1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Reptile [31]
3 years ago
10

What are consequences of globalization?

History
1 answer:
Oksi-84 [34.3K]3 years ago
6 0

Globalization must be expected to influence the distribution of income as well as its level. So far as the distribution of income between countries is concerned, standard theory would lead one to expect that all countries will benefit. Economists have long preached that trade is mutually beneficial, and most of us believe that the experience of widespread growth alongside rapidly growing trade in the postwar period serves to substantiate that. Similarly most FDI goes where a multinational has intellectual capital that can contribute something to the local economy, and is therefore likely to be mutually beneficial to investor and recipient. And a flow of capital that finances a real investment is again likely to benefit both parties, since the yield on the investment is expected to be higher than the rate of interest the borrower has to pay, while that rate of interest is also likely to be higher than the lender could expect at home since otherwise there would have been no incentive to send it abroad. Loose talk about free trade making the rich countries richer and poor countries poorer finds no support in economic analysis.

You might be interested in
What was the impact of exploration on Africa and Asia
taurus [48]

The record of European expansion contains pages as grim as any in history. The African slave trade—begun by the Africans and the Arabs and turned into a profitable seaborne enterprise by the Portuguese, Dutch, and English—is a series of horrors, from the rounding up of the slaves by local chieftains in Africa, through their transportation across the Atlantic, to their sale in the Indies.

American settlers virtually exterminated the native population east of the Mississippi. There were, of course,
exceptions to this bloody rule. In New England missionaries like John Eliot (1604-1690) did set up little bands of “praying Indians,” and in Pennsylvania relations between the Quakers and Native Americans were excellent. Yet the European diseases, which could not be controlled, together with alcohol, did more to exterminate the Native Americans than did fire and sword.

Seen in terms of economics, however, the expansion of Europe in early modern times was more complex than simple “exploitation” and “plundering.” There was, in dealing with the native populations, much giving of “gifts” of nominal value in exchange for land and goods of great value. The almost universally applied mercantilist policy kept money and manufacturing in the home country. It relegated the colonies to producing raw materials—a role that tended to keep colonies of settlement relatively primitive and economically dependent.


4 0
3 years ago
New neverland governor who refused to surrender to england
LiRa [457]
Peter Stuyvesant is the governor who refused to surrender to England
3 0
3 years ago
The Trans-Atlantic trade system had three parts that included
vfiekz [6]
First option: Raw materials were first sold to Africa from Europe, then, in the middle passage, slaves were traded to the Americas, and then finally manufactured goods were then shipped back to England. <span>The Trans-Atlantic trade system </span>was also called as the Triangular Trade as it connected three continents; so the complete circuit lasted 18 months in total, in order to carry the largest number of slaves. The slave trade lasted approximately four centuries, and was the largest deportation of people in history and according to many historians a worldwide catastrophe, at once a violent form of globalization. 
7 0
3 years ago
What do the empires of Egypt, Mesopotamia, Ancient China, and Ancient India have in common?
postnew [5]
B is the answer they all had a common ancestor that directed the establishment of these civilizations
6 0
2 years ago
Which group in Hawaii was in favor of annexation by the United States?
damaskus [11]
Companies I guess so.
3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • England’s prime minister ________ led them to a victory during the French and Indian War
    13·1 answer
  • Which new form of communication put the Pony Express out of business after just 18 months of operation?
    14·2 answers
  • Member at-large definition please ‍♂️
    14·1 answer
  • Who were the two participants in the great debate over slavery prior to the election of 1858? Daniel Webster and John C. Calhoun
    8·2 answers
  • Continuous improvement is an operations concept developed in
    12·1 answer
  • Which statement about the great depression would herbert hoover's and Franklin Roosevelt have agreed upon?
    6·1 answer
  • Which of the following is an example of the President using new technology of the time period to connect with the American peopl
    8·2 answers
  • Which of the following illustrates Congress’s role in national security?
    15·2 answers
  • PLEASE PLEASE HELP!!!! WILL GIVE BRAINLIEST, THANK YOU, AND 5-STAR RATING!!!
    8·2 answers
  • Who wants to be the bing boy
    14·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!