Globalization and Poverty
Everywhere, food production is becoming a negative economy, with farmers spending more buying costly inputs for industrial production than the price they receive for their produce. The consequence is rising debts and epidemics of suicides in both rich and poor countries. Cows in the European Union receive on average $2 per day in subsidies. Animals such as chickens are intensively reared rather than allowed to roam free or reared in chicken arks. Over 1 billion people live in the world on less than $1 dollar a day.
Many farmers who traditionally grew pulses and millets and paddy have been lured by seed companies to buy hybrid cotton seeds and other GM crops, which were supposed to make their lives easier and wealthier. Instead they faced bankruptcy and ruin.
Their native seeds have been displaced with new hybrids which cannot be saved and need to be purchased every year at a high cost. Hybrids are also very vulnerable to pest attacks. All pesticides have to be bought from the company that sold them the seeds; there have been reports of blatant profiteering from these companies.
It is experiences such as these which tell me that we are so wrong to be smug about the new global economy. It is time to stop and think about the impact of globalization on the lives of ordinary people. This is vital if we want to achieve sustainability.
We are repeatedly told that without genetic engineering and globalization of agriculture the world will starve, it is constantly promoted as the only alternative available for feeding the hungry.
Farmers in the Third World are encouraged by the IMF and the World Bank to produce cash crops for export. There are usually commodities that can be easily bought and sold on the World Markets. With fluctuating world prices, Fair trade is what can drag farmers and communities out of poverty. In some African countries it is cheaper to buy American sugar and coffee than it is to buy locally produced goods. This is because of over production and subsidies in the West which means that they then dump these goods on Africa destroying local markets.
When patents are granted to companies for seeds and plants, as in the case of basmati, saving and sharing seed is defined as theft of intellectual property. Corporations which have broad patents on crops such as cotton, soya bean and mustard are suing farmers for seed-saving and hiring detective agencies to find out if farmers have saved seed or shared it with neighbours.
As Gandhi reminded us, ‘The Earth has enough for everyone’s needs, but not for some people’s greed.’
This article has been adapted with the kind permission from Food Patents ‘Stealing Indigenous Knowledge’,Anup Shah,2006
Davinos Greeno
http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/globalization-and-poverty-84540.html
Tags: chickenarks, globalization, GM crops
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:28 am
Globalization is a source of poverty: True or False?
The impoverished masses see Globalization as the source of their poverty. Do you agree?
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:30 am
its looking true
References :
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:32 am
False
References :
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:34 am
False. Being a slacker dumb azz with no education causes poverty.
References :
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:36 am
Someone who was making 4 cents a day before might be making 5 cents a day now… that’s a 25% increase is income!!!!!
References :
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:38 am
True
You would not be able to make money with globalization if you were paying your workers the true value of their work, it would not be worth it. Globalization is about taking advantage of a population and shifting their wealth to the company doing it.
Perfect example is NAFTA. No workers lives have improved in Mexico, that is why we have the illegal immigration problem here.
References :
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6573660441809242121&ei=PectSYKdOIigqgKzjaDgDQ&q=michael+parenti
Watch that vid if you don't get it!
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:40 am
False
Conservatism is the source of poverty.
References :
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:42 am
False.
Even Krugman got this one right.
http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/smokey.html
References :
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:44 am
From a reviewer @ amazon.com
I was originally born in Uganda and I can assure you that Africans have always been suspicious of the so-called “aid” they receive since it almost always comes after a crisis that they can’t quite explain (like how did a bunch of poor, illiterate preteens get the money to buy those fancy weapons, or why won’t aid agencies buy food from the local farmers and distribute THAT).
