Blog jest częścią NAWIGATORA do mojej książki Wędrujący świat www.wedrujacyswiat.pl. Jej Czytelnicy mogą tutaj kontynuować frapującą i nigdy niekończącą się debatę na temat światowej społeczności, globalnej gospodarki i ludzkich losów, a także naszego miejsca i własnych perspektyw w tym wędrującym świecie.
Tutaj można przeczytać wszystkie wpisy prof. Grzegorza W. Kołodko.
Zapraszam do dyskusji!
Blog is a part of NAVIGATOR to my book Truth, Errors and Lies. Politics and Economics in a Volatile World www.volatileworld.net. The readers can continue here the fascinating, never-ending debate about the world’s society, global economy and human fate. It inspires one to reflect also on one’s own place in the world on the move and one’s own prospects. In this way the user can exchange ideas with the author and other interested readers.
Here you can download archive of all posts professor G. W. Kołodko.
You are invited to join our debate!
(1551.) Nie grozi nam przekroczenie 60 proc. PKB (próg zapisany w Konstytucji), natomiast 55 proc. PKB poprawnie liczony dług publiczny już osiągnął. Poprawnie liczony, a więc bez uciekania się do tzw. twórczej księgowości, która w przypadku ministra finansów polega m. in. na wyprowadzeniu Krajowego Funduszu Drogowego, KFD, poza sektor finansów publicznych. Gdy zaś liczyć bilans KFD w sektorze finansowym – a tak powinno się to robić zgodnie z obowiązująca i nas metodologią Komisji Europejskiej, ESA-95 – to relacja długu do produktu brutto już jest większa od 55 proc.
Czy jest się czego obawiać? Tak, ale panikować też nie należy. Kontynuacja polityki lat 2008-11 szybko doprowadziłaby nas do ponad 60-procentowego w stosunku do PKB zadłużenia, ale – miejmy nadzieję – takiej kontynuacji nie będzie. przecież rząd już istotnie zmienił politykę, dążąc do istotnego zmniejszenia deficytu. Oczywiście, nie uda się zejść poniżej 3 proc. już w roku 2012, co zakłada nieracjonalnie rząd premiera Tuska, ale deficyt powinien odczuwalnie spaść.
(1550.) Panie Profesorze. Jak bardzo realne jest przekroczenie opisanych w odpowiednich ustawach i Konstytucji III RP progów relacji długu publicznego wobec PKB w najbiższych latach? Jest się czego bać?
Pozdrawiam
(1549.) After I read the book “Wędrujący Świat “ The first think I would like to discus and comment was neo capitalism. Most of people see capitalism as a sense of freedom but is it really like that ? We can even see on example of United States of America. They were proud of the fact that they have free market and neo liberalistic ideology. But as in many countries all over the world crisis came to “America” as well. My opinion is that (I agree with Mr. Kołodko) cannot deal with self regulation of market. Government should not be passive when it comes to intervention in economy, of course it should not be total intervention.. Neo capitalism brought materialistic way of living and unfairness (monopoly, oligopoly market). In that kind of system the real power have big concerns, corporations where “normal people” has no word to say about economy. Is it really democracy and freedom ? Because of people who are controlling production of goods there is no longer economy for public welfare. I also agree with the sentence that like in Russia, neo capitalism is about distinction of interests tight group of people. What is more there is still bigger and bigger disproportion between poor and rich people. We can also see how in a big scale there is wasting of goods. My opinion is that world came from one extreme to another. Some ideas of capitalism are good but still government should take care of education, health care, environment etc. I am wondering what path will Poland take … ? I think that right now what helping us is still our culture ,values in creation of economic growth .
(1548.) In the chapter 6 of your book called “The Withering of Neoliberalism and Its Tattered Legacy” you criticize neoliberalism. And again, here we observe your clever thesis about many things happening at the same time. At privatization in Poland affected the collapse of socialism in our country and the free capital of the United States and Great Britain. Neoliberal policies, as opposed to minimizing the social role of the state. In such a system ceases to dominate the economic sector of state ownership. Pointing out the defects (including neo-liberalism is highlighting a narrow group interests as has happened in Russia.) you prefer a model of public-private economy, not a capitalist. Meanwhile, a larger share of state in the economy provides opportunities for more equal distribution of income. You cannot imagine that the state was passive in the economic sphere. You see the state’s participation in environmental protection, protection of public safety or health. At the same time you realize that as a bad idea to influence the state in the entire economy (as exemplified in our history we had). As an example, state that implements the model of free market and the interference of the state give to China. Do not forget, however, the costs (lack of democracy, control the number of births by state). In chapter VII which is titled “What is the development and on what it depends on” Already in the beginning of this chapter you note that “an increasingly complex world, knowledge alone is not enough political will is needed to use it.” You care, mr Professor, of the problem associated with the distribution of national income to consumption and accumulation, in both the short and long term. As a method of distribution gives savings: consumption, imports, and investments. You emphasize that the growth of production depends on both (and at the same time) from supply factors and demand factors, the size and structure of capital transfers and socialist, the expenditure of private entrepreneurs and the state budget, the nature of consumer expectations and interests, from internal and external demand, from extreme assumptions on the consumption and savings of various socio-professional and profitable. As the adverse effect of caring for the state and the company only of his capital, without taking account of social capital give rise without development and enrichment of a few. The development is also a growth in population and productivity.
