Spslugger88 discusses how " when you start thinking logically about it (globalization), people get upset about what is going on. But at the same time they don't want it to change." I could not agree more. Like I said, if there were better options than paying people from third world countries 10 cents an hour for labor, then of course we would go with that. But the reality is, this is the most beneficial for us and unless we make a forceful move and speak up on this issue, this end of globalization will remain the same.

Capitalist globalization takes advantage of poor nations and its people. Shipping factory jobs overseas creates fewer jobs in the United States and more unemployment. A corporation using less wealthy children is not the way to go, only to save a few dollars. Understandingly capitalism is all about making the mighty dollar but at what expense. If these corporations what to save money and get positive publicity then they should open a few, not all, factories in the “3rd world” countries and pay them a decent wage. In most of these countries the dollar is worth at least six times the regular monetary unit. All the money these companies use on cover ups and redirections of the public eye would better serve the people in their pockets. The worst are the hypocrites that speak out about the poverty and the slave labor and then they go out and buy the one hundred and fifty dollar shoe that cost Nike or Reebok a few pennies to make.

Globalization is not all bad if done right, like most ideas in this world, it can be beneficial to all involved. Richard light states that one pro globalization “push down they can also pull up (Light 2).” Globalizing sports helps give children hope and desire to strive for excellence. Yet with this opportunity there is risk that they will be taking advantage of the team. Kids signing long term deals for little money at a young age because they need to get off the streets and help their families is one way that major league teams take advantage. Where is the decency and correct judgment between right and wrong for some? It has gone the way of greed and the need for more money. Changing the perception of the way the audience views these players from less affluent countries does not make these teams better. Show that these kids come from nothing and we are giving them a better life. But when they do something wrong they are thrown under the bus a cast off as worthless immigrants while home born players problems are pushed aside. King-White writes about Danny Almonte and the Little League World Series, “Making Almonte’s budding celebrity identity more compelling was the fact that as an extremely poor Dominican immigrant to New York City his story was used to provide more evidence that anyone can become ‘successful’ in the United States (King-White 2.3).” After the ridicules performance in the LLWS it was found out that the kid was too old to be pitching in this league and the media with help from public opinion totally crucified a fourteen year old boy who had nothing to do with his birth certificate. His father tried to take all the blame but the viewers chalk this up to another “bad immigrant.” Yet the media didn’t take into account that this young boy was very good at what he does and now we might never see him try his luck at the professional level.

Related to these new stadiums, and brands is global capitalism and expansion. I agree and fully support globalization as something that needs to happen. Throughout history there have always been those countries that have, and those countries that have nothing. This era of globalization is no different however; I believe globalization and ethical practices can lead to a new and better life for the less fortunate. As far as manufacturing goes, child labor laws are increasingly becoming stricter. American companies have come under fire as of late for outsourcing jobs to places where labor laws are extremely relaxed and harsh. This is true however many of these corporations have hired independent agencies to keep tabs on the factories overseas and are making sure no one is exploited. The best example of a third world country improving itself into an economic power is Japan. Shortly after WWII Japan was in ruins, yet their manufacturing sector was started and was run efficiently and ethically and the country of Japan’s hard work was honored by the global market. This can happen anywhere.
On the sport side of globalization only great things have occurred. Sports have given people of the former soviet republic a chance to make it out of poverty. Women’s tennis, men’s boxing, and women’s and men’s basketball are all prime examples of this. In addition to new influx of talent from poorer areas of the world, new emerging markets now have a chance to have their own teams and leagues which benefits the public more then monetarily. Take the example of the Russian hockey federations Superliga which is a pro league which may eventually rival the NHL. From what we have learned in economic classes over the years competition breeds success and that is the basis for globalization.

"Globalization is about the organization of production and the exploitation of markets on a world scale" (King-White, slide). There is always going to be both positive and negative sides of globalization. Personally I am against the whole idea of having children overseas killing themselves by working for little money and doing hard labor. But, our economy is suffering already and I feel that if we lost the factories who are making tons of products for little money that our economy would decline to be even worse then it already is. The laws against child labor and slavery should be better enforced then how they are today but you cannot lose this aspect of our import/export business.
People tend to forget that 10 cents over in some third world country is not the same as making 10 cents here in the United States. Again I am only concerned with the conditions in which these children have to work. People in third world countries are happy to work for this type of pay. The United States brings not only revenue to the respective companies but they also provide the people of these third world countries hopes and satisfaction as well as a life to be a factory worker. This is their version of the “American Dream” and what people think is unfair may not be to someone of another ethnicity. American people think the world is perfect for everyone but I am here to say to these people that it is not.
The global expansion of capitalism may benefit a specifically small class or group of people but it hurts many more in return. This type of globalization is destroying the world and will do so until something is fixed. This whole situation may be better then say communism but it still is not what should be going on. Corporate America will never allow anything to change and until they take a revenue cut from their own pocket, the argument will continue to be looked at for years to come.



Andrew Schwartz

A recent trend in the sporting world has been the push of franchises and leagues to be globally recognized. Until this point the focus of marketing attempts of professional sports has been the American population. In an attempt to mainly increase profits professional sports have begun the process of globalization as a way of reaching new potential markets. The fear that the American market is tapped out of resources has led league officials to search for new markets in broader areas. The concept of globalization is that we become a global community. My feelings on globalization for the time being are split. I have reasons to both support and oppose the notion of globalization.
It is my fear that with that the globalization of sport the existence of local and organic communities will end. Encouraging a global community will take values and beliefs that many local communities have around the U.S. and share them with the world. The idea of sharing local customs with someone in India or anywhere else in the world, while could be promising, scares me for the fact of individual identity being lost. Already we have begun to see the affects of the globalization of sports. Every year now the baseball season begins in Japan and once and soon to be twice a year football games are beginning to be played in foreign countries. The availability of new markets in foreign countries has truly proven to be lucrative.
As a sport management major it is my intention to one day enter the work force as a member of a professional organization. That being said it is in my best interest to support the efforts of globalization and help facilitate its existence. With a broader audience there is a greater chance of finding a suitable job and a pay that satisfies my needs. The extra revenue that can be earned by reaching new countries or discovering talents in foreign countries is some that a business man cannot turn down. Aside from the financial opportunities that present themselves with globalization is the idea, my main con, that culture will be shared and one day be the same worldwide. While I do not believe this is a remedy for world peace I do believe that an understanding of one another culture will lead to a better worldwide relationship with one another. Our world today is connected in so many ways that an event taking place across the world cannot only be instantly reported, but have an effect on our lives as well. Globalization is the next step the sporting world has to take. Although I believe there will be some repercussions the advantages heavily outweigh the disadvantages.
Strickman

