Globalization

 Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam – the world is a family

 What is globalization?
Globalization or globalization is the process of interaction and integration among
people, companies, and governments worldwide. As a complex and multifaceted
phenomenon, globalization is considered by some as a form of capitalist
expansion which entails the integration of local and national economies into a
global, unregulated market economy. Globalization is the spread of products,
technology, information, and jobs across national borders and cultures. In
economic terms, it describes an interdependence of nations around the globe
fostered through free trade.

On the upside, it can raise the standard of living in poor and less developed
countries by providing job opportunity, modernization, and improved access to
goods and services. On the downside, it can destroy job opportunities in more
developed and high-wage countries as the production of goods moves across
borders.

Globalization is a social, cultural, political, and legal phenomenon.

 Socially, it leads to greater interaction among various populations.

 Culturally, globalization represents the exchange of ideas, values, and
artistic expression among cultures.
 Globalization also represents a trend toward the development of single
world culture.
 Politically, globalization has shifted attention to intergovernmental
organizations like the United Nations (UN) and the World Trade
Organization (WTO).
 Legally, globalization has altered how international law is created and
enforced.
 Globalization has sped up to an unprecedented pace since the 1990s, with
public policy changes and communications technology innovations cited as
the two main driving factors.
 China and India are among the foremost examples of nations that have
benefited from globalization.
  One clear result of globalization is that an economic downturn in one
country can create a domino effect through its trade partners.

 History of globalization
Silk roads (1st century BC-5th century AD, and 13th-14th centuries AD)

People have been trading goods for almost as long as they’ve been
around. But as of the 1st century BC, a remarkable phenomenon occurred.
For the first time in history, luxury products from China started to appear on
the other edge of the Eurasian continent – in Rome. They got there after
being hauled for thousands of miles along the Silk Road. Trade had
stopped being a local or regional affair and started to become global.

That is not to say globalization had started in earnest. Silk was mostly a
luxury good, and so were the spices that were added to the intercontinental
trade between Asia and Europe. As a percentage of the total economy, the
value of these exports was tiny, and many middlemen were involved to get
the goods to their destination. But global trade links were established, and
for those involved, it was a goldmine. From purchase price to final sales
price, the multiple went in the dozens. The Silk Road could prosper in part
because two great empires dominated much of the route. If trade was
interrupted, it was most often because of blockades by local enemies of
Rome or China. If the Silk Road eventually closed, as it did after several
centuries, the fall of the empires had everything to do with it. And when it
reopened in Marco Polo’s late medieval time, it was because the rise of a
new hegemonic empire: the Mongols. It is a pattern we’ll see throughout
the history of trade: it thrives when nations protect it, it falls when they
don’t.

Spice routes (7th-15th centuries)

The next chapter in trade happened thanks to Islamic merchants. As the

new religion spread in all directions from its Arabian heartland in the 7th
century, so did trade. The founder of Islam, the prophet Mohammed, was
famously a merchant, as was his wife Khadija. Trade was thus in the DNA
of the new religion and its followers, and that showed. By the early 9th
century, Muslim traders already dominated Mediterranean and Indian
Ocean trade; afterwards, they could be found as far east as Indonesia,
which over time became a Muslim-majority country, and as far west as
Moorish Spain.

The main focus of Islamic trade in those Middle Ages were spices. Unlike
silk, spices were traded mainly by sea since ancient times. But by the
medieval era they had become the true focus of international trade. Chief
among them were the cloves, nutmeg and mace from the fabled Spice
islands – the Maluku islands in Indonesia. They were extremely expensive
and in high demand, also in Europe. But as with silk, they remained a
luxury product, and trade remained relatively low volume. Globalization still
didn’t take off, but the original Belt (sea route) and Road (Silk Road) of
trade between East and West did now exist.