Proficient with various measures of development such as “gross national happiness”, the Gini coefficient, HDI. Professor mentions the so-called. Millennium Development Goals to be achieved by 2015. Eliminating extreme poverty and hunger, universal primary education, gender equality, reducing child mortality and improve the conditions of motherhood, the inhibition of Adidas and other epidemics, ecological sustainable development, global partnership for development. Stressing that the increasing consumption and production may encounter resource-barrier. An important finding of this chapter the summary is that globalization, diversification model, giving a chance at a fairly diversified multi-threaded development of the entire world economy, and also about the relationship dynamics of the effect of reducing the scale of varying levels of development and a realistic point of view of availability of comprehensive non-renewable resources of the earth. You see a big role of culture, values, institutions and policies in creating economic growth – and I agree with all of that.
(1547.) The truth, errors and lies is a powerful and quite an insightful book both in richness of history and glance into contemporary and modern development of history, civilization and, politics and economies. For the purpose of brevity and clarity, I will like to focus more on chapter “A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE WORLD AND WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM IT, why some countries are wealthy and others are poor and weather it must always be so”. I however agree with most part of the entire literature and must say that it’s a carefully threaded and intelligent reflection of what has transpired and need to be done. I will however disagree in some parts of CHAPTER THREE where the citations of history and civilization seems to sound more like the recounting of western biased literature chiefly written 18th century due to the affiliation of western and Arabic/Persian collective histories. I will like to state my disagreement to the facts contained in them about which economies, civilization and cultures were mostly far reaching. There is a vast disappearance of other under-written civilizations which contributed greatly to the collective world civilization in those eras ranging from 1000 BC to the pre-transatlantic slave era. Apart from the highly advertised, Chinese, European, Arabic and to a recent extent the American contribution to modern history, there is lack of interest or ignoring thereof of other parts of maybe less popular but original indispensable civilizations ranging from the Mongols, aborigines, southern Americans and the sub-Saharan African for example. There is no much mention of the civilizations of African empires like the Benin, Malis, Timbuktu, Ibos, Ijaw, and Nubians except the western version of Egyptian civilization. It is important to point out that these people have a high level of education, irrigation, agriculture, science, religious practices, trade, commerce, astrology, music, trans-border dealings and far reaching exports that contributes a lot to the wider world before the near and mainstream history that will be consumed with slavery, colonialism and the most modern poverty and corruption. Despite the fact that I am an African, I will like you to see my agitations in the light of reason and not only emotion.
It’s also worth noting that the book did not pinpoint on the exact reason why some countries or regions are still chronically poor or drained of the brains that have spurned the innovations or position they once used to enjoy. I am talking of Africa in particular and the Arabic wars, European occupation that will last more than 500 years of near modern times and the constant repression and lost of souls and intellects that goes with it for all this time periods. I generally admire the book and will like to write more if space and other occasions regarding the requirements will permit.
(1546.) If only the Russian economy was as splendid and robust as is its culture, this country would be doing just great! Unfortunately, it’s not the case. The resource course is affecting the economy in a negative way. Instead of taking care of diversification of the real sector, and using the windfall income form export of oil and gas at very favorable prices, for the purpose of investing in economy’s modernization, Russia’s government seems to be happy with the current state of affairs. And this state is an inertia, allowing for a miserable, considering the potential and the challenges, growth of GDP of only 4.0-4.5 percent in 2010-12. The current account surplus hovers around 5.5 percent, which is a wasteful way of using the economic surplus. At least in part it ought to be invested in high-tech industry to bring it to the modern standard of 21st century. The more so, since the process of de-industrialization of Russian economy continues.
The inflation remains too high, at over 9 percent, while the official rate of unemployment is over 7 percent. What’s worse, even with extraordinary income form energy resources, the budget is in red and there is a deficit of 2.7 percent of GDP. This balance should be in surplus. The new salon of Lamborghini at Tverskaya street doesn’t change otherwise meager picture.
But the culture flourishes! Theatres, galleries, exhibitions, shows, concerts, new books… So much to choose from! Thus, after my lecture, seminar and the books signing at the Lomonosov University, I’ve bought some new Russian fiction and I went to the Tchaikovsky Concert Hall to listen to the music. Splendid!
(1545.) If I would have to choose one chapter from the book ‘’Truth, Errors, and Lies’’ that would definitely be ‘The Uncertain Future’ and its twelve compass points of survey. As mentioned in the book, we are creators of the world- it is only up to us if we want to take the most of it without looking at the consequences, or take care of the future for the next generations. Knowledge and understanding seems to be the keys to information- based economy, which we should be aiming at. First we should ask ourselves why the future is uncertain and what is our contribution? Maybe it has its sources in people’s ignorance, maybe there are way too many sources of pressure, and maybe it is the dialogue, which is missing?
What I learned is that every reform matters and although reforms are confused with transformation the difference is huge. Reforms deal with improvement of existing system, whereas transformation is an move from one organization system to another. Policies existing should be mixed properly- systemic change and development policies must be balanced. It seems according to your statements, that balance is a key to the future. Even expanding private sector must be well outweighed between freedom and entrepreneurship. In the interview for “tvo” you caught my attention by stating that there are groups of interests behind the events. You also mentioned, that our policy makers tend to confuse means and ends in economy-our ultimate goal should be effective and durable economy along with social development. So what we need here seems to be a complex strategy in interdependent global economy as you write in the book. Now the question should be how we could achieve and govern it? Policy matters and domestic capital accumulation is crucial in the development we take part in. Managing country- minimizing threats and maximizing opportunities- must be done in global context, as the interdependence in this global, planetary world is a fact.
In your book you challenge yourself to explain reasons behind our reality from different perspectives. You try to show that we must learn the lessons from the past and that many future events have their beginning here and now. What I like the most is that you base your forecasts from own experience as a professor of economics, traveler and a person simply fascinated by world’s transformation- a true global citizen, as you said: “traveling is comparing and comparing is understanding”.
(1544.) Dzień dobry Panie profesorze.