Global capitalist expansion is bad in the moral sense. Our country ignores the basic needs of humanity in order to create tennis shoes for under a dollar, only to turn around and make a hundred dollars more. When money has clouded our vision of the world and our respect for human beings we have truly become out of touch with our social responsibilities and realities. If the Unites States became a third world country it would be a documentary not to miss. We take our freedoms for granted as we blatently watch the abuse of women and children who work for hours on end for pennies to create our lavish lifestyles and we give nothing in return. We create labor laws here to not allow our children to be “overworked” at a young age, yet the youth in other countries are being killed over the creation of our products while simply wanting to be just children and not work. We stand by and watch, silently accepting these conditions of others as we continue to ship out clothing material and computer parts. We do not act. What could be more wrong than this? Our message to the world is that we are all about the money. Your well being and place on this earth means nothing. Pour out your souls and drain your will so that we may become millionaires and employee generations of your families to come to keep up there. We are a nation that participates in a sick sad cycle. I am personally unaware of a solution, but as great as our dollar weighs in some of these battered countries, maybe it is our turn to start paying a little higher, share our quality of life. In turn maybe this can help the WORLD thrive.

I have always viewed globalization as a positive effect on of the international markets merging together. The concept of the “shrinking globe” focusing on the compression of time and space has always been looked at in a positive light to me. Teams, leagues, players, and brands expanding their name, image, and products on a global scale always seem like a great concept on the surface. On the other hand, we all know what’s behind the production of many of our cheap products that we purchase; however, we neglect to discuss the real issues. In a business perspective, the expansion of the global capitalist society is merely another cost beneficial aspect of the industry that keeps the market running smooth. If there were alternatives to the workers in third world countries laboring for 10 cents an hour, I would absolutely prefer that. However, the reality is that this seems to be the only legitimate option that allows our United States market to work in our, the consumers’, favor. -Gincel

Believe it or not i agree with what Mr. Hinch47 has said in his response. While ten cents is nothing over here it is a lot over there. What i found interesting in his response was how accurately he knew how much someone would earn working minimum wage for ten hours. ."But if Americans work 10 hours a day for minimum wage they make around $61 a day" I think it is about time to congratulate Mr. Hinch on the job offer he has received from McDonalds. Hinch will be working 10 hours a day, and making 61 dollars each day as head fry cook. He has signed the contract for the next 30 years.

I disagree with jacqattacq. like i siad in my response, money over there is worth more then what it is here in the US. What we think is nothing is a lot to them a US dollar is probaby worth $20 to them

I agree with Frank in the sense that yes it is important to help these countries build jobs and generate some revenue. But at what cost. We shouldn't have to hear about kids being shot because they wouldn't work for less then 10 cents an hour 7 days a week. Globalization needs to be changed to something less harmful to children.

Globalization can be an effective way to generate profits by cutting down on costs of labor dramatically. However this comes at what cost. We have seen through many examples that yes this help out big businesses everywhere moving factories to the third World countries where they can get labor for about ten cents an hour. In most of these countries however it is the children who re being forced into these conditions and in some cases are being killed. I think it is great that 1st world countries are moving into third world countries and are setting up opportunities for these weak nations to develop there economies by creating jobs. But there needs to be some regulations on this process so that children of the World are not forced to work their entire lives for basically nothing. This is also true in a sense for the Globalization of Sport. The U.S. has started globalizing their sports by creating opportunities for many people in these countries to someday achieve greatness through sport. However in many countries now the idea of playing these sports in the U.S. has consumed them and in turn has basically destroyed their economy. “To be sure the relationship between the United States and the Dominican Republic has left the latter to deprived for Little League teams, but almost completely dependent on baseball for economic growth” ( King- White, Danny Almonte,6). Ultimately I fell that this type of Globalization is a negative concept for the World because it will leave these third world countries too dependent on ideals that are somewhat unattainable, and it will eventually cause them to collapse.

Obviously, I do not condone paying any person no matter which country they come from, 10 cents a day to make shoes or clothes that I pay top dollar for. Their country and my country I guarantee can manage to splurge just a little bit more when it comes to wages for these individuals. Unfortunately, the problem that I feel is happening is that I will continue to buy these products despite the fact that those who are constructing them are paid so little. I feel trapped in corporate America because I as a single individual cannot make the difference. I also like to buy things cheap. I suppose I tend to rest along the ambivalent line and be happy that it is not me who is forced to work in these situations. As far as globalization goes, I am cynical and pessimistic and consider it a natural order of occurence for our society. This is where we are headed to, and I don't think there is much that I can do about it.

