Do you consider yourself a winner or a loser of globalization?

There are no losers in globalization.

>>75865311

Care to explain?

>>75865311

Working class in developed countries is the loser in globalization, they deserve it though they had plenty of time to save money but didn't and now their work is worthless.

>>75865265
>Globalized enough for immigrants to flood in
>Globalized enough to lose all our industry to G*rmans and chinks
>NOT globalized enough to move to North America

Definitely a loser.

All first world nations are losers of globalization.

>>75865340
He means that trade is always beneficial to both parties, buyers and sellers; otherwise buyers wouldn't buy (cheap Chinese goods, for example) in the first place.

>>75865265
Yes

>>75865387

So they were supposed to become upperclass in previous generations? Sounds like a pyramid scheme

>>75865265
Yes

>>75865433

What if the trade leads to an unequal redistribution of wealth and concentrates it instead of expanding it?

>>75865461
Yep, it's impossible for everyone to just stop working. Most people will always be working class.

While the western working class did get some indirect benefits from globalizations (cheaper mass-manufactured goods), this was almost completely counteracted by the loss of jobs.

Essentially in a few decades there will be a global class of working people and a global class of insanely rich people. Still though the westerners lost unless your net worth is in the ranger of 1 mil or more.

>>75865732

You cant have a working class in a world of automation. I wonder how they are going to deal with this clusterfuck, its probably not going to be pretty

>>75865461

They should have accumulated savings so they could profit from cheap labor in the developing world, now they have to compete against them and with their higher salaries they are in a very bad position

>>75865858
That's not how currencies work friendo. Also you can't live in savings forever.

>>75865858

How can you accumulate savings on minimum wage? How can you delve into the fantasy of education = more money when you cant pay for the degree? The western working class has been farmed for rent and tax like serfs since forever.

>>75865837
While in traditional automation there's always a place for workers, albeit a bit more trained workers, artificial intelligence will cause a massive bloodshed in the coming decades. I didn't sign up for this.

>>75865919
I've actually read krugman, what's your point?

>>75865973
Most people weren't on minimum wage, they were buying new cars every year and feeding a housing bubble for decades, the smart ones that were saving now are in a great position to benefit from globalization.

>>75865533
But trade generally creates wealth, and everyone gets richer from it (the rich and the poor alike). That's the point of trading.

>>75865732
Automation will probably decrease further the number of working people though. So it will more look like 1) a global class of clueless masses who do nothing, and 2) a global class of extremely qualified workers and entrepreneurs + a small minority of rich people who don't work.

>>75866003

It can only go so far though, if nobody actually has money to pay for the shit being produced then its worthless. The economic model of importing people into debt bondage cant work in the long term or short term.

>>75866087

Maybe in Uruguay or USA but not in most of the western world. That was mostly fueled by debt; i.e fake money

>>75866108

I dunno that seems like a very simplistic view of the actual effects of globalisation, its not just trade = good

>>75865973
>How can you accumulate savings on minimum wage?

It is possible in any first-world country, but you have to be extremely frugal and cautious with money. Many poor people don't have this discipline (because it would make their life unpleasant) and don't believe saving will lead them anywhere, so they stay poor.

>>75866003
I guess that's where transhumanism comes into play.

>>75865433
haha, it's all about the money for you globalists.

>>75865265

My job can't really be outsourced to china because that would mean moving the entire shop there which would mean 0 business, but I feel for those who lost their jobs and I am deeply disgusted everytime I notice another traditionally domestic company sold to foreign fucks.

>>75866289
>Many poor people don't have this discipline (because it would make their life unpleasant) and don't believe saving will lead them anywhere, so they stay poor.
this much is true. however, they will start moving to white countries because they want gibdats and easy pussy, thereby creating problems for the host countries.

>>75866289
But transhumanism is like dying anon

>>75865265
Materially and I suppose intellectually probably a winner, but in all other ways a loser.

>>75866239
>if nobody actually has money to pay...
But trade makes products cheaper, so you can afford with little money what would have been unaffordable (or even impossible to create) before. Think about a mediocre €100 smartphone: that would have been an incredibly costly marvel, just 15 years ago.