Age of Discovery (15th-18th centuries)

Truly global trade kicked off in the Age of Discovery. It was in this era, from
the end of the 15th century onwards, that European explorers connected
East and West – and accidentally discovered the Americas. Aided by the
discoveries of the so-called “Scientific Revolution” in the fields of
astronomy, mechanics, physics and shipping, the Portuguese, Spanish and
later the Dutch and the English first “discovered”, then subjugated, and
finally integrated new lands in their economies.

The Age of Discovery rocked the world. The most (in)famous “discovery” is
that of America by Columbus, which all but ended pre-Colombian
civilizations. But the most consequential exploration was the
circumnavigation by Magellan: it opened the door to the Spice islands,
cutting out Arab and Italian middlemen. While trade once again remained
small compared to total GDP, it certainly altered people’s lives. Potatoes,
tomatoes, coffee and chocolate were introduced in Europe, and the price of
spices fell steeply.

Yet economists today still don’t truly regard this era as one of true
globalization. Trade certainly started to become global, and it had even
been the main reason for starting the Age of Discovery. But the resulting
global economy was still very much soloed and lopsided. The European
empires set up global supply chains, but mostly with those colonies they
owned. Moreover, their colonial model was chiefly one of exploitation,
including the shameful legacy of the slave trade. The empires thus created
both a mercantilist and a colonial economy, but not a truly globalized one.
  The waves of globalization
First wave of globalization (19th century-1914)

This started to change with the first wave of globalization, which roughly occurred
over the century ending in 1914. By the end of the 18th century, Great Britain had
started to dominate the world both geographically, through the establishment of
the British Empire, and technologically, with innovations like the steam engine,
the industrial weaving machine and more. It was the era of the First Industrial
Revolution.

The “British” Industrial Revolution made for a fantastic twin engine of global
trade. On the one hand, steamships and trains could transport goods over
thousands of miles, both within countries and across countries. On the other
hand, its industrialization allowed Britain to make products that were in demand
all over the world, like iron, textiles and manufactured goods. “With its advanced
industrial technologies,” the BBC recently wrote, looking back to the era, “Britain
was able to attack a huge and rapidly expanding international market.”

The resulting globalization was obvious in the numbers. For about a

century, trade grew on average 3% per year. That growth rate propelled exports
from a share of 6% of global GDP in the early 19th century, to 14% on the eve of
World War I. As John Maynard Keynes, the economist, observed: “The inhabitant
of London could order by telephone, sipping his morning tea in bed, the various
products of the whole Earth, in such quantity as he might see fit, and reasonably
expect their early delivery upon his doorstep.”

And, Keynes also noted, a similar situation was also true in the world of investing.
Those with the means in New York, Paris, London or Berlin could also invest in
internationally active joint stock companies. One of those, the French Companies
de Suez, constructed the Suez Canal, connecting the Mediterranean with the
Indian Ocean and opened yet another artery of world trade. Others built railways
in India, or managed mines in African colonies. Foreign direct investment, too,
was globalizing.

While Britain was the country that benefited most from this globalization, as it
had the most capital and technology, others did too, by exporting other goods.
The invention of the refrigerated cargo ship or “reefer ship” in the 1870s, for
example, allowed for countries like Argentina and Uruguay, to enter their golden
age. They started to mass export meat, from cattle grown on their vast lands.
Other countries, too, started to specialize their production in those fields in which
they were most competitive.

But the first wave of globalization and industrialization also coincided with darker
events, too. By the end of the 19th century, the Khan Academy notes, “most
[globalizing and industrialized] European nations grabbed for a piece of Africa,
and by 1900 the only independent country left on the continent was Ethiopia”. In
a similarly negative vein, large countries like India, China, Mexico or Japan, which
were previously powers to reckon with, were not either not able or not allowed to
adapt to the industrial and global trends. Either the Western powers put
restraints on their independent development, or they were otherwise
outcompeted because of their lack of access to capital or technology. Finally,
many workers in the industrialized nations also did not benefit from globalization,
their work commoditized by industrial machinery, or their output undercut by
foreign imports.