Chciałby znać Pana opinie w sprawie tego artykułu
http://www.parkiet.com/artykul/1054561_Stany-Zjednoczone-sa-bankrutem.html
Czy pomysł przedstawiony przez profesora Kotlikofa jest realny i możliwy do wprowadzenia w naszym kochanym kraju.
(1543.) Professor, in your book you mentioned very often the globalization of culture; I would like to develop this issue. Very often, we talk more about Americanization than globalization, as you also have referred to this point during one of your lecture at Kozminski, but I do not agree on the fact that the world is Americanized.
Obviously, the American film industry known as Hollywood is the most important exporter in the world. Its influence and success in other countries – so other cultures – is a fact and not debatable, even if Bollywood is trying to catch the train. When one talk about Americanization, how not to think about MacDonald? This is part of the American food culture; which is maybe not the best thing that has been imported from the American culture.
We could mention many other parts of the American culture that have been imported, but it is not the only culture that has influenced the world. For example, in Europe and also North America, Asian food became very trendy since the 1990’s. There are many other examples coming from all over the world (but not from the US) that have influenced the world itself.
Moreover, some countries defend against cultures coming from abroad. Like you mentioned in one of your lectures, Professor, in France a film has to be translated into French to be shown on the French territory. It may be seen only as laziness, but as far as I know French culture, I think that is more proudness of their culture than laziness. In France, people are proud of the region where they live in, so proud of their subculture. For example, in some regions, people fight for keeping their old language, which is not spoken anymore in France.
To come back to the issue of Americanization, I would say that the American culture is the result of a melting pot that created a global culture and not a national culture. Indeed, the country is too young and people living there are almost only immigrants, so they brought their own culture and added it to the melting pot. Finally, I would say that American culture is only a sum of many cultures, with the good and the bad points. So for me, globalization of culture is a global exchange from one country to another, and not from the US to the rest of the world. This exchange is not new, it started thousands of years ago when the merchants came from Asia to Europe to sell their silk, but the speed of this exchange has increased, thanks to the new ways of communication.
As citizens of the world, should we work on a global culture or maintain its diversity?
(1542.) The term development is a complicated concept and as a result we have problems to measure it. Unfortunately the most theoretical concepts such as; HDI, GNH let alone development strategies and policies fail since the present day situation for growth and development is becoming more and more complicated. Over the last few decades, a broad consensus has emerged that our standards of living are not only driven by economic success, but are also determined by the quality of the environment we live in. Today, it is widely accepted that the traditional measures of economic welfare, such as GDP or per capita incomes, can provide only an incomplete picture of how well we are doing. Development process plays crucial roles in any process affecting the exploration, utilisation, and conservation of natural resources since it bases on rapid industrialization. Taking into account that the resource factor returned to its prominence today’s multinational companies must understand that sustainability is the calling of their generation. Sustainable development is a very complex concept and there are many interconnections between the environment and business sector. In many cases, environmental improvement and business development may be connected, for example, where industrial process improvements may make a plant more efficient and reduce pollution. I think it should be an important goal of each country to create a system of indicators for sustainable development and thus for making the important signals for policymakers and for the society. A key problem however lies in the lack of critical information and the amount of uncertainty regarding the causes and effects of environmental decision-making. In the absence of reliable data and analyses, choices have often been based on generalized observations, guesses, and on emotions. It is therefore not surprising that the use of natural resources has remained below optimal, resulting in lower standards of living than would otherwise be possible. We stand, however, on the verge of the opportunity to transform our approach to pollution control and natural resource management through the deployment of digital technologies in support of more careful, quantitative, empirical grounded, and systematic environmentalism.
The movement toward sustainable development on the business level is very important information for government. Company strategy and public policy are alike concerned to match international challenges. This also increasingly affects individuals, who are also required to become competitive in the way they conduct their lives, these demands going under the headings of being flexible, innovative, imaginative entrepreneurial, etc. With the own system of indicators, we could evaluate the development position of economy. It is important for policymakers to find the strongest correlations between sustainability indicators. This is the only way to find the shorter way towards a more sustainable society.
(1541.) Although you claim that only a few politicians out there are aware of the fact that an instrument such as the Human Development Index exists, this topic really got my attention. I realized how true it really is, when we, let alone the politicians, think about the wellbeing of a country one of the first things that comes to mind is the GDP. Reading the news today, I bumped into “The Better Life Index” which was formed by OECD having in mind to rank countries based on things like the employment situation, leisure time, and life expectancy. I thought this was quite funny, but at the same time it is something which actually seems very useful. First of all, a very credible organization such as the OECD stands behind it and second, it seems like a very good way to measure the “health” of the country. Is this not what we are trying to accomplish by measuring the GDP? Sure, GDP is a lot more precise, but at the same time very limited.
Life has more to offer than just the cold numbers of economic statistics. OECD has identified 11 topics as essential, from which we can derive the quality of life in particular countries. This index reminded me of the HDI, which takes into consideration the state of health, knowledge, and the standard of living in the country. Of course “The better life index” is not the perfect tool. For example, on the list of the countries in which the quality of life is the best, we can find New Zealand on the fourth position, yes the same New Zealand which has witnessed the second highest rate of male suicides in the world last year.
Globalization is switching the shifts very fast on us lately. It is important to keep up and to measure its effects by more than one mean. But maybe in the rush of things we overestimate this process a little, to say the least. The fact that we were supposed to be flying supersonically today is a little disappointing because we have not lived up to the “hype.” I think it is pretty safe to say now that globalization is an unpredictable process. Who would have thought that even though the “gap” between rich and poor is increasing, the poor countries will be taking jobs away from the developed ones during today’s phases of globalization. As you said, this is actually a perception and what is really happening is there are two processes happening simultaneously and many other factors are involved. It turns out that there is some truth in the statement that, no matter what somebody will be there to complain.
