Latest update 28.08.2019 Category: Globalization

Winners And Losers In The Globalization Process. essay

The Real Winners and Losers of Globalization Completely on theglobalist.com

It is there — between the 50th and 60th percentile of global income distribution, which in 2008 included people with annual after-tax per capita incomes between 1,200 and 1,800 international dollars — that we find some 200 million Chinese and 90 million Indians, as well as about 30 million each in Indonesia, Brazil, Egypt and Mexico. These 400 million people are among the biggest gainers in the global income distribution.

Winners and Losers of Globalization Completely on studymode.com

...last few years, the globalization has been a subject of controversy. The anti-globalization was asserted that the globalization would give developing countries poverty, war and even cultural extinction. Whiles, Others think that it will bring unprecedented progress and prosperity in the whole world. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that t...

What Is Globalization? | Globalization101 Completely on globalization101.org

This current wave of globalization has been driven by policies that have opened economies domestically and internationally. In the years since the Second World War, and especially during the past two decades, many governments have adopted free-market economic systems, vastly increasing their own productive potential and creating myriad new opportunities for international trade and investment. Governments also have negotiated dramatic reductions in barriers to commerce and have established international agreements to promote trade in goods, services, and investment. Taking advantage of new opportunities in foreign markets, corporations have built foreign factories and established production and marketing arrangements with foreign partners. A defining feature of globalization, therefore, is an international industrial and financial business structure.

Winners and Losers of Globalization Completely on termpaperwarehouse.com

...between the ‘winners’ and ‘losers’. It is important to note that momentum strategy appears to be temporary in nature. Over short time-frames of 3 to 12 months, past winners continues to perform strongly, and vice-versa. This pushes the price of these past winners (losers) above (below) fair value, which leads to lower (higher) medium to long term. Performance of Relative Strength Portfolio Strategy  Sub-period analysis o Seasonal Patterns January (lowest) August (low) April, November and December (high) o 5-year Subperiods In 1975-1979, the returns were negative due to the January performance of small firm; positive returns were observed on medium and large sized firms similarly, returns were positive when January is excluded  Performance of the strategy in Event Time With the exception of month 1, the average return in each month is positive in the first year. The average return is negative in each month in year 2 as well as in the first half of year 3. The negative returns after a year indicate that the relative strength strategy does not tend to pick stocks that have high unconditional expected returns  Back-testing strategy From 1941 to 1964: returns were negative due to the volatility in the market. Many firms declared bankruptcy.  Stock Returns Around Earnings Announcement Dates Stock returns for past winners realize positive returns around the time when their earnings are announced and it goes the same way for past......

Who are the biggest winners and losers in a globalised world Completely on ukessays.com

The Asian countries financial crises in the 1997 made many experts to fight globalisation become stronger. They believe developing countries are losers in globalisation. However, the experience of China has been used as a good example to prove they are the winner of globalisation. Before reform, China was the world most important opponent of globalisation which is not opening their trade market. Since 1979, reform policy made China’s economic become most competitive and booming country in world widely. According to Michael Dauderstädt & Jürgen Stetten (2005) purchasing power parity in China is ranks secondly after America. Share of world trade increased from approximately 1% to almost 6% between 1979 and 2003. Since 2001, China access to the WTO which provide better free trade market environment and also become more competitive in international market. In a word, China’s experience in opening up reveals in what way a developing country can become winners from globalisation. Besides, China gives other developing countries more confidence to support free trade market and globalisation.

Winners and Losers of Globalization Completely on studymode.com

...Critically examine the proposition that national boundaries have been surmounted by the phenomenon of globalisation and that therefore, national governments are no longer able to promote independent economic policies.Marxism conceived of globalization to a great extent as simply the worldwide expansion of the capitalist mode of production (Amin and Luckin 1996:225). The global expansion of production methods and networks has resulted in a proverbial shrinking of the globe, leading analysts to argue that globalisation is constricting the capacities of states and governments to control economic policies and processes within their borders. Baylis and Smith (1998) define globalisation as the 'intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa.' In this essay, Globalisation is understood as a phenomenon, and a process that eases the movements of labour, services, capital and goods and information across the globe. It has evolved partly due to the trend of increasing international trade across national boundaries and the conduct of business activities in more than one country. Put simply, it is a process that involves the growth of inter-dependency between national markets and industries on a worldwide scale (Brooks, Weatherston and Wilkinson, 2011). As globalisation progresses the status of national boundaries as obstacles to...

Winners & Losers of Globalization Completely on studymode.com

...Critically examine the proposition that national boundaries have been surmounted by the phenomenon of globalisation and that therefore, national governments are no longer able to promote independent economic policies.Marxism conceived of globalization to a great extent as simply the worldwide expansion of the capitalist mode of production (Amin and Luckin 1996:225). The global expansion of production methods and networks has resulted in a proverbial shrinking of the globe, leading analysts to argue that globalisation is constricting the capacities of states and governments to control economic policies and processes within their borders. Baylis and Smith (1998) define globalisation as the 'intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa.' In this essay, Globalisation is understood as a phenomenon, and a process that eases the movements of labour, services, capital and goods and information across the globe. It has evolved partly due to the trend of increasing international trade across national boundaries and the conduct of business activities in more than one country. Put simply, it is a process that involves the growth of inter-dependency between national markets and industries on a worldwide scale (Brooks, Weatherston and Wilkinson, 2011). As globalisation progresses the status of national boundaries as obstacles to...

What Is Globalization? Who Are the Biggest Winners and Losers in a Globalization World? Completely on studymode.com

...Critically examine the proposition that national boundaries have been surmounted by the phenomenon of globalisation and that therefore, national governments are no longer able to promote independent economic policies.Marxism conceived of globalization to a great extent as simply the worldwide expansion of the capitalist mode of production (Amin and Luckin 1996:225). The global expansion of production methods and networks has resulted in a proverbial shrinking of the globe, leading analysts to argue that globalisation is constricting the capacities of states and governments to control economic policies and processes within their borders. Baylis and Smith (1998) define globalisation as the 'intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa.' In this essay, Globalisation is understood as a phenomenon, and a process that eases the movements of labour, services, capital and goods and information across the globe. It has evolved partly due to the trend of increasing international trade across national boundaries and the conduct of business activities in more than one country. Put simply, it is a process that involves the growth of inter-dependency between national markets and industries on a worldwide scale (Brooks, Weatherston and Wilkinson, 2011). As globalisation progresses the status of national boundaries as obstacles to...

Winners and Losers: Perspectives on Globalization from the Emerging Market Economies Completely on brookings.edu

Fundamental to making better education more widely available is a more comprehensive social contract for delivering essential social services in general. The world’s advanced economies have vigorously debated the merits of targeted versus more universal social welfare policies (with supporters of universal policies arguing that tightly targeted policies cannot sustain the political support needed to preserve public funding). Meanwhile, many developing countries that have turned to the market have increased targeting of public social spending and reduced absolute poverty, even during times of fiscal austerity. At the same time, shifts in the rewards to different education and skill cohorts, coupled with cuts in the size and scope of public services, have led to a perception and often a reality of increased insecurity for groups in the middle of the income distribution. It is time to revisit the targeting debate. At least some targeting is usually desirable when public resources are limited. Nevertheless, it is necessary to craft a broader and more politically sustainable social contract, which includes middle-income groups as well as the poor.