The world wars

It was a situation that was bound to end in a major crisis, and it did. In 1914, the
outbreak of World War I brought an end to just about everything the burgeoning
high society of the West had gotten so used to, including globalization. The ravage
was complete. Millions of soldiers died in battle, millions of civilians died as
collateral damage, war replaced trade, destruction replaced construction, and
countries closed their borders yet again.

In the years between the world wars, the financial markets, which were still
connected in a global web, caused a further breakdown of the global economy
and its links. The Great Depression in the US led to the end of the boom in South
America, and a run on the banks in many other parts of the world. Another world
war followed in 1939-1945. By the end of World War II, trade as a percentage of
world GDP had fallen to 5% – a level not seen in more than a hundred years.

Second and third wave of globalization

The story of globalization, however, was not over. The end of the World War II
marked a new beginning for the global economy. Under the leadership of a new
hegemon, the United States of America, and aided by the technologies of the
Second Industrial Revolution, like the car and the plane, global trade started to
rise once again. At first, this happened in two separate tracks, as the Iron Curtain
divided the world into two spheres of influence. But as of 1989, when the Iron
Curtain fell, globalization became a truly global phenomenon.

In the early decades after World War II, institutions like the European Union, and
other free trade vehicles championed by the US were responsible for much of the
increase in international trade. In the Soviet Union, there was a similar increase in
trade, albeit through centralized planning rather than the free market. The effect
was profound. Worldwide, trade once again rose to 1914 levels: in 1989, export
once again counted for 14% of global GDP. It was paired with a steep rise in
middle-class incomes in the West.

Then, when the wall dividing East and West fell in Germany, and the Soviet Union
collapsed, globalization became an all-conquering force. The newly created World
Trade Organization (WTO) encouraged nations all over the world to enter into
free-trade agreements, and most of them did, including many newly independent
ones. In 2001, even China, which for the better part of the 20th century had been
a secluded, agrarian economy, became a member of the WTO, and started to
manufacture for the world. In this “new” world, the US set the tone and led the
way, but many others benefited in their slipstream.

At the same time, a new technology from the Third Industrial Revolution, the
internet, connected people all over the world in an even more direct way. The
orders Keynes could place by phone in 1914 could now be placed over the
internet. Instead of having them delivered in a few weeks, they would arrive at
one’s doorstep in a few days. What was more, the internet also allowed for a
further global integration of value chains. You could do R&D in one country,
sourcing in others, production in yet another, and distribution all over the world.

The result has been a globalization on steroids. In the 2000s, global exports
reached a milestone, as they rose to about a quarter of global GDP. Trade, the
sum of imports and exports, consequentially grew to about half of world GDP. In
some countries, like Singapore, Belgium, or others, trade is worth much more
than 100% of GDP. A majority of global population has benefited from this: more
people than ever before belong to the global middle class, and hundred of
millions achieved that status by participating in the global economy.
Globalization 4.0

That brings us to today, when a new wave of globalization is once again upon us.
In a world increasingly dominated by two global powers, the US and China, the
new frontier of globalization is the cyber world. The digital economy, in its infancy
during the third wave of globalization, is now becoming a force to reckon with
through e-commerce, digital services, 3D printing. It is further enabled by artificial
intelligence, but threatened by cross-border hacking and cyberattacks.

At the same time, a negative globalization is expanding too, through the global
effect of climate change. Pollution in one part of the world leads to extreme
weather events in another. And the cutting of forests in the few “green lungs” the
world has left, like the Amazon rainforest, has a further devastating effect on not
just the world’s biodiversity, but its capacity to cope with hazardous greenhouse
gas emissions.

But as this new wave of globalization is reaching our shores, many of the world’s
people are turning their backs on it. In the West particularly, many middle-class
workers are fed up with a political and economic system that resulted in
economic inequality, social instability, and – in some countries – mass
immigration, even if it also led to economic growth and cheaper products.
Protectionism, trade wars and immigration stops are once again the order of the
day in many countries.