Globalization has been a touchy issue for some time now. On one hand, globalization has revolutionalized markets across the world, and made things that used to cost a fortune available for purchase for people who never could afford them before. On the other hand though, globalization has also destroyed the lives of many people living in 3rd world nations. Children and adults have been forced to work for our huge corporations for pennies a day making products that are then turned around and sold for a 1,000 % profit. It is a horrible thing to do to these people, but do we as a society really care. Everyone obviously thinks that it is a horrible thing for these people to be forced to work in these conditions, yet we all still continue to buy these products. We as a society have decided to speak out against it, yet neglect to think about it when it comes time to go shopping. I can't really say anything bad about this because i would align myself with this group. While it really is a horrible thing to destroy these people's lives, i have to think about how bad life would be without all of the luxuries that these corporations have provided me and that have become such a permanent fixture in my life. I do everything now online from shopping to talking to my friends. If suddenly i found myself with out a computer because we put up regulations on these corporations i would go crazy. Of course globalization is going to be looked at as a horrible thing until it is gone. If it were to be suddenly banned, all of the 1st world countries would crumble. Without globalization, more than half of our huge corporations that stimulate our economy would be missing. In the end, if i am forced to make a decision on which side of this argument i stand on, i hate to say it but i would go with globalization. I think that people who speak out against it are only do so because they feel guilty themselves for participating in buying the products that people overseas are forced to make for a couple of cents.

Globalization is known to be the integration of political, economic, and cultural systems across our world. Hearing about the incident where the young man was gunned down after returning home from escaping because he no longer wanted to be used as cheap labor made me think a lot. I believe there needs to be a stop put to globalization. I could never imagine myself working in a factory for less then 10 dollars let alone for 10cents. Many say globalization is an excellent way to make a huge profit on a little investment but it being at the cost of someone’s life just does not sit well with me. Once upon a time it would have been difficult for me to say I’m totally against globalization because when I would go out and by my designer shoes, purses, and attire thinking about where it came from, who made it, and how much they were paid to make it were the last questions on my mind. With that being said now that I have a better understanding of this aspect of globalization and what it really is, I feel horrible knowing that there are children working for so little and making our clothes when they are barely old enough to read or write. Globalization may never come to a complete halt do to demand of several different resources. Until all aspects dealing with globalization economics, politics, and cultural systems are all able to come to one accord change will never come bout.

Kadie Bangura

I have a hard time deciding over this issue when it comes to globalization. If we didnt have it, the products would be much more expensive. At the same time job opportunities would increase as well as the wage to pay these workers. This could eventually be benefical to our economy in this economic crisis. On the other hand, this could open job opportunities to 3rd world countries. Though they get paid dirt cheap, it is all relative. Some third world countries have people that can live off under $500 a year ( a little over a dollar a day). By increaseing the amount of work in these countries, the same effects would happen in regard to more jobs and higher wages. A great example is, 20 years ago when something was made from Japan, it was seen as cheap or tacky. Now all major electronics are from Japan and many major automobile companies. This advancement came from starting with a little profit from the "cheap products" and turning it into a leading country in the sense of its economy. The media forces us to see these sweatshops as very criminal, but in these people's native countries, it isnt seen like that. it is seen as an opportunity.

I think that since the economy is so poor right now, globalization is the only way to get us back up to #1. We may be a 1st world country but we are still struggling as if we were a 2nd world country. I feel as though globalization is a good way to not only improve our international sales and make some money for the country, but maybe we can learn from the prospering countries and take some ideals and positive issues from there.

I agree with btrott2. Globalization does make buying cheaper, and with everyone already complaining about the economy and how expensive commodities are, what would happen if the prices went up? Btrott2 also makes a good point when he mentions that companies should be active in improving working conditions overseas and regulated check ups need to happen as well. When talking about costs here, another aspect comes to my mind. Michael Stipe of R.E.M. can afford to have outsourcing changed or reduced or taken away. He is a multi-millionaire, what real concerns does he have when it comes to money? There are millions of people who need costs in the country to be where they are now, if not lower. Overall, I do agree with Btrott2 in that it is difficult to truly be on one side, but perhaps, with the economy as it is now, we might need globalization.

To me, globalization is a double-edged sword. There are negative aspects, which if rectified, might effect the living conditions I am accustomed to. However, the treatment of individuals, especially children, in poor countries is completely wrong.
The story of Masih is very tragic and there is no doubt about it, but at the same time, innocent children here are victimized on a daily basis as well. Also, if the country were to discontinue outsourcing and current business operations, costs would sky rocket in this country, only further damaging the economy.
Let me preface this next part by saying I wish we could find a solution in that treatment and pay wages overseas change to benefit them, but at the same time, not drastically change costs and spending here. However, the countries we outsource to are incredibly poor, and if we were to take these jobs away completely, would that leave those people jobless and without income? I truly do not know the answer to that, but I would be curious to find out. If we were to take the jobs away from them, this would in turn create more working opportunities for people in the U.S., but then the cost to pay these workers would have an effect on the economy. This also goes back to the discussion of companies hiring illegal immigrants to work for less, ultimately befefiting the owners anyways. Would this even be a proper solution? I still am torn between the two arguments on globalization and truthfully until corporate America decides they want to take a pay cut, I'm not sure any solution will be realized.

Globalization is one of those issues that people try not to think to about to deeply. The main reason for this is when you start thinking logically about it people get upset about what is going on. But at the same time they don’t want it to change. I fall into this same group. Even though I hear the stories about the lives people live in other countries I still end up looking at it from my point of view. I think that globalization is a great way to keep our style of life under control. When you look at most of the material goods in which we have come to enjoy here in our country we usually end up importing them into our country. I am currently looking at getting a new car and even though I would love to stay loyal and “buy American” it is much easier to go with a reliable foreign car. When I start to look at what it would cost for a single pair of shoes the price would be outrages. Then when you take into account that companies are already looking to make the largest profit possible the cost of Nike or Addis shoes would sky rocket. So even though there are people that definitely see the negative effects of globalization I am one of the luck few who would consider it a positive.

When it comes to global capitalist expansion, this is a hard topic to talk about for anyone. I believe that it’s so hard to believe that there are children who are 8 years old or younger working in factories to provide us, 1st world country, with items that we believe we “need.” However, there is also another part of me that thinks that those children or those families over there could possibly only make money this way. Yet, this still doesn’t make everything alright in my mind. Yes, we are giving jobs to families across the world to pay them a ridiculously low amount to make us our items, but there are so many jobless and homeless individuals around the United States that could use these jobs instead if you think about it.

