “poor” take into account debt levels or ability to not eventually become bankrupt?

[bush_cheney2004]

Does this very definition of “poor” take into account debt levels or ability to not eventually become bankrupt?

Yes....poverty in the undeveloped world has barely gotten to the point of micro-loans, let alone mortgages and unsecured consumer credit to buy all manner of goods and services, also unavailable in many poor countries.