As a percentage of GDP, global exports have stalled and even started to go in

reverse slightly. As a political ideology, “globalism”, or the idea that one should
take a global perspective, is on the wane. And internationally, the power that
propelled the world to its highest level of globalization ever, the United States, is
backing away from its role as policeman and trade champion of the world.

It was in this world that Chinese president Xi Jinping addressed the topic
globalization in a speech in Davos in January 2017. “Some blame economic
globalization for the chaos in the world,” he said. “It has now become the
Pandora’s box in the eyes of many.” But, he continued, “we came to the
conclusion that integration into the global economy is a historical trend. [It] is the
big ocean that you cannot escape from.” He went on the propose a more inclusive
globalization, and to rally nations to join in China’s new project for international
trade, “Belt and Road”.
It was in this world, too, that Alibaba a few months later opened its Silk Road
headquarters in Xi’an. It was meant as the logistical backbone for the e-commerce
giant along the new “Belt and Road”, the Paper reported. But if the old Silk Road
thrived on the exports of luxurious silk by camel and donkey, the new Alibaba
Xi’an facility would be enabling a globalization of an entirely different kind. It
would double up as a big data college for its Alibaba Cloud services.

Technological progress, like globalization, is something you can’t run away from, it
seems. But it is ever changing.

 India and globalisation

India had the distinction of being the world's largest economy in the beginning
of the Christian era, as it accounted for about 32.9% share of world GDP and
about 17% of the world population. The goods produced in India had long
been exported to far off destinations across the world the concept of
globalisation is hardly new to India.
India currently accounts for 2.7% of world trade (as of 2015), up from 1.2% in
2006 according to the World Trade Organization(WTO). Until the liberalisation of
1991, India was largely and intentionally isolated from the world markets, to
protect its fledgling economy and to achieve self-reliance. Foreign trade was
subject to import tariffs, export taxes and quantitative restrictions, while foreign
direct investment was restricted by upper-limit equity participation, restrictions
on technology transfer, export obligations and government approvals; these
approvals were needed for nearly 60% of new FDI in the industrial sector. The
restrictions ensured that FDI averaged only around $200M annually between
1985 and 1991; a large percentage of the capital flows consisted of foreign aid,
commercial borrowing and deposits of non-resident Indians. India's exports were
stagnant for the first 15 years after independence, due to the predominance of
tea, jute and cotton manufactures, demand for which was generally inelastic.
Imports in the same period consisted predominantly of machinery, equipment
and raw materials, due to nascent industrialization. Since liberalization, the value
of India's international trade has become more broad-based and has risen to
63,0801 billion in 2003–04 from 12.50 billion in 1950–51. India's trading
partners are China, the US, the UAE, the UK, Japan and the EU.[6] The exports
during April 2007 were $12.31 billion up by 16% and import were $17.68 billion
with an increase of 18.06% over the previous year. India is a founding-member
of General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) since 1947 and its successor,
the World Trade Organization. While participating actively in its general council
meetings, India has been crucial in voicing the concerns of the developing world.
For instance, India has continued its opposition to the inclusion of such matters as
labor and environment issues and other non-tariff barriers into the WTO policies.
Despite reducing import restrictions several times in the 2000s, India was
evaluated by the World Trade Organization in 2008 as more restrictive than
similar developing economies, such as Brazil, China, and Russia. The WTO also
identified electricity shortages and inadequate transportation infrastructure as
significant constraints on trade. Its restrictiveness has been cited as a factor which
isolated it from the global financial crisis of 2008–2009 more than other
countries, even though it experienced reduced ongoing economic growth.

