1. Drew Dondelinger<br />Foundations in Geography (MW 10-12)<br />Assignment #1 Globalization Analysis<br />While Thomas Friedman is thoroughly convinced and an advocate for the acceptance and awareness of globalization, Pankaj Ghemawat is equally as sure that globalization is not a pressing issue. In my mind the question and controversy isn’t whether globalization is real or whether it’s a concerning issue that needs our attention; globalization is a reality and does require our attention as Americans if we desire to remain world leaders in the future. However, I acknowledge and understand the data and reasoning behind Pankaj Ghemawat’s argument, that 90% of capital movement and activity is still domestic. <br />In my eyes it is not a matter of which argument/opinion is right, even through the two essays are contradictory, and more specifically Why the World Isn’t Flat was a direct counter to It’s a Flat World After All; I can appreciate and draw conclusions from both sides. Globalization is inevitable. With all the factors and flatteners Friedman discusses it’s hard not to accept the fact that globalization is a real issue. In its simplest form, one doesn’t even need to read about the ten flatteners to understand the basic concept of globalization. Look simply at the internet and dot-com boom and bust in the economy, not simply the US economy but the world economy. A world economy, in some aspect, has existed since the beginning of trade when one community of people came to the realization that they weren’t isolated on the earth, since then the world economy has been growing and evolving. Never though had it experienced such a force that drove the world economy to increase so exponentially. Anyone with a computer and internet connection, both of which have become much more readily available and realistic, has access to almost limitless information. The US and Western Europe aren’t the only places now that the majority of people have the opportunity to own and access the world wide web and other advanced technologies. China, India, Russia and Brazil lead the way in upcoming economies and societies followed by other South American countries like Argentina and Eastern European countries headed by the Czech Republic. At any rate, it is undeniable that other countries’ economies and societies are growing stronger and the world is becoming more interconnected and dependent.<br />Ghemawat will most likely not deny these facts, however he suggests that while countries are growing stronger they don’t need to be dependent and correlated to other countries, but rather each country can be self-sufficient. His 10% Presumption shows data that suggests only 10% of capital action and movement is done internationally, justifiably with only trade as a clear outlier. I agree that when given two equal opportunities, whether it be for trade or employment, where the only difference is domestic or international, that most companies, governments or individuals would be more biased in supporting and choosing the domestic product, good or service. <br />Putting the two concepts together is where I would find my thesis. While most capital movement is still domestic, I believe globalization is developing. If Dr. Ghemawat were to do the same study for the years 1990 through 2010 I believe he would find a significant increase in his study of capital movement over that period of time, and a good inclination that a globalized economy is emerging. As I mentioned before, given two identical options, most people are more likely to support local ahead of international, the problem is you aren’t always comparing apples to apples. Many foreign countries are producing better quality and are able to do the same work for far cheaper, leading more and more companies to hire or manufacture internationally. Is it not possible that in 2005 the 10% Presumption was true? Yet globalization has advanced since then? And even that 10% Presumption is a support of globalization?In my opinion Globalization is real and a very important issue, and Americans are in danger of losing their leadership standing in the world because of it. However I don’t view it as a threat, but a challenge, a challenge to better ourselves and our economy to remain not only competitive but on top. From an economist’s view Globalization is a great thing because it leads to greater efficiency. More competition in a free market place makes everyone better and individually firms and markets will be more efficient as a result of free market economics allowing firms to find cheaper production and labor. Yes globalization is causing what some people consider economic and social inequalities; however that’s more of an issue of global politics than global economics, since economists are solely focused on efficiency. In my opinion globalization does exist and is growing every year, while it is more efficient it is causing inequalities, there are positives and negatives to almost everything in life, globalization is no exception. It doesn’t matter whether we think the positives outweigh the negatives or vice-versa, the only guaranty is that globalization is here and we need to be aware, educated and ready for it.<br />