Skip to main content

Simplifying globalization: wealth redistribution and comparative advantage

IMO, for the majority of heated debate on globalization, there are 2 sides of globalization that rarely mentioned together. Globalization as method of wealth redistribution, and globalization as method to capitalizing comparative advantage.

In theory, if you're relatively poor because your work result is undervalued relative to world average valuation, you can benefit a lot from globalization. Once the whole world has access to your work, it will be valued higher. You will be richer. The bad side is that if you're relatively rich because your work result is overvalued compared to world average valuation, globalization will lower the valuation of your work. You will be poorer.

Is this mean that people from rich country is always at disadvantaged when joining globalization? Not really. Rich countries can benefit from globalization because of the second aspect of globalization, which is comparative advantage.

With comparative advantage, people can concentrate on doing what they do best thus driving down cost and increasing profit margin. People from relatively richer country can benefit from this by having access to superior product/service or cheaper product/service. The relatively poor can too.

----

Globalization is also a game of give and take. A country give up protection to certain aspects of it's economy, and take up the opportunity of certain aspects of economy in other country.

Unfortunately, many countries choose to selectively open themselves to globalization. They only open aspects of economy where they will be hurt the least, and force other country to open up it's aspect of economy where they will gain the best result.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A quote from "Virgin": "Saya Masih Perawan".

The intended readers of this post are liberals. You have been warned. I had just turned on my tv and saw the last minutes of the movie "Virgin" (2004), made in Indonesia. It's the first time I see this movie. The movie title's alone is enough to cause controversy in Indonesia, a country with the largest moslem population in the world. The content is said to be even more controversial ( http://www.opensubscriber.com/message/buletin-studia@yahoogroups.com/293663.html) due to it's vulgar depiction of sex and ..cursing. Many groups deemed it immoral enough that it was pulled from circulation within 2 weeks (correct me if I'm wrong). Anyway, I'm particularly interested in the last scenes of this movie. A high school girl is standing on a platform talking about something (I didn't pay attention). Many people such as fellow students and some adults watch her. After she finish talking, she pause. But everybody seems waiting her to say something. Finally...

The boiling frog: Internet censorship (Fitna) in Indonesia.

Have you heard the story of boiling frog? Taken from wikipedia: "The boiling frog story states that a frog can be boiled alive if the water is heated slowly enough — it is said that if a frog is placed in boiling water, it will jump out, but if it is placed in cold water that is slowly heated, it will never jump out." This blog told me about a decision of a major ISP in Indonesia to censor the controversial fitna film. Regardless of whether that movie deserved to be ban or not, I fear that this censorship is the beginning of boiling frog phenomenon. The justification for the next censorships will be more and more ridiculous that it won't take too long for Indonesia returning to a police state again.. And I do think that the censorship decision is ridiculous. Yes it is probably important to ban this movie in Europe where a majority or people in power are not moslem, because the hatred towards moslem induced by that film put many minority moslems in trouble. But in Ind...