(1540.) Poverty, in its very deep definition, is based on unemployment rate in a country. I can say, as ordinary Georgian, that problems of poverty concerns my country even very much. Especially main problem of Georgia is hidden unemployment, that causes huge problems to the citizens. The percentage, of people who leaves country just because to find a job abroad and to afford their living and look after their families, is shocking. The rate of inflation increased by 30%, so the prices got triple, because of that purchasing power of poor people declines and they are obliged to leave the country, especially women, just to get above the poverty even for a bit. I think, this kind of migration has very bad influence on developing of the country. Even to double pension isn’t enough to lead a normal way of life. The government is trying to solve the problem by shrinking the gap between wealthy and poor people. In the recent years, it’s said that reduction of poverty is visible in Georgia, but they never mention about this hidden unemployment. So there is always lack of robust data in official statistics, as poverty is subjective phenomena and it’s impossible to calculate thoroughly, estimate and reduce it completely.
Another also very important indications of poverty are health care (especially it concerns with water) and education system. To say the truth the education level in Georgia is too high, but anyway the migration of students from the country counts thousands already. It is considered that if you get education abroad you have more opportunities to find a good job. This kind of ‘brain drains’ will definitely influence the countries future. Water quality is Georgia is too high and it’s too cheap, especially you don’t have to buy fresh water, it’s drinkable. It could be considered as very big advantage for any kind of country.
Georgia is striving towards integration into increasing economic world – Globalization. It’s the fact that it has experienced major change and keeps going to move onto high standards by developing technologies and economic growth. Poverty and migration drivers are in direct connection with globalization, so they should not have received relatively little attention. But anyway this kind of problems like poverty, brain drains, unemployment etc remains as unsolved task for Georgian government.
(1539.) Over-globalization
Before to start giving my opinion I’d like to raise the following question: Are we over-globalizing the planet?
It is true that globalization has brought great things. But often do not talk about its negative aspects and I would try to show that sometimes there are not benefits of globalization. Term globalization is vast and as a student, I think even I have little expertise to make a specific analysis of advantages and benefits that emphasizes that part of the balance carries more weight.
We can not understand the crisis without taking into account globalization. The globalization of financial markets without any regulation has meant that we see involved in an unprecedented crisis, but do not want to focus on this aspect because I think has been discussed many times. I want to focus on how globalization implies decrease in diversity.
With globalization, are losing the richness of human diversity. Today there is a tendency to unification, all seem to tend to follow patterns established by society, some guidelines that are part of the globalization process.
The difference is often seen as something negative, something unusual. And all those who distance themselves from the rest are seen as weirdos in this society. Be careful with over-globalization because each country has its culture and if we globalize the planet without controls and regulation we could lost the cultural diversity.
Because of globalization many cultures, traditions and celebrations are taking that are not characteristic of themselves, such as Halloween. Should be aware of the dangers of globalization and try to put the brakes on the new trend of over-globalization.
Education is the key to control the conscience of the individual. It should educate children on the way to see this human diversity.
The problem is how to get out of this current of the river of globalization. Social pressure often makes it very complicated.
As discussed in my first post, men’s needs a change of consciousness of 360 º. Part of this shift has to do with awareness that globalization brings both positive and negative, and that we should place limits and barriers for the common good and not for a common evil. Without collaboration and team work to eradicate global crisis in the world is impossible.
(1538.) First of All I would like to point that this book is interesting because it has been written as an “observation of the world” , so there are not only cold facts but also penetrating observes getting , opinions and different views. This is very important when it comes to understand the crucial aspects of this book. The problems that Prof. Kołodko touch are about today’s world and the future (his comments, hopes, views, observations). What I like the most in this literature is that He mixed knowledge and elements from history, sociology, politics and economy- which is crucial when it comes to understand genesis of the issue and get to know: how?, when?, why? and what next ?. For me as a student and young person still getting experience important is that this book was written by experienced person, practitioner not only theoretic.
What get my interest the most in that book was chapter about globalization. I wrote really carefully this chapter because I was curious what economist and experienced people think about this process. From what I observe globalization has many advantages but also a lot of disadvantages. As advantages we can point out things like: increased free trade between nations, flexibility that companies have to operate across borders, communication (mass media) between countries, reduction of cultural barriers, faster spread of democratic ideas etc. My opinion is that nowadays all the disadvantages of globalization are because this process sometimes “crosses the line”, I mean get to far. Globalization as a general idea is good but no it become too strong. Nations losing their independence, culture, uniqueness. As attributes of globalization in the book there are point out : liberalization, integration, interdependence. But is it really good in that kind of scale ? I agree with the author that we should control globalization , in order to make it well processed. I also agree with the fact that nowadays because of the globalization world have new problems like : Countries are out of control because of the migration of people or fast spreading new technology, which change way of economy and makes countries too dependent from each other all over the world. From me another disadvantage is also the fact that now there is still increasing flow of global capital, increased number of people who migrate to developed countries and work as a cheap labor. Globalization is also a result of materialistic lifestyle with consumption as a path to prosperity. I truly agree with skeptical attitude of Prof. Kołodko and postulate for more controlling and institutionalization of this process. I also hope that people will not blindly stuck in this process because we have many national goods, amazing culture so being a little bit more individualistic is better. Because being individualistic is being unique and valuable.
