The I.M.F i.e. the International Monetary Fund is a body that seeks to give assistance for improving the world economic cooperation. Joseph.E.Stiglitz is a renowned Nobel winning economist who worked under Clinton as an advisor and at the World Bank and has been chosen as the focal point of reference in this argument. Which makes the two set a basis for the question on the comparison and contrast that exists. Therefore, one can deduce from the two the following comparisons:
On the definition of globalization both of them concur that is method of improving the economies of the world through trade and financial endeavors. The two also illustrate that there are points of views of the benefits that globalization has in store for inhabitants in countries some of these countries view it negatively while others view it as a positive endeavor toward improving life’s of peoples. The IMF illustrates this by including statements as if it is a world economic development strategy for the forth-coming generations, Stiglitz illustrates that it brings spontaneous prosperity to every person in the world.
The two also concur in their statements that globalization is not unilateral in growth as it has hiccups in its progressions. In addition to this comparison, the two in their statements say that the volatility of the capital is an indicator towards realizing some the challenges that come with the globalizing.
Moreover, the income gaps between the two high-income earners and the low-income earners have been gradually ever increasing with time.
In contrast Stiglitz recognizes that countries that some of the successful countries that have undergone self-globalization have been very successful because of their own self governance while the IMF depicts through institutional governance of aspects of globalization.
The IMF argues that by setting policies such as education, training and research and development will improves the level of productivity in poorer countries; this perception is different from Stiglitz. As He argues this fact differently, he says that the education policies fail to meet expectations when free market policies lead several strays of investment from other key sectors. In particular, he gives an example of Thailand that supports his argument.
The IMF report mentions four aspects of globalization i.e. Trade, capital movements, movements of people and spread of knowledge and technology (IMF, 2000). Trade-aids in increasing the rate of development in any region it is therefore of great factor of globalization only when it is carried out in a fair and just manner it will yield positive fruits. Capital movements-increases the capital flow in a country’s economy. It is beneficial to a country’s development in infrastructure but it has a volatility element that makes it dictate the level of development in a country. Movement of people is another aspect of globalization. It involves equipping an economy with labor forces. This is an important aspect of globalization as it aids to facilitate the exploitation of labor opportunities for a country’s economic growth/development. Spread of knowledge and technology is another aspect of globalization-it involves utility of knowledge to develop economic opportunities. It is importance to globalization: is that it provides a pool of knowledge in which economy can inevitably benefit from picking from it and develop raw resource. This may be in the form of marketing of goods and services.
However, there is only one aspect of globalization that stands out i.e. the spread of knowledge and technology (IMF, 2000). The basis of any task will always depend on some form of knowledge be it formal or informal. Therefore, knowledge sets the integral part of any activity hence it can be translated in a form of global development force e.g. use of management skills in trades.
Chart two shows that in a country such as Asia have income per capita on the rise as it industrializes itself, while the others develop gradually towards industrialization. Africa has the lowest GDP, followed by china, Middle East, western hemisphere, and Asia in an ascending order.
The IMF argues that countries benefit from globalization through integration with the global economy hence this transitioning has brought a level of development despite the charts indicating otherwise.
The proposed measures to assist the problems include educating and offering vocational training for worker, and implementing social safety nets for those persons/workers who are shifted.
These measures are enough, as they need to operate in a transparent/corruption free setting that allows people to appreciate the validity of the efforts hence the embracing of globalization can take place.
One of Stiglitz criticism of the IMF is on the policies. He argues that there is irony in the policies and uses Thailand’s free market investment that turns out to have bias outcomes in development ignoring sectors such as education etc (Stiglit,2002).
The IMF offers assistance in the integration of world economies.
It should as well reach out to the poor and the middle class to create equal opportunities
Yes the bottom system would decrease the level but not completely alleviate poverty.
If I was the governor I would agree to using it as it allow self governance of development.
Yes, the IMF should adopt it: as it will help in improving their lifestyle, which will translate into, better labor force for economic growth.
In China, the economic improvements have forced the natives to take measures of population by having smaller families (Anonymous, n.d). Hence, a control on population gives a chance for economic growth to be somewhat vibrant.
Anonymous (n.d).A Social Undertaking That Benefits the People. Retrieved on 25th October 2011, from http://www.china.org.cn/e-white/familypanning/13-3.htm
Stiglit, J. (2002).Globalism’s Discontents. Retrieved on 25th October 2011, from http://prospect.org/article/globalisms-discontents
IMF Staff, (2000).Globalization: Threat or Opportunity? Retrieved on 25th October 2011, from http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/ib/2000/041200to.htm