Neoliberals champion globalization and trickle down economics, citing the World Bank and other stats showing that it has lifted millions out of poverty. While inequality has increased, they say, and the rich have benefited more than the poor, they claim in absolute terms that everyone has benefited to some extent and thus globalization is good for poor countries.
There are some challenges to this though that I’d like to present.
-
Correlation doesn’t necessarily equal causation. While most poverty figures do seem to suggest that there is quite a bit less poverty now than there was in the 80s or even the 90s, the two decades when the current wave of globalization really started kicking into gear, it’s questionable and debatable that this is the reason why poverty seems to have declined. One could also point to better democratic process, the progression of technology, and better crops for this (I do generally support GMOs).
-
The lion’s share of the decline of poverty has taken place in the People’s Republic of China. The 80s, 90s and 00s saw huge increases in income in China. However it should be noted that while China did open up to the world during this time, their economic policy is still vastly different from a free market. Not only that but you also have to consider that in 1980 they were less than 20 years out of a famine. It’s not like they could have done down much worse than where they were at.
Also I don’t think working for $2 a day in a factory in a dismally polluted city is necessarily that much better than subsistence farming and making $1. When we talk about “lifting millions out of poverty” with China we’re not saying one minute they’re starving to death and then the West comes along and suddenly it’s all caviar and flat-screen TVs. There are millions of Chinese people who can afford such things but the vast majority of Chinese people would be considered very poor by American standards.
They have also lost unpriceable forms of social capital such as close family and community ties that existed in their villages in 1980. I’d much rather live in a rural English village in 1750 than as a factory worker in Newcastle upon Tyne in 1850 even though I’d have a bit more spending money working in the factory.
- How much money someone makes a year doesn’t factor in how much of their culture they’ve lost, how oppressive their government is, the non-measurable economic exchanges, etc.