History context

 Thomas Friedman, an American journalist, columnist, and author of "It's a

Flat World After All" separates globalization into three stages; globalization
1.0, 2.0 and 3.0. According to Friedman, globalization 1.0, which dates to
1492, involved countries globalizing for natural resources. In globalization
2.0 (1800–2000), companies globalized for labor and markets. In 3.0, the
current stage, companies are seeking to globalize down to small groups of
people, or even individuals.
 Friedman first described the world's economy as being macroscopic. He
explains that only countries interacted with each other, not individuals or
small groups. Friedman then focused on how this has changed and
improved within globalization 3.0. Under globalization 3.0, the world
turned flat and individuals now had the opportunity to work and
collaborate with other individuals from varying and diverse backgrounds. In
addition, Friedman discussed how countries like India are using
globalization to their advantage. The economies of countries similar to
India are now blooming as the world is flattening and shrinking due to
globalization.
 Fifty years ago, countries such as India did not have a say in the global
market and trade. America and other European powers who were once top
players in the international market are now getting competition from
countries like India, which is experiencing tremendous economic growth.
Technology has played a major role in the advancement of globalization
within India.
  Why is globalisation is the only way forward?
Isolationism and protectionism, if taken too far, would break the trade-based
economic engine that has delivered peace and prosperity to the world for
decades. In the developing world, trade has delivered high growth and
technological progress. According to theWorld Bank, since 1990 trade has helped
to halve the number of people living in extreme poverty. But these gains, while
impressive, are not necessarily permanent. If high-income countries close
themselves – and their consumers – off from global markets, the world’s poorest
people will suffer the most.

Trade thrives in an open environment of willing participants acting in good faith

and governed by clear rules. Short of this, the forces of globalization can turn
cooperation into conflict. That’s why policymakers should focus on four areas.

First, countries should dismantle protectionist measures they have in place, and
make a firm commitment not to implement policies that distort global markets.

Second, countries should come together to update the international rules

governing trade to account for changing economic conditions, and effectively
implement negotiated agreements.

Third, individual countries and institutions such as the World Trade Organization
should work together to eliminate barriers that increase trade costs. In particular,
they must abolish agricultural subsidies, remove restrictions on trade in services,
improve connectivity, facilitate cross-border trade and investment, and increase
trade finance.

Finally, and most important, wealthy countries should support developing

countries’ efforts to integrate themselves further into the global economy. Given
trade’s record of reducing poverty, this is a moral imperative; it is also
indispensable for peace and stability.

To be sure, trade must deliver for all countries and for all people, from factory
workers suffering plant closures in Europe or the United States to subsistence
farmers trapped in informal economies in Africa and South Asia. But those who
suggest that trade is a zero-sum game are simply avoiding the hard questions:
Who should bear the painful dislocation costs from trade and new technologies?
What policies will enable dislocated people to pursue new opportunities? How
can countries maintain productivity-led growth in an age of frequent and sudden
disruption?

The challenges of global integration are not new, but nor can they be ignored.
Policymakers should mind the lessons of economic history. Above all, they should
bear in mind that even during past periods of rapid technological change, far
more people benefited from free and open trade than from protectionist barriers.

No country in today’s world can seal itself off from foreign goods, services,
capital, ideas, or people. Instead leaders should foster more commerce to include
more people. They can do so by adopting international rules to manage openness
and interdependency; establishing stronger social safety nets; investing in
innovation, education and skills-training, and infrastructure; and creating a more
conducive regulatory environment for businesses and entrepreneurs to foster
stronger and more inclusive growth.

No country can deliver long-term prosperity to its people on its own. Closer
international cooperation and economic integration is the only way forward.

Importance of Globalization

Although small business owners may think of globalization as something

that only affects multi-national corporations, the truth is that all
companies, regardless of size, must understand the opportunities and
challenges of globalization. Over the past few decades, information and
technology have increasingly connected the world to such an extent that
economic problems in the U.S. now have a detrimental effect on financial
sectors as far away as Tokyo and Beijing. If you own a small business,
learning how to leverage globalization to expand the market for your
products and services is essential to long-term success. The importance of
globalization are as follows:-

(a) Proper use of Resources: Globalization leads to expansion of markets

and this enable organization to make proper use of available resources.

(b) Multiple choices: No country is self sufficient and every country

 depends upon other country. Globalization has solved this problem and
people can have better choice to satisfy their need.