A quote used in King-White's paper on Danny Almonte states, “Making Almonte's budding celebrity identity more compelling was the fact that as an extremely poor Dominican immigrant to New York City his story was used to provide more evidence that anyone can become ‘successful' in the United States.”(King-White, blog Globalizatioin) This is exactly why it makes it so difficult to take a strong stand against global capitalist expansion. Having the opportunity to make even a small amount of money and to have a job is what these individuals from third world countries are happy to have. I believe that having kids at such a young age being forced to work in factories is definitely wrong. They obviously don’t truly want to be there if they are constantly running away and the results is them being shot down. These third world countries might enjoy having the US companies there to provide jobs and a stimulus to their economy, but I feel that the 1st world countries are taking advantage of the 3rd world countries.

Kasi Harris

I agree with the people who are split in the argument. I know my blog was strictly con, but it is a tough decision to have to make. On one hand we are given very nice products to wear and to use. The majority of this country lives very comfortably. We are also giving a third-world country a bunch of jobs to allow their people to make money to live. On the other side, we are paying these people close to nothing and putting them in danger in the factories to work awful hours. Also, they are shipping away all of our jobs along with the factories so that in turn does not help our economy very much.

Global capitalist expansion is not a good thing. It destroys countries, while profits companies. As our economy is showing, this expansion is not even helping our businesses. Our economy is terrible and some of our biggest corporations are crumbling due to the debt they have. The global expansion of capitalism may benefit a certain class or group of people but as a whole, it is tearing the world apart. People may argue that it is giving third-world countries jobs and boosting their economy, but at what cost. These foreign workers are working for nearly nothing and for unthinkable hours. Also, if these jobs are being shipped overseas, that means the United States population is losing their job. The large corporations take away the jobs of their citizens and still expect them to pay for their over priced products. It is a wonder how some of these companies are breaking down after all the profit they make in the cheap labor they enforce. They give these people from other countries jobs making 10 cents a day and they sell the product for an outrageous profit to us. I like the idea of helping other countries by giving them jobs but do no agree with how they are treating their overseas workers, and how they are treating us. Taking away our jobs and raising prices on their products is not the right way to help our economy.

i agree with jared when he said we would be much better off if this form of global capitalist expansion did not exist. Things would be more expensive but we would not know anyhting different so it would be okay

I have been sitting here for awhile trying to take a side on global capitalist expansion. It does help America and it probably helps my everyday life but currently i think it is terrible. I live a very privileged life and do not always think about other kids in other countries who spend their entire life in a factory. I cannot believe that there are women and children working in horrible conditions making my shoes for a couple cents per day. The problem is there is really no solution. If this took place in the USA there would be away to regulate the factories and make sure they are safe but this is happening in 3rd world countries. Another thing they could do is put the factories in America, but then prices would sky rocket. The really sad thing is we would probably hurt them more by pulling the factories out of these countries because then they would be making no money. Since the concept of global capitalist expansion is a good thing than i would probably agree with it if the American companies at least doubled the rate they pay the factory workers and they regulated the factories.

I love Nike; I always have and always will. Do i totally agree with what they do? No, not always! Although it is fun whenever you get a new pair of shoes to check underneath the tongue and see what 3rd world country your shoe started out in. People always have looked down upon Nike when talks about them doing all of their “dirty work” in 3rd world countries! They hear of factory workers only making 10 cents an hour and Nike is automatically the bad guy. The fact of the matter is that in those third world countries 10 cents a day probably goes a long way for the workers. When I see tons of people working in factories getting paid I can’t feel too sorry for them. There are tons of people in our own country that would love to have some sort of work, so I can’t sympathize for the employed. It’s not as if the workers in these factories have a gun held to their head and are forced to work. Things must not be too bad if they choose to work there! I also would have to imagine that without Nike or Reebok factories putting money in these people’s pockets many would struggle to survive. Yes it’s understandable that some may argue that Nike is taking advantage of the fact that these people need Nike more than Nike needs them. To answer that problem Nike should probably double the wages of its employers that would put a lot of criticism to rest. Yes Nike would take on a huge hit in terms of their profits but they might gain some respect along the way. And even with a huge hit like that Nike will stay be doing just fine for itself. Similar to how the Dominicans need America, “Further since many of these children are in families reliant on American money in some form” (King-White, 2007 p8)These third world countries rely on Nike aka America too! So in response to the questions, yes I believe overall globalization is a good thing

I diasgree with Jared that a stand on globalization is based soley on your morals. I do not think most people are advocating child labor just to get their tennis shoes. If anything it comes down to the ignorance (not knowing) of the general public for not knowing and being educated about the extent of cruelty going on. Most Americans are against child labor but as seen after doing some extra reading, bills cannot be passed and only draw attention to the matter for a small amount of time. Its a dog eat dog world, and its part of survival especially in this economy. Where would we be as a county without globalization? Probabley in even worse shape then we are in right now.

I am somewhat torn about global capitalist expansion whenever I try and take a side on it. Overall, I would have to see I am for it. Despite the bad that comes along with globalization, there is enough good especially for our country that makes it worth it. In a time when the economy is in such a bad state, globalization makes buying much cheaper by outsourcing then it would cost to produce products in our own country. I am all for creating jobs for people in the Unite States and supporting our own production in the country, however, all outsourcing is not a bad thing. I understand the poor working conditions and the 12 year old boy, Masih, being murdered for speaking out against the poor conditions. As long as companies improve conditions of the workers in the 3rd world countries and actually check up on the factories where products are being produced with good working conditions, I have no problem with outsourcing. When I hear stories about Masih and poor working conditions for little to no money a day, that is when I have a problem. I do like buying clothes and product for cheap, but not if it costs people their lives. I guess I would have to say that I support global capitalist expansion but not one hundred percent. Some stuff we outsource can easily be produced in the states and it could generate jobs, which I am all for. It could help with unemployment and possibly help the economy regroup. Globalization is necessary, though, for the economy as well becasue it produces cheaper products.

