TTIP allegedly dead.

[Love Mountain]

Nonsense, Apple's whole business legacy is brainwashing people to buy their crap to outrageous prices. I'd join Russia's ban on Apple products anyday, to get rid of all the useless appletards who cause trade deficit. Inflation is going to hurt the Dollar, because creditors will want to replace their cash reserves with foreign currencies.

Not really.

iPhone 6s outperforms all competitors in single threaded performance. Not to mention the insane battery life, excellent camera, the Apple eco-system...

A 64GB iPhone 6S is 650$ on retail in the states.
A Samsung S7 is 590-670$...

Fact is, Apple products are excellent. They work well and are very user friendly. Whether they are the best is a matter of debate, but they are certainly market competitive, and the Apple "tax" is not as outrageous as it was before. In fact, I bought a MacBook Pro on sale for my girlfriend on sale for less than it's competitors at 2k$ when similarly euipped machines go for 2200$+

As for inflation, our dollar has been undergoing inflation for years now and the world isnt panicking. If anything they're getting more...

[Mayer]

The iPhone 6 is so awesome, it got its own meme
Also, i don't believe your price tags, the iPhone is marketed with 1/3 higher price, minimum, and the S7 is not only cheaper but also sturdy, water resistant and has a longer battery life.

Inflation has drawbacks, you know. Just look at Venezuela.

[Sir Adrian]

Don't blame globalization for decreased purchasing power of the common citizen. Blame organized money. America is pretty much all about service jobs. Death of organized labor and wage increases are the result of intense lobbying by corporate interests that demonized minimal wages as "Socialist Communist Evil" and Unions as "Anti-Labor".

The only reason those companies were able to get away with it is because of globalism. They could tell their employees there is always somebody in India ready to take their job for a quarter pay and they could tell the government that there are always poorer countries who will welcome all their profits and business. If globalism did not exist, if corporations did not have the option to simply "run out of town" they would have no other solution but to provide decent conditions for their workers.

Furthermore to call an ideology which promotes the destruction of local culture and practices, without exception, the maximization of exploitation of both natural and human resources by market players (aka corporations) and the creation of an elitist global super-government a force for good is both laughable and very frightening at the same time.

Globalization is ultimately a positive force. I want everyone in the world to have access to good schooling, technology, and food.

None of those things have anything to do with globalism, at all. In fact if you look at china, africa, south america and india globalism did the exact opposite. Bolivians no longer have free access to clean water because globalism allowed Bechtel to muscle in and confiscate all water in the country, Brazilians are starving in the thousands because globalism allowed american and european soy producers to move in and ruin the land, Africa is full of epidemics because globalism allowed Nestle to dump its failed artificial baby milk in the guise of real milk and destroy the immune system of tens of millions of people across three generations.

Or maybe you like to learn how you iphone, nokia, fubu, adidas, nike, reebok or ugg boots were made. That is the real face of globalism, not the sweet lies you get told in infomercials and pamphlets.

[Abdülmecid I]

The social-economic issues you mention are actually derived from the castrated way with which globalization has been applied. Namely globalization for corporation rights, while workers' and human, in general, rights, remain obstructed by national boundaries. Of course, such an inconsistency is far from unintentional, but that's not a reason to wholly reject the merits of globalization, in what concerns the advantages that either have already occurred (easier transportation through the limitation of bureaucratic labyrinths) or are going to occur, according to the ideal version of globalism.

[Love Mountain]

The only reason those companies were able to get away with it is because of globalism. They could tell their employees there is always somebody in India ready to take their job for a quarter pay and they could tell the government that there are always poorer countries who will welcome all their profits and business. If globalism did not exist, if corporations did not have the option to simply "run out of town" they would have no other solution but to provide decent conditions for their workers.

You can't outsource Retail workers. Similarly, there are a ton of jobs that cannot be outsourced and must be kept in America. The majority of our finance industry, the majority of our service industry, a lot of higher-skilled jobs...

Furthermore to call an ideology which promotes the destruction of local culture and practices, without exception, the maximization of exploitation of both natural and human resources by market players (aka corporations) and the creation of an elitist global super-government a force for good is both laughable and very frightening at the same time.

Globalization is forced on those who don't want it by greedy interests. What you are complaining about are politicians and organized money. Not the natural diffusion of technology.