(c) Foreign Exchange: Globalization encourage exports and discourage

imports. This help to earn foreign exchange.

(d) Creates Employment: Globalization helps to provide employment to a

large number of people. Multinational companies such as Business Process
Outsource popularly known as Call center employs and appoint a large
number of personnel with high pay scale and other benefits.

(e) Government incentives: Government also provides various incentives in

taxes, custom duties, pre-shipment finance, post shipment finance and
many more. This is done to encourage globalization.

(f) Technology: Technology is the latest and fruitful outcome of

globalization. It is the best even gift. Technologies not only increase
efficiently but the organization and everyone having a little knowledge can
update one and can stand by world. Globalization not only enables
competition but also very much helpful for profit of maximization.

(g)Spreading of Risk of Loss: Business thy name is risk. There may be

different types of losses in every business. Various losses which may be in
domestic market can be easily compensated from international market.

(h) Benefit to the consumers: Globalization encourages free and fair

competition at world level. Due to this, organizations try to supply quality
goods and that also at a reduced price. This benefits consumers.

Globalization Opens Up International Access

With the world increasingly resembling the “global village” predicted by social
scientist Marshall McLuhan decades in the past, small businesses are no longer
restricted to only reaching customers. The evolution of digital communication has
opened up small businesses to an international market that they can reach
through social media platforms, website content, and mobile marketing
campaigns. For example, if you sell comic books to a market, there’s nothing
stopping you from promoting your products to Japanese youth that love
American superheroes.
Globalization Lowers the Costs of Customer Service
If you run an e-commerce business, chances are that you need to staff a customer
service department to handle orders and complaints. Globalization has made it
possible for you to outsource your customer service to remote staff overseas that
can handle customer inquiries 24/7, at a much lower price than if you hired a
U.S.-based company. This helps you cut expenses, and still provide outstanding
customer service.
Globalization Levels the Competitive Playing Field
Although your business may never generate the kind of revenue of a major player
in the same industry, globalization has equalized the international playing field so
that even small companies can compete to get their slice of the global buying pie.
One example is Uber, which entered the taxi industry by changing the game with
ride sharing that customers could order on mobile devices. Uber started small,
but leveraged mobile marketing and social media to grow into a company now
worth an estimated $70 billion.
Globalization Breeds More Competition
Despite the fact that globalization offers small businesses many advantages, it
also presents a major challenge, which is that the increased international
opportunities also leads to increased competition. As a result of greater access to
international market, globalization creates more businesses that want to gain a
piece of these emerging markets. This means that your business will have to find
different ways to distinguish itself from the competition, which typically means
finding a unique selling proposition that expresses why your company is worthy of
being chosen by your target audience.
Winners and losers of globalization
Globalization has benefited an emerging “global middle class,” mainly people in
places such as China, India, Indonesia, and Brazil, along with the world’s top 1
percent. But people at the very bottom of the income ladder, as well as the lower-
middle class of rich countries, lost out.

The findings, presented by economist Branko Milinkovic to a packed audience of

more than 120 people at a Policy Research Talk at the World Bank earlier this
month, come just as the institution mobilizes around two goals: ending extreme
poverty by 2030 and boosting the income growth of every country’s bottom 40
percent.

“Those goals are very ambitious, since the pace of growth is uncertain,” says
World Bank Research Director Asli Demirguc-Kunt, who hosted the event.
“Boosting shared prosperity also requires us to tackle inequality, not just within
countries, but across countries as well, as globalization has made it easier for
goods and people to move around the world.”

The new global middle class, about 400 million people, earned more and
consumed more in the 20-year span before the global financial crisis hit in 2008,
propelled by economic growth in countries such as India and China, said
Milinkovic, a lead economist in the Bank’s research department who has been
studying inequality since the 1980s. He made the cross-country comparisons
using a newly-created database of World Bank- managed household surveys that
covers some 120 countries from 1988 to 2008.