Globilization, since its instatution, has been exploiting third world nations while negatively effecting lower and working class families in our country. As jobs here disappear, more factories and sweatshops show up in less modern countries. Globalization has led to the degeneration of American cities and could even be seen as a reason for the economic crisis we’re in now. I think it would benefit people to either have to pay a lot or make their own clothes, and farm for themselves, and drive less any way. The only people who benefit from the way it is now are the CEOs of major corporations. They pay less to have their products made and then charge more for them in the market to make more of a profit. So even the people who buy these products are being taken advantage of. Globalization needs to be stopped like imperialism was because it is just as dangerous and has just as much of an impact on the lesser developed nation. It creates a dependant relationship where the lesser nation ends up needing the coroporations, and they have to put up with the horrible condions. Eventhough I reap the benefits of globalization, I don’t think it is good, and would gladly give up those benefits for equality.

amg

I have to agree with Hinch47 when he says that even though these children are not making much money this is still a great start for these third world countries. The jobs that we are bringing into this economy might not be very profitable but they are still jobs. It allows these people to do work and that is something that has not been available to many of these people before the US came to their country. It allows at least some money-making and it gives these people work. Frank Olszewski

Global capitalist expansion is a pretty tough topic to have an opinion on for me. There is a part of me that thinks that it is ridiculous to have children working for so little and having them make us clothes when they are only seven years old or possibly younger. Then there is the other part of me that is thinking that maybe this would be the only way these people would ever make any money and that we are in some ways doing them a favor. No not a favor by paying them ten cents an week but a favor by the fact that they might not be able to work anywhere if this was not available. Another huge dilemma is that fact that there are so many people jobless in our own country and these companies are taking their business elsewhere and taking away jobs from people who need it here. A quote used in King-White’s paper on Danny Almonte states, “Making Almonte’s budding celebrity identity more compelling was the fact that as an extremely poor Dominican immigrant to New York City his story was used to provide more evidence that anyone can become ‘successful’ in the United States.” This is why it makes it so difficult to take a stand against global capitalist expansion. These people from third world countries are happy to just have the opportunity to make any money whatsoever and to have a job. I obviously think it is wrong to have kids that are seven being forced to work and when they escape being shot down. I also believe that these third world countries like these US companies being there because it adds jobs to an economy that desperately needs it. Frank Olszewski

No matter what way you look at it this global capitalist expansion has it pros and its cons. Whether you feel globalization is good or bad is completely based on your morals. From the corporate perspective it is an excellent way to make a big gain with just a little investment. When we buy our shoes and clothes we don’t think about how they were made, who made them or where they were made. Plus we don’t know which clothing and shoes were made from global expansion and which from factories here in the U.S. We all buy clothes and shoes all the time but never consider these things. Most of the people who buy clothes from globalization don’t even realize it. You could be completely against globalization and unknowingly be financially endorsing it.
What if you went to your favorite store and picked out some things but when you got to the register the cashier said to you “excuse me sir but we are required to tell you that the things you picked out are from our global expansion collection manufactured from the forced labor of young children making 10 cents a day, 7 days a week overseas. Would you still like to purchase these items?” What would you say? It’s a question of moral. Some wouldn’t care and say yes and others would be shocked and not buy the things. I would say no. Even if I was forced to buy it I wouldn’t use the things knowing how they were made. It would be hard for anyone with morals to purchase the items and actively use them. You can’t help but notice the message you’re putting out if you buy the merchandise. I’m sure most people including myself wouldn’t want to support that. But some people would like the corporate executives who organized it. They obviously wouldn’t mind purchasing the items because this is what they endorse. That is their product.
The other side of the argument would be what would happen if the global capitalist expansion didn’t exist or if it did those children were given the choice of whether they wanted to work or not and were given the same salaries that an adult sewing clothes for them in the U.S. would make. The good news is that those products from your favorite store that you wanted to buy would not be from children forced into labor but the bad news is that it’s going to take more money to pay for those same things. So for those who are against globalization you need to ask yourselves if you feel strongly enough on your position to pay extra when you shop for those children overseas. My position is that I would prefer to have it so that that kind of global expansion ever existed. That way at least I wouldn’t be any disputes about paying more for the same products. I feel that that form or globalization shouldn’t have been allowed to have a start. The profiting of the exploitation of children being forced into labor is wrong no matter what negative results from the morally right alternative.

Everyone cannot be a winner in this world. but i think we need to be more considerate about other countries and what our corporations' actions do to their enivironment and and economy. serious action and law enforcement needs to occur. the us consumer benefits from outsourcing and business wise i don't think it should stop. the u.s. needs to have some sort of rules that the companies have to abide buy in order to sell their products in the u.s. as long as the company is based in the u.s. globalization is a neccessary evil, the world is now to small to avoid it, but it needs to be monitored to keep these bad and evil things from occuring. the countries that corporation out source to need to govern themselves accordinaly also, child labor laws are different everywhere, americans can't control and be responible for things that happen in india, or anywhere else for that matter. that is an issue that needs to be dicussed and debated in on a global platform.
ultimately i think globalization has the potential to be a good thing, i just think some of the people are to corupt to handle it in a respectful manner.


i agree with 9 Tremblay Road the u.s. economy at this point is to damaged to worry about the effects of outsourcing, it will hurt us more than help. if we did so yes, we would create more american jobs but the prices of the products we make would also go up considerably, it wouldn't be a good thing for the economy.

