I looked to the National Bureau of Economic Research, who recently published Globalization and Poverty. Here’s what I found out:
Some studies show that globalization has been associated with rising inequality, because the poor do not always share in the gains from trade. An example of this is the coffee trade. Coffee is the second most traded commodity in the world, yet most of its growers only make 10% of what it eventually sells for. However, when farmers have access to credit, technical know-how, and social safety nets such as income support, trade can benefit the world’s poor.
The book argues that export growth and incoming foreign investment have proven to reduce poverty. But, at the same time, trade and foreign investment alone are not enough to alleviate poverty. Increasing access to education and credit, as well as improved infrastructure, are necessary in order to see real progress. Echoing that idea, Harrison concludes that globalization can benefit people living in extreme poverty, but only if the appropriate complementary policies and institutions are in place.
I didn’t copy
My answer:
Despite the fact that everybody realizes that seawater is pungent, not many realize that even little varieties in sea surface saltiness (i.e., convergence of broke down salts) can effectsly affect the water cycle and sea flow. Since Earth's commencement, certain cycles have served to make the sea pungent. The enduring of rocks conveys minerals, including salt, into the sea. Dissipation of sea water and arrangement of ocean ice both increment the saltiness of the sea. Anyway these "saltiness raising" factors are ceaselessly offset measures that decline saltiness, for example, the nonstop contribution of new water from streams, precipitation of downpour and day off, liquefying of ice.
I hope that helped you a lot
Answer:
Wegener
Explanation:
Seems like an officer in the military i think.