The inflation-adjusted real income for the group around the global median rose
80 percent between 1988 and 2008. Their incomes, however, were still a paltry $3
to $5 per capita per day.

Not surprisingly, the top 1 percent of the world’s earners were big winners. Their
real income went up by more than 60 percent during the 20-year period. In
absolute terms, they saw their incomes increase by nearly $23,000 per capita per
year, compared with some $400 for those around the median.

By contrast, incomes were almost stagnant among the world’s poorest 5 percent,
despite the fact that real income did increase for the bottom and the second-
lowest defiles.
Least satisfactory was the outcome for the people in the 75th to 90th percentile of
the global income distribution, who saw zero growth in their real income. Those
people represent a global upper-middle class, including the lower-middle class of
rich countries, as well as many people in Latin America and former Communist
countries in Eastern Europe.

Inequality between nations also grew, despite the recent drop in global inequality
between individuals. In fact, the divisions between countries are more
pronounced than those between different income classes within countries,
Milinkovic said. More than half of the variability in people’s incomes across the
globe is simply due to one factor: the place where one lives.

The reality that opportunities are highly unequal, depending on where you live
raises a question: How can we reduce global inequality? Milinkovic pointed out
three paths. First, high growth rates among poor and middle-income countries.
That would be the best path, but it’s not easily achievable. It also largely depends
on China and India maintaining their high growth rates. In fact, the decline of
global inequality so far is largely due to the high growth rates of China and India –
what Milinkovic called “two big sumo wrestlers” tilting the scales in the fight to
reduce global poverty and inequality.

A second path would be a global redistribution scheme pushing ever larger

amounts of money to poor countries. That isn’t likely to happen, as development
assistance is just a little more than $120 billion a year, and isn’t showing any signs
of increasing.

The third path would be to promote migration, which can be an expeditious way
for people to improve their fortunes. That means development should be seen
through the prism of people, not countries. From a global point of view – though
not necessarily from a nation-state political point of view – what matters is that
people should prosper, wherever they end up.

“Either poor countries will become richer, or poor people will move to rich
countries,” Milinkovic said.
Augusto Lopez-Claros, director of the World Bank Group’s Global Indicators and
Analysis Group, said at the event that Milinkovic made income distribution, a
complex subject, easy to understand. Policy makers, he said, can benefit from the
research by, for example, making sure that energy subsidies, which are highly
regressive and benefit largely the middle- and higher-income groups, are phased
out. The resources can then be used in more productive ways, such as educating
800 million people with low levels of literacy skills, or ensuring that girls have
greater access to education

Who Wins? Commented [1]:

There are a number of different people who actually do very well in a globalized
economy. For example, if you're able to sell a good or service at a lower price
than everyone else, or sell a better product or service than everyone else, then
you are going to be making even larger profits than before! Globalization allows
very cheap producers and very high-quality producers to do well.
Additionally, globalization favors larger companies that can afford to make such
capital investments. It takes a lot of money to build an entirely new factory
overseas, and bigger companies are more able to do it. They are also able to
better afford the increased transportation costs of moving goods back from a
different country.
Because of these new opportunities in transportation, logistics and shipping firms
also do well in a globalized marketplace. Globalization also permits someone who
just wants to save money to do well. They can find cheaper goods than they were
able to acquire before, which means that they save money

Who Loses?
Sounds great, doesn't it? But there are a lot of people who lose at globalization.
Take your baker. Unless he can sell the absolute cheapest bread around, or if he
can convince everyone that he sells the absolute best bread around, then chances
are that he is out of business. People will simply go to one of the other ends of
the spectrum.
In a global economy, large companies can often produce their goods per unit
cheaper elsewhere, which means many people who were in manufacturing jobs
are finding themselves out of work when companies move to other locations to
take advantage of lower production costs. Speaking of those cheaper locales.
Many of the people living there now have jobs. However their jobs do not pay
them much. Instead they earn much lesser than the workers of countries with Commented [2]:

high wages