Suspicions and rumors are insufficient to counter what appears, on the surface, to be international generosity. That is why I am grateful for Chossudosky’s contrarian masterwork. It confirms the fears and suspicions regarding a return to colonialism and economic slavery. The fact that Chossudosky was willing to put his career on the line to write this hard-hitting book is worthy of our attention. He shows, without a shadow of a doubt, that there is a deliberate and systematic campaign of “economic genocide” against Africa and all other resource-rich regions. Neoliberalism have mastered the British colonial-era double-speak of “liberty”, “democracy”, “markets”, etc. “Market liberalization” is nothing more than armed robbery. And “investment” is really nothing more than “asset stripping”. The Adam Smith phraseology of free-trade and free markets is used, much like their British predecessors, to recolonize the world. Chossudosky shows how the “Washington Consesus” has embarked on a foreign policy strategy of economic sabotage and “strangulation.” As Kissinger famously ordered, in the now declassified National Security Memorandum 200, Africans should be kept from becoming consumers of their own raw materials.
Chossudosky does an enormous favors to us neophytes by decoding the neoclassical econo-babble. His brilliant deconstruction of IMF structural adjustment policies is worth the price of this book alone. But he goes beyond that. He shows how nations can be brought to their knees through currency devaluations and speculative attacks. The whole cynical process of creating the crisis then blaming it on the victims, i.e. the “Asian” Crisis which is in fact an American Crisis, or the excuse used to maintain Odious Debt on impoverished nations: “their corrupt leaders are to blame for the Odious Debt”. Yes but those “corrupt” leaders were trained at American military bases (much like the 9/11 hijackers), and are killing us with American made weapons (thanks again Kissinger). Besides, everytimes Africans (or Latin Americans) try to put a reformer or socialist democrat in power, he develops a nasty habit of being assisinated.
This book will make you angry at how long and how often you’ve been lied to. Everything you thought you knew about economics will be tested as the Machiavellian machinations of international creditors, grain companies, and financial “investors” is revealed in page after riveting page. I also recommend Michael Hudson’s Super Imperialism and Horowitz’ Emerging Viruses. If it’s not out of print then get The Merchants of Grain. Some publishing companies are refusing to publish some of these books because of their controvesial nature so get them before they’re made “out of print”.
References :
http://www.amazon.com/Globalization-Poverty-New-World-Order/dp/0973714700/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1227745000&sr=1-2
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:46 am
False:
Although it is true that there are still hundreds of millions of people living in desperate poverty. The fact is, the share of people living on a dollar a day or less has plummeted from 40% in 1981 to 18 % in 2004, and is estimated to fall to 12% by 2015. China's growth alone has lifted more than 400 million people out of poverty. Poverty is falling in countries housing 80% of the world's population. The 50 countries where the earth's poorest people live are basket cases that need urgent attention. In the other 142 - which include China, India, Brazil, Russia, Indonesia, Turkey, Kenya, and South Africa - the Poor are slowly being absorbed into productive growing economies. For the first time ever we are witnessing true GLOBAL growth. So globalization is in fact irradicating poverty.
References :
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:48 am
Not at all- poverty has been the norm since the beginning of time. The vast majority of the world’s population lives in poverty and it is NOT caused by globalization but by unique factors to each region such as cultural norms and customs, climate, ignorance about better agricultural practices, the poor being the ones that breed like rabbits, poor sanitation practices, lack of skills and so many more.
References :
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:50 am
Oh yeah, that is what matters most in any father’s or mother’s mind worldwide when their children cry out for food or medical aid…
References :
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:52 am
False.
Liberalization is the source of poverty. Liberals thrive on poverty. It makes them feel self-righteous and warm & fuzzy when they can visit foreign countries and hand out candy bars.
Poverty feeds the liberals desire to be needed. It gives them the opportunity to create more and more government programs, so they can show everyone how wonderful they are as they pass out all those welfare checks.
Need milk? Love a liberal. Need cheese? Love a liberal. Need your mortgage payment paid or a free college tuition? Vote for a liberal.
Need a bailout? No worries…the liberals are in charge! And they will spend every dime your children and grandchildren ever make to make sure you know they gave it to you!
References :
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:54 am
If American workers making $15 an hour are forced to compete for jobs with Chinese workers who will gladly accept $1 an hour, Americans grow poorer.
References :
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:56 am
A low paying job is better than no job, or forever looking for hand outs from the west. Looking for handouts is almost an industry in Africa .
References :
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:58 am
True when the globalization is not organised proparly, when the richer companies take ove land in poorer countries take advantage of the people their land ect it can go very wrong
References :