(1537.) Nowadays the international policy is shaped by activities of countries which aim at providing themselves the energy resources security. In the global race for the long term access to natural resources, the dominant position of major players such as the United States are facing the threat of an expansive and dynamically developing Chinese economy. The possession of raw materials give the possibility of development of the country, ensure social welfare and secure the economy, therefore China growing demand for raw materials has forced them to redefine its policy in quest for new markets rich in natural resources. Recently Africa has become an attractive target of Chinese policy, which aim at ensuring a constant independent base of resource. Such countries as Gabon, Angola, Equatorial Guinea and Nigeria have rich oil deposits and at the same time they are a large market full of potential. Angola is certainly a major direction of Chinese investments, mostly in the energy sector.
It is worth to analyse the Chinese involvement in Africa and its consequences from several perspectives. As everything has its pros and cons, China’s investments in Africa one hand can be beneficial but on the other can bring damaging effect. Chinese activities involve economic, political, cultural and social aspects. China’s economic cooperation with African countries is based mainly on the production and export of raw materials, therefore is not intended to improve the situation in whole Africa, because most of the natural resources are located only in few countries. Instead, Africa should adopt a diversified economy, which will provide them balanced and stable development. Because China observes non-interference principle in internal affair of state it may contribute to the uneven redistribution of wealth and in consequence creates room for abuse and the spread of corruption, which is one of major barriers of growth in the African continent. Profits from trade goes primarily to the highest authority and elites and do not affect the poorest class that are most numerous in the African countries’ society. Chinese companies encouraged by the state move their production to Africa in order to minimize costs. Their activities could contribute to the development of the labour market. But many foreign companies are characterized by a failure to comply with safety standards, child labour and work in inhumane conditions. The fact remains that rapid growth of the African-Chinese relationship contravened the traditional power of the presence of USA and European postcolonial countries (mainly France), causing their anxiety related to their shrinking influence in the region.
On the positive side African-Chinese relationship started to place more emphasis on investment in infrastructure development, which is indispensable in achieving economic independence of the states. Besides investments in infrastructure China involves in agriculture investments through training the local staff. In the face of huge deficit and starvation in some regions the development of agriculture sector is extremely important. An advantage can be also a huge import of cheap Chinese products which enrich the African markets by giving people an access to essential commodities.
The importance of the involvement of China in shaping the transformation of the African continent is significant and growing. The increase in culture exchanges can lead in the future to interesting new social phenomena. China’s presence in Africa should be perceived as a new persistent element of the global economy and what is interesting this time without the involvement of the West.
(1536.) For whom globalization is harmful?
Anti-globalists say that globalization is especially harmful to poor workers in developing countries. It is seems that the majority of workers in rich countries should not be afraid of globalization, and they greatly benefit from it. But is it true for workers from poor countries? The answer is simple: for workers should be less to lose and more to buy.
Conservative economists are optimistic about the integration and the prospects of developing countries. Openness to international trade and investment should encourage capital inflows into the poor economy. In the developing world is not enough capital and return on investment here will be higher than in developed countries. If poor countries reduce their barriers to trade and investment, rich foreigners will want to send back their capital. If the flow of resources comes in the form of loans or portfolio investment, it increases domestic savings and reduce the lack of investment for local companies. Things will get even better if theinflow of resources is through the emergence of new, controlled from overseas enterprises. This form of capital brings with it technology and skills from abroad, with the financial risk which is reduced. In any case, investment growth should increase incomes, increasing demand for human resources and making them more productive.
That is why the workers from the countries – recipients of foreign direct investment rather benefit from the integration than workers from donor countries. With or without the influx of foreign capital inflows, developing countries should get the same static and dynamic gains from trade, and rich. This logic often leads to distrust, since these benefits seem to appear out of nowhere. It is obvious that someone must lose and someone has to buy. But it is not. Benefits that rich countries through trade, is not formed due to a poor country – its trading partner. Recall that, according to theory, trade – this is a game with a positive wallet. All transactions – exporters and importers, borrowers and lenders, shareholders and employees – can have benefits.
What can refuse this simple theory, and prove that it is false? Opponents of globalization say that much can. First, they suggest, that people encourage developing countries to economic growth through trade – it is a mistake. If all poor countries try to do it at the same time, the price of their exports in world markets may fall.
The second objection of the anti-globalization concerns not the trade but foreign direct investment. Traditionally believed that foreign money is spent on economical investments that should be conducive to development. Experience shows that this is often not the case. New capital may make a small profit or do not offer it, and sometimes turn around losses. Money can be wasted or stolen. And because they were borrowed, it generates a huge external debt. Not too much influence on economic development, such integration weakens it.
(1535.) Globalization has become a major topic of discussion and concern in economic since the mid 90s, and has offer some countries in Africa like Nigeria the opportunities to become wealth through export growth, and to increases her international trades between other globalized nations in the world. Also to gain new ideas in the terms of technologies and education. Globalization helps in development of Nigeria and her economy in the sense of export led growth.
Since independence (1960) Nigerian economy has been monoculture and has been a dependant of western nations for its survival. Nigerian revenue was depending on agriculture product such as palm-nut, cocoa, groundnut and many others, which they use to provide and sustain her citizens. The exportation of agriculture reduced after 1970 when Nigeria discovered crude oil and made a major shift from agriculture and add more force in petroleum business. The discovery of oil has made Nigeria to become heavily dependent on it and that has really caused Nigerian economy to be unstable due to the price of oil in the global market. The advantages of globalization in Nigeria is that it allow us to do international trades such as export import and allow foreign investors to invest in the country to create more job opportunity to the country citizens. Globalization as it is say has enriched the world economically, scientifically and culturally. This is because globalization opens the countries’ economies to a wide variety of consumption of goods, new technology and knowledge, and has offers economies potentials of eradicating poverty.
