Wolf and Singer on Trade

The readings from Wolf and Singer both discuss the issue of international trade. Wolf focuses on the economic theory that trade benefits those that chose to participate; he argues global trade is a good thing and it works. On the other hand Singer has a different approach, he focuses on the World Trade Organization (WTO) and raises questions on its achievements and effectiveness. They both seem to have faith in globalization if it is carried out well. Their difference shows when they look into why the globalization has not worked as well as it should have.

Wolf points out to the problems in developing countries such as lack of transparency, stability, policy failures, lack of technology and so on. He argues that these shortcoming in developing countries have resulted in lack of capital and trade. He also mentions Hong Kong and Singapore as the examples of success through opening up to global economy.

Singer points the finger to the WTO. He points out that it is dominated by developed naitons. He mentions the pressure the countries face to follow the direction wherever WTO is heading and thus reducing the autonomy of states. Towards the end of the chapter he increasingly sounds like Thomas Pogge in his book "World Poverty and Human Rights" becasue Singer argues about ethics of trade using the example of resource previlage.

I think both of the authors have a good point but I can't help but to feel that their arguments are only partially accurate. Becasue globalization is so complex and all the countries are so differnt.

Singer and Stiglitz

I think both readings from Singer and Stiglitz books are interesting in that they both mention the problems caused by current globalization. Singer and Stiglitz both approach the problems from ethical viewpoint because they see things that are unjust and they feel that they need to change the current situation. They are also both willing to sacrifice some benefits that we currently enjoy in order to make things better for everyone (Singer also argues that it will benefit the US in the end because there will be less incentives for terrorism).

The main problem they mention is the fact that globalization has not benefited everyone; it has largely benefited industrialized nations, especially some powerful groups within industrialized nations and it has not benefited or harmed developing nations. They mention global institutions such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. They argue that currently these institutions are not run democratically as the developed countries are overrepresented and developing countries are underrepresented. Thus, the policies these institutions pursue or recommend mainly focuses on the benefit. Both writers argues that the change in global order is necessary in order to achieve globalization that can truly benefit everyone and the reason why that needs to be done is because it's ethically right.

Singer sums up his introduction by writing, "The thesis of this book is that how well we come through the era of globalization (perhaps whether we come through it at all) will depend on how we respond ethically to the idea that we live in one world". He urges us to change our politics and so does Stigliz as he write:

I hope that this book will help to change mindsets-as those in the
developed world see more clearly some of the consequences of the policies that
their governments have undertaken. I hope it will convince many, in all
countries, that "another world is possible." Even more: that "another world is
necessary and inevitable.

I think they both have right idea in that the globalization as we know it needs to change and we have to care more about other people's suffering and struggles.

first posting

test