Global capitalist expansion can be looked at both bad and good. Good for the 1st world countries and bad for the 3rd world countries. I personally think that globalization is good. I'm not sure if that’s because I’ve never been to a 3rd world country or that I have never seen kids underage working seven days a week. Growing up in America, People from our generation were never exposed to having underage children work. While I have heard stories from my grandfather about him having to work to help support his family at a young age. Don't get me wrong I do think that it is terrible that there are kids in 3rd world countries are working nonstop for next to nothing. But the truth is that’s where all countries have to start. To me I think that it is smart of big companies like Nike and Reebok to have most of their products made in 3rd world countries. Isn't that what America is known for? We have big companies worth billions of dollars. There is no possible way if they were to keep these jobs in the U.S. that these companies would be worth as much as they are now. While civilians in other country's don’t get paid a lot for work, I’m sure that what they get paid goes a lot further over there then it would in the U.S. I’m not saying that the 10 cents an hour some people make is good. But if Americans work 10 hours a day for minimum wage they make around $61 a day. In Pakistan where Masih was from worked for 10 cents an hour for 10 hours, he would make 60.70 Rupee. Yes it is worth less but in a 3rd world country it’s not all that bad. I do believe that the corporations could pay them more and still turn over big profits. At the same time if they weren’t sewing clothes, would they really be making more money doing something else? While some people think that it is a terrible I see it as bringing more jobs to 3rd world countries and trying to help their economies out. That is why I think that pro's of globalization outweigh the con's and therefore is good.

I am not saying that I agree with Globalization neccessarily but, I do agree with what Slickwilly when he says that now since the econemy is doing so poorly, many people are more in support of globalization. He is also right that the econemy won't get any better by us exploiting 3rd world coutries to turn a profit!
Erin Ragan

It is hard for me to take a stand against this kind of globalization Our economy depends so much on this kind of globalization to help us to over turn our economy since we as Americans are too lazy to even make our own products. A person would have to look at the moral aspect of this global capitalism. There are families that are getting paid merely pennies to product the products that we pay hundreds of dollars for (sneakers, etc). We are against the aspect but yet we are doing very little to fix the issue. We are toughening the immigration laws which are not allowing the people from other countries to escape these types of conditions. Global capitalism also takes alot from the American people even though the corporations only pay pennies on a dollar to these children that are breaking their backs to feed their families with the money they make from this child labor. The only reason people are for this form of global capitalism is because it is bringing revenue into the American economy. Money hungry Americans. This is why a plethora of the international country secretly hates/loves us. Our business is helping their poverty stricken country but yet millions of kids are being killed if they try to escape the facilities. Our hunger for revenue supports this immoral kind of global capitalism.

Kierra Palmer

I would have to agree with 9 Tremblay Road when he says, " with the economy the way it is today, I don't think cutting down on the expansion is a great idea at this point." I do not like paying a jillion dollars for shoes and apples like he referred to, but this economy for a lack of better words- down right stinks. We cannot afford to cut back on globalization at this point because if we do we will be paying taxes out the wazooo for the next 200 years to get us back on track economically.

Global capitalist expansion in many ways helps 1st world countries, and hurts 3rd worlds countries undeniably. It is very unfortunate that children are being put to work for next to nothing for an entire day seven days a week. Anyone would agree that this is not right and not the way to live one's life to the fullest especially if one is being forced to work under such circumstances. But as we have learned as a country in just the past decade that these third world countries and the east hemisphere do not value life like we do. Authoritarian governments in the eastern hemisphere punish crimes in a much more dramatic manner than we do. There is not a 'innocent until proven guilty' way of thinking or a right to a trial by jury in any and all criminal offenses. Most of the time if you have been presumed to commit a crime you are shot, lynched, or killed right on the spot. A great example of how people of these different cultures value life much less are the Japanese Kamakazies and the men who crashed their planes into the world trade center buildings. Life is not valued as highly as we do here in the states which makes us as a country more vulnerable to the rest of the world. The point I am trying to make here is yes, children in sweatshops making our clothes and our shoes for chump change and then industries like Reebok making a billion dollar industry out of them seems like stealing. But then again like King-White said, 'who are we to say that they shouldn’t work for 10 cents an hour if they want to?' Of course it would be highly unlikely if some child did want to work under such conditions, but then again its the government thats letting this happen not companies expanding globalization. In the United States an instance like this is forbidden, so we let people come to America-some support it but most do not- to start a new life and work hard.

By being born in this country I already had an advantage. I am part of the upper, middle class and lived a great childhood. So considering this, does that mean just because people in other countries are suffering from poverty means I have to give up what I have to make things fair? Why should I have to give up what I have earned individually- mostly of what was earned from hard work- to compensate others who HAVE a chance to come to America and start over? Whatever happened to survival of the fittest by Charles Darwin? Competiton is what makes America, and maybe against what others think, the World great. I will help out people and children in third world countries to make their lives better but I am not going to switch places. Danny Almonte made it to New York as an immigrant, and had the talent to become a great ball player. What his father and coach made him do was wrong but I am sure that Danny-at 14, did not wake up one morning and say to himself 'lets scam the Little League World Series and cheat.' Danny had talent and in the Dominican Republic, baseball is everything. "...baseball prowess is a valued part of the Dominican male identity' (King-White, 2008, pg. 7). Danny came to America, made a name for himself-though not the way he wanted, but nonetheless drew some success which in my book is the essential part of the 'American Dream' for many.

"Globalization is about the organization of production and the exploitation of markets on a world scale" (King-White, slide). There are both positive and negative sides of globalization. Globalization may give some people the chance to better their situations, and to some 10 cents a day may be helpful and all they need. Sure, they are making products that benefit the first world consumer but that is simply because they are not up to speed as us. Some of the people working see it purely as work and do not realize what poor conditions and pay they are receiving. They feel like they are just lucky to have a job and be bringing in some money. However, when it comes to the point when children are being forced to work and beaten and mistreated when they do not want to there is a serious problem. As was the case of Masih, there comes a point when enough is enough. The little boy was trying to escape because this was not the life he wanted. It is not easy to get out of that cycle and in this case ended up costing Masih his life.