None of those things have anything to do with globalism, at all. In fact if you look at china, africa, south america and india globalism did the exact opposite. Bolivians no longer have free access to clean water because globalism allowed Bechtel to muscle in and confiscate all water in the country, Brazilians are starving in the thousands because globalism allowed american and european soy producers to move in and ruin the land, Africa is full of epidemics because globalism allowed Nestle to dump its failed artificial baby milk in the guise of real milk and destroy the immune system of tens of millions of people across three generations.

Globalization

Globalization or globalisation (see spelling differences) is the process of international integration arising from the interchange of world views, products, ideas, and other aspects of culture.^[1] Advances in transportation (such as the steam locomotive, steamship, jet engine, andcontainer ships) and in telecommunications infrastructure (including the rise of the telegraph and its modern offspring, the Internet, andmobile phones) have been major factors in globalization, generating further interdependence of economic and cultural activities.^[2][3][4]Though many scholars place the origins of globalization in modern times, others trace its history long before the European Age of Discoveryand voyages to the New World. Some even trace the origins to the third millennium BCE.^[5][6] Large-scale globalization began in the 19th century.^[7] In the late 19th century and early 20th century, the connectivity of the world's economies and cultures grew very quickly.

The faults of globalization lay with power of organized money, who lobby world governments to get what they want. Just look at Iran's history, the whole reason it's so fiercely anti American is because we put corporate interests over IR interests. Moreover, nobody can argue against the benefits of better technology and access to information.

Or maybe you like to learn how you iphone, nokia, fubu, adidas, nike, reebok or ugg boots were made. That is the real face of globalism, not the sweet lies you get told in infomercials and pamphlets.

I didn't know that bringing industry to other countries is evil. Would you rather the rest of the world live off subsistence agriculture?

[Mayer]

Iran is no fan of globalization either, their islamic revolution was actually a reaction to westernization. Clinton is probably complaining right now about the digital age and the information it exposes. Local farming is essential for independence, in contrast to subsidized leftovers from western food producers flooding the market and destroying the livelihood of african farmers.

[Love Mountain]

Yes I can totally see why most nations would want to rely on subsistence agriculture to combat the evils of globalization.

[Mayer]

It would just require an end to agricultural subventions and this evil falls apart.

[Condottiere 40K]

Three dee printing will move a lot of manufacturing locally; we're moving through different industrial phases.

[Sir Adrian]

The social-economic issues you mention are actually derived from the castrated way with which globalization has been applied. Namely globalization for corporation rights, while workers' and human, in general, rights, remain obstructed by national boundaries. Of course, such an inconsistency is far from unintentional, but that's not a reason to wholly reject the merits of globalization, in what concerns the advantages that either have already occurred (easier transportation through the limitation of bureaucratic labyrinths) or are going to occur, according to the ideal version of globalism.

Globalization can only ever go in one direction, either the state and the workers (at which point it stops being globalization and reverts to the status quo) or corporate. You can't appease the goat and the cabbage at the same time. The money is with corporate so of course corporate will always win. Heck the very definition of globalism is exercising corporate interests on a global scale.

Free travel is indeed good and desirable but much like free trade it can be achieved without globalization. The schengen zone can survive without the european union, as proven by 20th century scandinavia, you don't need an integrated centralized government for it nor do you need every country to follow the same cookie cutter standard.

What future benefits do you have in mind? So far all I can see is more of the same, rich countries getting richer at the expense of the poor ones as culture and identity are eroded and replaced with an artificial persona of "the good consumer"

You can't outsource Retail workers. Similarly, there are a ton of jobs that cannot be outsourced and must be kept in America. The majority of our finance industry, the majority of our service industry, a lot of higher-skilled jobs...



Globalization is forced on those who don't want it by greedy interests. What you are complaining about are politicians and organized money. Not the natural diffusion of technology.

[/B][/B]The faults of globalization lay with power of organized money, who lobby world governments to get what they want. Just look at Iran's history, the whole reason it's so fiercely anti American is because we put corporate interests over IR interests. Moreover, nobody can argue against the benefits of better technology and access to information.



I didn't know that bringing industry to other countries is evil. Would you rather the rest of the world live off subsistence agriculture?

Globalization has nothing to do with the diffusion of technology, it is entirely and exclusively about what you call organized money.

Even the wiki definition you have posted says technological development made it easier to spread, not that technological development is a result of it or even a part of it.