>its not just trade = good
Sure, but in purely economic terms, free trade makes everyone richer. Now, in human terms (dignity, social cohesion, equality...), it's another story.

personally lmao a winner

don't like it though

>>75866289

>It is possible in any first-world country

Well if we look at Ireland, minimum wage is 9.15€.
9.15x160 = 1464
1464 @ 20% tax = 1171
1171 - 600 (average rent nationwide) = 571

So you have 571€ to pay all the other taxes with, to buy food with, pay for transportation with (you are not affording a car on that), and to pay bills with.

Lets say, best case scenario, you have €100 left after living thrifty, thats barely €1000 a year, What the fuck are you going to do with that? Buy a new computer?

It only works if you still live in your parents house.

>>75866593

You need food and maybe a car more than a smartphone to browse bullshit with

I'm studying Advertising right now
I have a Korean professor. He teaches IMC with his broken ass English.
He has a PhD in Communication.
What do?
Is this Globalization?

>>75866239
>It can only go so far though, if nobody actually has money to pay for the shit being produced then its worthless.

This applies indeed to the current state
You assume you need the money of the working class, meaning you need their services. That is the fact today, because all goods and services are in some way depended on manual/unskilled labor.

But the scary thing is that you might not need the money/services of unskilled laborers in the future, because their jobs are fully automated.

You will still be able to devote massive amounts of wealth/capital in order to produce useless things for yourself using very little manpower.

Truthfully thats a hard question to truly answer if not impossible but my gut tells me im a loser. Its primarily multinationals and rich assholes that benefit. Western wealth flows overseas to buy shit that we used to make that we no longer make so we can save 10 cents on every item at walmart.

>>75867044

The rich would need to keep the "working class" quiet though, in order not be rolling out of a guillotine. They cant live in a literal ivory tower.

>>75867132
Revolutions are very rare. Think about all the third world countries where millions starve to death without a single complaint.

And it's easy to keep them down with an automated law enforcement force.

>>75866712
Being very frugal means blowing less than the average rent, and owning your place (if banks let you borrow). 20% tax on the minimum wage is really rude though.

Now say you can save up €200 per month because you're really, really frugal. Invest that at 8%, and after 40 years you get €700,000. Now if you bought a house instead of renting, you almost have €1,000,000 when adding the value of the house + the money you saved after the mortgage is payed.

And that's if you can only save €200 per month, a ludicrous sum. It is possible. It has been done in my family (going from minimum wage immigrant to millionaire, just through saving hard).

Smartphones were an example. Modern cars are certainly cheaper compared to a few decades ago (the average car today is more luxurious and reliable than an old limousine). Regarding food, I'm sure the hungry masses of 1930 would be puzzled by the fact today's poor are rich enough to be obese...

>>75867132
Not if they automate police work.

They're not quite there yet but they sure are trying their best.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVlhMGQgDkY

>>75867298

But these states are designed around suppression.

>>75867333
>Invest that at 8%
nice joke.

>>75867341

What if you hack them?

>>75867390
That is a very real concern, but you can make them nearly unhackable simply by disconnecting them from the internet.

I wonder if more people would join the army to escape poverty.

>>75867298
>>75867341

Thats not happening guys, molotov's or suicide bombers (21st century molotov's) will make short work of those if people are pissed enough. And to be honest I cant think of a single western country where that has happened without complaint.

>>75867333

Hey I know where you are coming from and myself and my family have done the same for generations. We grow our own food and waste nothing, steal whenever possible etc.

But come on, what is the point in living in misery for 40 years saving up money which will be almost worthless in 40 years due to inflation? To pass it on to the next generation, some vapid assholes who only want to pick your corpse clean?
Maybe your family did it in the 1960's but today is a different world, real income is far less now.

What would be the same Peasant Revolt ideology, like Communism, would be called without working class or farmers? Unworking class?

>>75865732
>Essentially in a few decades there will be a global class of working people and a global class of insanely rich people
Marx was right.

>>75867871

I think we are entering uncharted territory, the same yet different.

What really makes me sad is the fact that this could be the only inhabited place in the universe and this is the road we are going down.

File: 1992-2013 S&P 500 Total Returns.png (71KB, 740x573px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 740x573px

>>75867382
8% is nothing special (pic related).