The book Truth Errors and lies made me to understand that globalization is changing country economy, but also has a change in the social, culture and political aspect of life’s. I was wondering if globalization has influence in human thinking and religious beliefs. But as I can see and read from the news, I understand that some countries doesn’t want the help of other globalized nations and that they are happy they way they are. Take Pakistan as an example, the citizens knew Osama Bin Laden is the leader of terrorist group (Al Akaida) who are threat to the world and responsible for most of the attacks in the United States Of America etc, but they were angry at US after raid that killed the most wanted man. The people were protesting standing in front of the cameras hold papers with signs written on them saying America go we don’t need you we can do without you. Should I say cultural aspect of globalization didn’t influence them? Or they prefer to live the life of killing themselves and killing other innocent’s souls? Or they need something more the world cannot give them?
(1534.) „Truth, errors and lies“ is a bestseller, which was translated into 25 languages and published in 40 countries. What is special about this book that it helps to understad the term of globalization, it shows different aspects of this concept like geographic, cultural and economic. It was said that it is an essay about the world, which looks into the past and into the future.
The book consist of ten chapters, each of them touch the substantial problem. The fourth one brings up the issue of immigration, which nowadays is starting to be more and more common. The world is becoming a melting pot. Some countries are trying to limit the amount of immigrants, but some states, who already open its borders regret it. For examples in Europe, France and United Kingdom. Generally speaking European Union had opened its borders, so the mobility of the people also increased. Sometimes the reason of the immigration is the economical situation and the main factor in the decision making process is disatisfaction of the current situation in the fatherland. Some of them are personal reasons. The phenomenon of immigration is that we are dealing also with the cultural aspect. The new inhabitants has to adopt some new customs, language and tradition. In this case those cultures are clushing and melting.
Of course migration has its advantages and disadventages. It helps to obtain some personal goals, like to get the better education and job. But in my point of view there are much more drawbacks. The country is losing its citizens, there is less working-people, immigrants are using more frequently different means of transport, which results in the increasment of polution, which is an environmental aspect.
In my opinion globalization is mostly a danger when it comes to the culture. As we all know, people are psychologicaly conditioned to affililation. They need to belong to some group and have their own idendity. In the future the globalization might change people’s values and beliefs, because of melting all the cultures together. We should preserve our cultures and pay more attention to those ethnical. Also I think that the globalization ought to be used more as an informatice source Of course it already has be done, but there are some issues, which still should be publicized constantly untill there will be some action involved. For example the problems in Africa like in Ghana, where in the Northern region only 20% inhabitants have an access to the fresh water. There is so many examples, of poor situations, especially in the third world countries, people should be educated. Using the phenomenon of globalization and the development of the technology is a good solution. I am wondering why it has not been done yet? Media popularize so many issues, why not focus on those people in need who do not have an access to the information?
(1533.) I would say that generation is not only the buzzword of our generation, but the buzzword of the last millennium. What has happened during the past 1000 years was definitely extraordinary and to some extent – unexpected. Stating in your book that only during the last couple millennia, us as Homo sapiens have actually been doing something constructive and at the same time productive making us make steps forward. These steps proved to be leaps. In a relatively short period of time we have traveled unimagined distances. But how good is this really for the world? Even though the future is uncertain, we can say with quite big confidence that the future holds bad things in store for us. Even in the letter to your granddaughter’s granddaughter you stress the significance of things happening, but many things being left out, many chances lost. At the end, you end by enclosing 1000 euros, saying that she will probably need it to buy herself something to wear. This caught me by surprise, but also sparked interest in me.
What makes me wonder is if globalization is indeed good for everyone in the long run. By thinking deeper and deeper, the things that are said about secret societies wanting to control the world by in the end having a one big nation seem quite reasonable. Now, we have North America, consisting of numerous countries. Europe is now a big accumulation of countries called the European Union. Soon enough we will see the Asian countries form some kind of a collaborating unit. As you said, thinking short term does not get us far. The United States has been thinking mostly about themselves when “being the police of the world.” That is why their control is no longer so evident. You are also the supporter of the global currency, which I find interesting and it makes me wonder “does one size really fit all?” Okay, more and more we experience the clash of cultures, but we cannot forget that some of the differences are simply –huge.
By “globalizing” everything, including countries (which are already majorly interdependent), currencies, cultures, it is a scary thought to think many years ahead. Is a one big country (which I don’t think is an exaggeration of the possibilities of the future), really a good thing for the Earth? This makes me agree even more with you that people today only care for about the next 100 years, the years in which they will be alive.
(1532.) The expansion of the market economy means having the need for more knowledge, this is undeniable that education, knowledge and comprehensive educational process, acquire a huge value and who can successfully access to greater knowledge, more information will have access to a better life, and consequently, greater ability to rise socially. We are moving according to Tomassini, a production company to another of knowledge, competition for capital, labor or natural resources competition for knowledge and quality as the key to market access, emphasized the importance acquiring information and knowledge in this process of globalization. Globalization strengthens and legitimizes social mobility (formerly within the conservative society, the social scale was by the bond of blood or money) is now more dynamic by a value or value that is anti-competitive, this suggests constant improvement. The market economy requires competition between countries, between companies and between individuals, this highlights one of the natural features of the man, who is competing, not standardized and it has always been so, what happens is that before this aspect was diluted in the mass of individuals with egalitarian behavior, the man always competing with himself, if he did not have no rationale or explanation to see him overcome so that the market economy has raised the professional level now and economic activity is but something that man has known and lived forever. What has and what to do is to regulate this competition and ethical manner that relies on a basis of loyalty. The world goes to the homogenization of the values of belonging and identity and thus national boundaries begin to lose gravity and become more permeable, individuals may care about what happens in neighboring countries not only as a distant relation, but as part of its own concern, and obviously that’s going to be an important cultural and political change.