In fact here is what the oxford dictionary (which cannot be edited by random user 568723458) says on the matter

The process by which businesses or other organizations develop international influence or start operating on an international scale:

Here is a definition by Cambridge

​

C1 the increase of trade around the world, especially by large companies producing and trading goods in many different countries:
We must take advantage of the increased globalization of the commodity trading business.

a situation in which available goods and services, or social and cultural influences, gradually become similar in all parts of the world: the globalization of fashion/American youth culture

Now kindly tell me where in the flying in any of the 3 definitions (yours and mine) do you see the words globalization helps the diffusion of technology.


2. Those jobs cannot sustain even a moderately large country and the fact that those jobs cannot be outsourced is not an excuse for the the jobs that can and have been outsourced. Your argument is like saying "so what if I've lost my arms and legs, my bladder and lower intestine cannot be removed by traffickers". But hey, if you enjoy working in a supermarket for minimum wage be my guest.



3. I'm not sure I would call forcing 12 year children to work 16 hour shifts in hellish conditions, while keeping the local populace in perpetual poverty so you have a constant supply of children, just to save 15 cents on the dollar "bringing industry to countries" but rather crimes against humanity. That is what globalization has brough to Africa, Asia, the Balkans and E Europe (though here they exploit 18 year olds and the desperate)

[Gaidin]

That makes no sense. Supposedly everyone in power is owned by corporations so why should that be the last chance? If one wants to peddly conspiracy theories one should stay consistent.

Politicians change. Power structures don't. There's always going to be a corporation here and there in the political power structure of the world. Maybe occasionally depending on who and how someone wins an executive office they have to effect things differently for a few years. But they're still there. In 2017, whoever wins the election, the question is, which ones.

[mrmouth]

Absolutely precious that people see this as a victory against globalization. The system is in place. You either play the game or you don't. Europe has a particular talent for shooting itself in the foot recently. US will be just fine and European central bankers will continue to drink themselves into an early grave because they know just how close to the edge Europe is. Rejecting trade due to conspiracy theories is just another nail in the coffin.

[Sir Adrian]

If I have to choose between lack of trade or cancer and obesity epidemics I choose the lack of trade.

Europeans will never accept the lack of quality control and consumer safety that you have in America nor the idea of a private enterprise telling the government what to do. Lives are more important than profits.

Besides we're trading fine just as it is. the US is our biggest export partner even without the treaty

[Condottiere 40K]

If Nestle took over most of the food corporations in America and imposed European standards, maybe.

But accountants rule.

[Basil II the B.S]

Absolutely precious that people see this as a victory against globalization. The system is in place. You either play the game or you don't. Europe has a particular talent for shooting itself in the foot recently. US will be just fine and European central bankers will continue to drink themselves into an early grave because they know just how close to the edge Europe is. Rejecting trade due to conspiracy theories is just another nail in the coffin.

Ahaha the Federal Reserve has been pumping money more than everyone to prevent a market collapse of epic proportions that would reveal how bad the US economy really is, but you blame the pot for being black. Nice one kettle.
Also, ISDS is a conspiracy theory? Wow, globalist propaganda is running out of ammos.

[Gallus]

Absolutely precious that people see this as a victory against globalization. The system is in place. You either play the game or you don't. Europe has a particular talent for shooting itself in the foot recently. US will be just fine and European central bankers will continue to drink themselves into an early grave because they know just how close to the edge Europe is. Rejecting trade due to conspiracy theories is just another nail in the coffin.

You must be one of those people who hears "free trade" and immediately supports it without reading what it actually means, because MOAR FREEDOMS!

TTIP allows companies to shape our laws. No politician ever should agree to that.

[Chukada1]

TTIP dead?

Take that China!

Next we will revoke NAFTA. That will show those commies.

[Basil II the B.S]

TTIP dead?

Take that China!

Next we will revoke NAFTA. That will show those commies.

Even better
TTIP is about free trade. It's absolutely necessary to pass it so that you don't trade with China.
Take that protectionists.

[Condottiere 40K]

You need to build a wall, along the border with Europe, an Atlantic Wall.

And no one builds Atlantic Walls better than Trump, believe me.

[fkizz]

You need to build a wall, along the border with Europe, an Atlantic Wall.

And no one builds Atlantic Walls better than Trump, believe me.

Wasn't he the one to say USA should prioritize European immigrants over South American ones?