For the few "lucky" ones who do escape lifestyles of poverty and disfortune they make their way to America. An example would be Danny Almonte a young boy who came to America with dreams of playing baseball and improving his life style. Danny Almonte, who became famous in a sense, had his hard times and trials, showing the difference between Dominicans and United States citizens in regards to being treated unequally. At one point "Almonte was still being celebrated as an example of what is gooda bout the U.S neoliberal corporate structure for he was able to pull himself from the terrible conditions of small-town Dominica, and be 'governed' to become: an ideal neo-liberal citizen..not just committed to hard-work but...one commiteed to biological self-betterment" (King-White, pg 16). This attitude did not last long, as he was villified after adults had lied about his age.
After this, Americans fell back to relying and basing him of sterotypes of being lazy and such."The American public is generally ignorant to the fact that the United States has systematically destroyed any hope for Dominican national economic growth outside of baseball. In many ways the Dominican Republic remains a 'simple' country, because the American government has fashioned it in that way. Initially this was constructed through the empowerment of American-friendly dicatator, Rafael Trujillo, then through the aforementioned influx of U.S owned corporations" (King-White, pg 29). This is unfortunate because since Americans do not understand or even know this they follow and believe many of the stereotypes they have heard and do not even give them the chance.

It is even harder for imigrants who are not playing sports. "Dominicans [have] left their homeland pressured by economic needs, the desire to improve their lives, and encouraged by a de facto immigration policy that facilatated their exodus. Once in the U.S., most Dominicans encounter an economy that increasingly demands skills and levels of schooling they do not possess. Rather than a prosperous life, in the new land, Dominicans face high unemployment levels and an alarming state of pverty. Paradoxically, while the needs of Dominicans continue to be unmet in the new society, the social policies and the conditions that pish them out of their country remain in effect...In the end, poor Dominicans are pished back and forth by both societies whose immigration policies mask their unwillingness to repsong to the needs of the group" (King-White, pg 6). This is unfair yet competlely understandable. Unemployment rates are at an all time low right now for citizens of the United States due to the economy, it is even harder for people coming from a different country with a language barrier to try to start a new life over here. Therefore, if people are leaving their countries to find a better life, they get to America and cannot even get the life they envisioned.

Given the unfairness of the situation I do not think that it is completely the United State's total fault. Nor are we the ones to begin fixing this. The way the economy has been we are probabley helping other countries out. In addition, we need to look out for the benefit and well being of our own country. In a sense it is a win win situation, we are getting the things we need made cheaply by outsourcing and they are getting paid. Who knows what would be going on if they did not have things that we needed being made? Their country and economic status could be in even worse shape.

Global capitalist expansion is a tough subject to take a side on. Each side has its pros and cons, and to be honest, it really depends on how deep you want to get with your morals, or how screwed our economy is at the moment. If you are the kind of person that enjoys getting their apples for 5 bucks a piece, and loves paying 200 dollars for your shoes, then I would assume you are very against the concept. Me on the other hand, enjoy my apples at under a buck a pop, and even though shoes are on the pricy side now a days, would much rather pay a hundred rather than two. With the economy the way it is today, I don’t think cutting down on the expansion is a great idea at this point. As a matter of fact, that is one of the last things we should be doing. I agree with people when they say that it is morally wrong, and these children should be making much more money than 10 cents a day, but then again, I don’t see people refusing to buy the fruits, or not going out and buying shoes anymore. It’s a tough argument to follow and to pick a side, but for me, I would just say let’s leave things how they are, and not start anything that would eventually screw us anymore in the financial department then we already are.
Scott Rappaport.

There isn't anything more inhumane than child labor and slavery. No child should be subjected to the conditions the children in Pakistan faces with child labor. Unfortunately, these children are expected to work to support their family. These children and their family live in poverty and the children can't afford to attend school. However, this should not be a reason to penalize global capitalist expansion because 3rd world nations condone child labor. There are laws against child labor and slavery but very little effort is made to enforce the laws. Until such time this bad behavior is corrected, this type of environment will continue to exist. Should there be public policy wherein the United States boycotts Nike? Or should individuals be left to make that decision knowing that Nike has been involved with child labor in Pakistan. We are a nation of democracy which goes hand and hand with capitalism and I am an advocate of global capitalist expansion; individuals should be left to make their own decisions on what and when to buy. This doesn't necessarily mean equality for all but the opportunity for all. While many individuals believe that the global capitalism system is problematic, history has not proven anything any better; control over all economic activities certainly isn't the answer. Clearly, politics plays a significant role in the markets. While many believe that capitalism breeds the pursuit of money and ignore other social considerations, it brings many benefits including the increase of productivity and innovation. There are [many] times where the government imposes too many restrictions that do not serve the global economy very well. One doesn't have to look very far for examples (current bailouts). Our democratic freedom hinges on global capitalism.

There are two different ways to looks at Globalization. There is the view of corporations, that sees global capitalist expansion simply as more money. Then there is the view of the producers of globalized products who live in 3rd world countries and are being forced to make them for as little as 10 cents a day. When you think about the things that we enjoy living in a 1st world country like globally based food and textiles, and technology such as satellite television, we don’t think about how there are 3rd world countries who are becoming more poor to provide us with these luxuries so that our country can grow and gain more money. By exploiting the workers who produce our products we are taking their lives away. Many 3rd world countries use child labor to make globalized products, being paid merely pennies so that people in 1st world countries can buy cheaper cars, computers, clothes etc.
I realize that if these sorts of things were not taking place that I probably wouldn’t be able to afford many of the things I have now. With out globalization 1st world countries might not be as rich and we might not be able to enjoy global sport heroes or watch global sports on satellite television. With the good parts of globalization comes the bad, and one must decide whether the good out weighs the bad. Corporations who are making more money than ever right now by globally expanding would argue that the good does out weigh the bad, because what’s happening is 3rd would countries doesn’t effect them. But I think that the bad out weighs the good. Even though every good aspect of globalization is something we want, it isn’t something we need. I think that having better living standards is something that the child laborers of 3rd world countries need more. Hearing stories about kids who are murdered, such as Misih’s, for not cooperating when being forced to sew products for us makes me feel horrible. I think that Global organizations like the UN need to step in and try to stop what is happening in those 3rd world countries that are exploiting their people. It is only helping the rich become richer and the poor become poorer. If corporations want to continue to expand globally, they should do it in a way that does not exploit the work forces of 3rd world countries.
Erin Ragan