(1531.) As in seventh chapter of your book „What development is, and what it depends on” you mentioned an example of 100 entrepreneurs and 10000000 people getting different amount of money. I am going to consider what is more beneficial for national economy, 100zł per year more for many people or 10 million less on taxes for entrepreneurs. Which class of these could move economy more, richer entrepreneurs, that can invest bigger amount of money in huge ideas, or simple citizes, earning regular salary, spending a great part of their wage for the cost of living, not having a possibility to save a lot. So these regular ones cannot afford for as huge investment as entrepreneurs can but additional 100zł per year for millions of people can significantly increase move in economy.
I would like to base my opinion on example of post-soviet countries like Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. Why are these countries strongly connected with this topic ? because we can observe enormous differences between society classes in those countries. Entrepreneurs are very often exempt from the part of taxes, and sometimes their scams are hidden due to corruption. There is no middle class in such countries, so people are either rich or poor. Rich entrepreneurs by investing, can create new workplaces, so why if they have reliefs from taxation, they cannot provide a job to wide amount of poorer people, job that can guarantee higher level of living. I think if they tried to increase salaries of their employers instead of saving, whole post-soviet economy would go upper, not losing too much by less amount in entrepreneurs’ pocket. Unfortunately this system does not work properly and we still observe big differences between each class. However I think that those countries will be forced in the near future to change their attitude to poorer layers of society, by giving them higher salaries. It is simple if worker earns 1500zł, he spends probably 90% of that amount, if entrepreneur earns millions, in most cases he is not able to spend even half of that, so his situation does not accelerate economy. Government cannot be selfish and protect this style of managing people anymore, sooner or later demographic and poverty phenomenon will exceed the possibilities to deal with them, not affecting GDP growth.
(1530.) First of all, I would like to underline that I am positively surprised about how quick of a read your book is. Not only is it drenched with a myriad of information, but it is an unpredictable piece, as well. Including everything from the turtles from the Galapagos Archipelago, informative stories from your life, brief history of our existence, sustainability and countless others – your book is one of a kind. There has been a lot said about the topic of globalization. We know it incorporates everything from migration to the abolition of slavery in Britain in 1807, I do wonder when it really started – because I agree with your statement that it had to have a beginning and it is not unending.
Right now, we are at the stage of globalization (or at least taking into consideration one part of it), where one nation finds itself dependent on another whether we are talking about food, energy, minerals, manufactured goods, and even foreign debt, to name a few. Of course not forgetting the fact that as you said, observations regarding the interdependence have been witnessed By Polybius of Megalopolis over two millennia ago. I think it has never been so fierce as it is now. The whole world will depend on Poland and Ukraine to be the host of the European Football Championships in 2012. It is quite amazing to think how intertwined our world really is. As you have stated, the unemployment in Europe (now even more in the USA), depends on the amount of workforce in Asia. Unrest in the Arabic countries might not seem so dangerous at first glance, but I think we all noticed the effect it has had on the global markets. The obvious rise in the price of oil and other factors, undoubtedly negatively influenced the developing countries such as India by leading to higher budget deficits or South Korea which has no energy resources of their own.
As we clearly see, interdependence is a phenomenon (as you called the third attribute of globalization) which is present now more than ever. The clearest and most recent example is the unrest in the Middle East which has destabilized the energy markets and pushed the crude oil prices up. For many, globalization is equal to economic interdependence. I think we can all agree that globalization has its winners and losers, but I will stick with the liberal approach and say that the openness accompanying globalization will benefit all.
(1529.) If humans’ freedom rely on the possibility of travelling and having the choice of the residence place, so why it creates so much discussion and controversy? And why some people are for and others against it? From the beginnings of our times, people were travelling, colonizing and populating different places. It is still happening but from different reasons. Will it always be that way? Or will it stop? Maybe, in the far future we will not have any culture and race difference in our World (melting pot). I think that opinions are divided. Ones are for it and others are against it.
“We cannot stop migration”
Immigrants often leave their countries to search for a better life. We can see it in movies like: “Dirty Pretty Things” or “Desert Flower”. Those people often come from poor families or countries and wish to perform a better life. They also travel to earn more money to help their families. Most, without migration would not settle down as they did. Are people “intolerant” or “discriminating”? Or are immigrants cross too much “boundaries”? Well, “where you stand depends on where you sit.”
The second part of people claim that culture is disappearing and everything connected with it (salad bowl). They might think that emigrants are taking them jobs. An example would be the campaign in France with the poster of a “Polish Plumber”. We often meet critics on emigrants but as a quotation says, the only person that can criticize is the one that has a heart to help (William Penn). They can also think that some have difficulties in adapting in a new environment, in the new countries. No doubt, we cannot stop the migration wave, and there are troubles with migrants in countries like France: the discussion on Muslim headscarf in France. However, also young educated people migrate because of unemployment in their own countries and low earnings. Not only have the countries that are welcoming immigrants met troubles, but also for the countries that are losing talented workers. They are expecting better wages abroad. Some are so determined to leave their countries that they die on the way (desert border between Mexico and USA), some are deported- they all want to get a chance. In case to understand it we have to be more empathic (one of the abilities described by Daniel Goleman in Emotional Intelligence).
Many people are wondering about the effects of migration. I think there are some positive aspects of it: elimination of overpopulation in for example India, and negative effects: riots and culture disappearance. The solution would be to find a balance between those two. “Globalization remains restricted as long as (…) it does not allow people to live and search for work where they want”, as well as “with democratic and peaceful methods we cannot stop it”.
(1528.) Today we all are witnesses of an ever more rapid process of internationalization, of economic life in the world, sometimes even its globalization. There are many reasons for this, but the parent may be seeking to raise the level of wellbeing of the population of individual nations, countries and groups of the ongoing and intensifying competitive struggle. It’s about more intense competition among the various economic subjects (households, enterprises etc.) both in domestic markets and the wider international market. In your book, you perceive globalization as “a process of permanent change that not necessarily always lead in one direction “. The main attributes of globalization are, as you mention, liberalization (mostly freedom), integration (and thus a gradual process of connecting to markets and goods, capital, labor) and the relationships.