>>75867744
Inflation is a very real concern, but fortunately we live in an era of low inflation these days.

Yes, it's a harsh life if you're saving like this, but remember you may not be dead at the end of this 40-year period. Ask yourself: when I'm 60 or 70, would I rather have one million euros, or nothing but memories of the money I spent?

>>75868142

That money is not much good when you are old and cant do anything, and of course you cant take it with you to the grave so what does it matter then? I'd rather have good memories since both rich and poor both end up the same, no point living in poverty of the soul.

>>75868142
what is a million today? you gottabe filthy rich to have no worries and even then you have worries, so fuck that 40 years of saving, you have one life to live

>>75868291
60 years old is fine, you can still enjoy most of life if you don't have a cancer or something... It's after 85 years old that everything goes south.

Some people just see further than themselves and have a "dynastic" view. It's more obvious when you inherit money: you have the feeling that all this money (even the money you earned by yourself) does not really belong to you, that you're just the custodian of something that must be passed on, etc.

>>75868908

It starts going south at about 25 bruh

>>75865461
You're supposed to get education/skilled labour training. Anon many people got entitled that these jobs would last forever in the UK with the closure of the mines generations that worked at these closed mines and treated these jobs like an inheritance of sorts

>>75868759
A million is not that much, but better than nothing.

Being rich brings a different kind of worries indeed, but you wouldn't trade these worries against poor-people-worries.

And not everyone is happy with consuming more and more. A lot of self-made millionaires keep on living frugally (driving a 15-year-old car, wearing a €20 watch...) even after they become rich.

>>75866401
You completely miss his point anon.

File: tfw_no_400400-dfd0635c84c80427fad3c54acf92511c.png (16KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 400x400px

>>75869045
>It starts going south at about 25 bruh

>>75865265
pol memes aside there's literally nothing wrong with globalization

>>75867341

Wouldn't that switch power away from today's rich and powerful and towards the engineer and scientific classes? It's in their hands to program these things. You can hide a carefully prepared rebellion within the code. If robots do all the work, why are you even need rich people to pay you?

>>75869260

It does not just apply to mines, forever even the lowliest unskilled worker could pay his and his families way just through manual labour sweat and toil. Not anymore.
And hey get this, training costs money which people cant afford straight off the bat, not even by drinking their own piss and eating their own shit.

>>75869260

Thats when old age starts, why do you think footballers retire at 30? Its an uphill struggle from there, if you think you will be fit for anything other than sleeping in a comfy chair at 60/70 you are insane.

>>75868759
He's desperately trying to legitimize extreme inequality. He's saying that you totally can become rich too, and you totally chose not to, you just have to live in box for 40 years.

>>75869583
yeah I know why I'm not rich, me and my ancestors didn't work hard enough

grandpa #1 died in an accident at work, he just should have tried harder in the steel work to not get burned alive

File: 43eab355b3511dcc9741cfbc49bdee19[1].jpg (39KB, 480x346px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 480x346px

>>75865973
if you dont make enough money to afford your means then you should spoend less
there is always a way to lower your living exspenses, there isnt always a way to increase your income

you should always have and be building up some savings, not getting into more debt because you expect as bigger payout later
because in life shit happens, no matter who you are, cant build yourself up if your foundation is shit

globalism mainly hurt people who didnt want to change their ways or adapt, those that did adapt did benefit, those that didnt are whining for a thing that never was and never will be
like candlestick makers bitching about the new fangled fad called the light bulb, or horse drawn carriage drivers who never wanted to learn how to use on of those "car" thingys, or those people with degrees in newspaper journalism complaining about how no one buys newspapers anymore

the only certainty in life is change, you cant do the same thing every day for 70 years and expect not to fail at life

>>75870175
t. american teenager with middle class parents

>there is always a way to lower your living exspenses
yes you can chop off an arm or starve to death.
Or you can live in a cardboard box outside your workplace, great tip, that's a big money saver.

>>75869554
Ultimately, engineers and scientist are workers too, and once they have build the tools of oppression they will be dispatched too.

Winrar

>>75870175

Maybe globalism is shit?

>>75870175
>there is always a way to lower your living exspenses
starving or dying for example like they do in Africa