What is my stand on globalization? It is a difficult question to answer for me, because I don’t want to sound cold hearted but then again I don’t think it is wrong. Our economic system has turned into a system that doesn’t produce actual products. Its just too expensive for us to do. Our economy focuses purely on coming up with new and better ideas and technologies and then outsourcing to other countries to actually build the product. I do not see this as a bad thing. Our country needs to outsource or else everything would be entirely too expensive. The countries that take on our production and exploit their people is not the U.S. companies doings. I honestly believe these foreign countries want our companies there. It is producing jobs for their economy that isn’t advanced enough yet to come up with new ideas that can compete with our country’s ideas. If anything we are helping these third world countries out, not hindering them. People say that is horrible that these people are making ten cents a day and I agree but people forget about the currency exchange. Ten cents in American money is nothing to us, but it could be a good deal of money to them in their respected currency. Especially since their standards of living and cost of living is less since they are a 3rd world country.
Do I believe it is right that kids are being put to work in unsafe conditions and worse, being put to death because they do not want to continue to work in these unsafe conditions? No I do not think it is right. I think it is a horrible thing, what happened to that boy and what is happening to other young children around the world. But I do not think it is the U.S.’s responsibility to change it. The U.S. was able to come up with solutions to this very problem. Less than 200 years ago our country was a 3rd world country as well, and we didn’t have labor laws for our children either. These very things were happen to our own citizens. We as a country rose above it our problems and became a power in this world, because our citizens got fed up with the way things were. I believe that if the people of these 3rd world countries get fed up enough, they too can change the condition and will one day be a 1st world country.
I do believe it is a good thing for globalization. But 3rd world countries need to provide better laws and regulations for their working citizens.

The topic of global capitalist expansion epitomizes the idea good and evil. On one hand you have the 1st World country of America basking itself the phenomenon known as internationalization and on the other hand you have 3rd World countries who are feeling the brunt of our new found fixation on globally uniform and locally diverse sports brands and items. Over the decade we have seen global expansion of leagues, teams, and players throughout the world. David Beckham left England to see how his global appeal is in America. “Just as US leagues and teams look abroad for “market expansion”, so major sport entities such as Manchester United look at the US market as a lucrative, and relative untapped, source of fans/customers” (King-White-2008-J, Slide 60). The NBA has seen its’ share of internationalization, with the 2002 draft “five out of the first sixteen players drafted were from outside the U.S.” (King-White-2008-J, Slide 38). Who could forget the man who made multiculturalism popular Tiger Woods. “Because of Woods’ presence, corporate and television money has been thrown at the tour since 1996. It has helped golf rise the label of a ‘niche’ sport, and Woods has become perhaps the most famous athlete in the world” (King-White-2008-J, Slide 83). In 2008, Richelieu, Lopez, and Desbordes concluded that “A global brand needs to provide relevant meaning and experience to people in multiple markets, and this depends on the brand’s capabilities and competencies, the strategies of its competing brands and the outlook of consumers Being global does in itself create perceptions of brand superiority, quality and preference among consumers” (p. 4). Global sport cultures are clashing and on the outside it looks like a positive venture but as you take a closer look you see the true consequences of our privileges. The outsourcing that goes on in this country despises me. Here we are as Americans telling everyone how to run their country properly and how they should view us as role models. Professor touched on this issue in his blog about the kids sewing soccer balls 7 days a week for measly pay and foreign countries are suffering from environmental destruction and economic decline. If people were not sewing our clothes for 10 cents a day or if our companies could not turn a larger profit by having someone in a 3rd World Country make cheap microchips for our computers then we probably would be headed in the direction of a 3rd World country. It is a dog eat dog world out there and no matter how badly a utopian society would be a great alternative it is just not feasible. Everything no matter how you spin it comes directly down to money. According to King-White (2008), “dominant neoliberal discourse is shielding the inherent inequalities attendant in our current governmental system from the eyes of those who would benefit most from its change my aim is to help foster a more democratic, socially just society by helping to wrestle with the Algerian mythologies that prevail through popular discourse and governmental rhetoric” (p. 33).

To comment on slickwilly686 thoughts I do agree that unfortunately now during a recession is the time when supporters of global capitalist expansion come out. It would be very hard during these times to promote nationalism.

Global capitalist expansion may in some instances provide people with an opportunity for a better life but more times then not it exploits the labor force in 3rd world countries. The worst part about the exploitation is that it involves children. Kids like the one mentioned by Dr. King-White are being put into factories under terrible working conditions to make our Reebok’s for next to nothing. Children here in America get to enjoy their youth while kids in 3rd world countries don’t even get to experience youth.

The 1st world, America in particular, is a major benefactor of global capitalist expansion. Our corporations and economy are tied to the livelihood of many other countries. 1st world countries are setting back these nations economically and socially simply because it helps them and because they can get away with it. The rich in 3rd world countries allow corporations to come in and start factories to exploit THEIR people. Some sort of reform needs to occur within the countries or global organizations like the United Nations needs to get seriously involved.

The recession that is occurring in our country right now might convince supporters of global capitalist expansion that now is more a time then ever to have this. But by supporting this, we are ultimately betraying our conscience. The economy is not going to get better by turning a profit through 3rd world labor. Companies need to rethink the structures of their work force so that they can turn a profit without having to outsource labor to the 3rd world.

Bill Reem