The process of globalization and the whole concept of globalization has become today, probably as a broad term as range of the same phenomenon. I think that globalization can be generally described as a network of links between companies, countries or societies. This means that some activities occurring in one part of the world bring consequences for individual units or societies in sometimes very distant regions of the globe. Moreover, the name itself suggests that the process of some reflections on the substance: globalization so the spread of something to the whole earthly globe – as well as moving something into the background, in other words to the margin which is also called marginalization. Nowadays, it seems that globalization has affected virtually every aspect of human life – from the patterns of consumption, lifestyles through research and development of knowledge and technology to finance, markets and consumer strategies. The benefits associated with globalization are primarily extending the scale of production and binding of the availability of the products simultaneously in several locations around the world. As an advantage of globalization we can also acknowledge even easier communication through the development of techniques that are made for this purpose. And finally, the development of transport has meant that practically every place on earth is for us to open … But globalization also takes on a negative meaning. Even in the economy, finance and business. It often leads to a widening gap in society, inequalities that are particularly discernible in the countries of Latin America, where on the one hand we have a small group of people very wealthy, on the other hand huge number of poor or even destitute. Of course, these proportions are changing, but not everywhere and not at the same pace. Today, for the profits from phenomenon of globalization benefit only those poor countries that do not close up on it. Wider opening up to globalization is associated with membership in international organizations, grouping a number of countries in a particular legal system. In the case of Poland being more open to globalization has meant and has been associated with accession to the European Union, accompanied by income growth and reducing inequality. With regards to the negative impact of globalization on the level of social wealth and the degree of financial disparities between nationals of the country have certainly increased competition, a growing share of new technologies in production and the freer movement of capital – in fact, these factors reduce the clout, in other words “bargaining power” of workers . A common practice today is therefore the transfer of work or even entire factories to countries where there is cheaper labor, or where the market and demand are relatively larger. This results, of course, in deepening unemployment and, consequently, economic contrasts in a place where the firm already was.
We all know that wealth creates another wealth. The best confirmation of this is huge role of loosening of restrictions on capital movements (connected with globalization) to increase social inequalities. The higher our wealth status is, the faster grow our assets. Such a policy is very friendly to the rich people and unfavorable for the poor – it means that the latter are not able to meet even their basic needs. Therefore, I think that there is a possibility that people may abandon the idea of free markets, if they become ineffective for them. Especially these concerns seem to reinforce Latin American countries like Venezuela, Brazil and Argentina, where the most important voices are populist leaders like Hugo Chavez. These people are ready for a chance to bury their countries with rising economic collapse, if only to improve the rank lists by a few percentage points. Even in the United States, there is no shortage of votes advocating hardly against the concept of free trade and thus implicitly against any benefits involving the concept of globalization.
How the world will change because of globalization is very difficult to predict today. What is certain, is that reality can no longer get around this process.
(1527.) Globalization has brought not only economic integration, but also makes the concept of urban development, design and even construction techniques and materials globalized. While China is becoming the test site of the world’s leading architects, on the other hand, globalization is leading “urban epidemic” to flood.
Internationally renowned architect, CCTV new building designer Rem Koolhaas once said: “The number of Chinese architects is one-tenth of America’s architects, but in one fifth of the time, five times the number of building are designed. This means that the efficiency of Chinese architects is 2500 times the Americans.” Such as Shanghai in the past ten years, the new skyscrapers are more than the skyscrapers combined all over the U.S. West Coast. These architectural design concept, most directly drawn from the Western developed countries’ “high-rise, high density and large squares” model, lacking the city’s “thumbprint”.
In the construction sector, for a long time, the architectural culture mainly is Western architectural discourse which dominated the world and globalization brings Western values to city planning and design, thus shaping a similarity of city space and form. We see that no matter Beijing, Shanghai, or Hong Kong, Taipei, Bangkok, Seoul or New York, Paris, London, Toronto, many cities have lost their selfhood, being very similar to each other. It can be said that the impact of globalization, lessened the consciousness of Chinese Building and the Oriental culture. The identity of global culture and the common pursuit of present consumption patterns causing the traditional city characteristics gradually die out.
On the other hand, globalization also makes the construction market increasingly international. More and more large-scale construction projects are designed by architects who are away from the project environment and background. Architects’ lack of understanding of the urban context and developers’ pursue of profit, resulting a freedom like making city plan and reconstruct the city on a piece of blank paper. For example, a considerable number of foreign architects while dealing with Chinese old town reconstruct problems, often see the city as a piece of blank paper, make China as the proving ground of where their dreams come true, freely draw the blueprints on it. And the native architects, either adhering to the Western idea, or living for orders, to meet the intent of the leaders and developers.
Speaking of China, which has for thousands of years’ city history, the cities should not lose the characteristics, and destroy the historical culture’s heritage. Professor Kolodko wrote in his book: “Everything that was once new becomes old and can disappear entirely over time.” I think that many things will be changed, but something should at least stay.
(1526.) I found the section of the book Stagnation and Development to be very interesting to me. I found it exceptionally interesting when you mention that there are good institutions and bad ones. When we talk about the bad ones these are the institutions which are the main result of stagnation in a society. These bad institutions really have a negative effect on the growth and the prospects of a society and really discourage the potential growth. Red tape and the centralized management of state-owned companies are institutions you mention in your book. But something people don’t recognize is that the mafia and organized crime is also an institution and in some parts of the world one of the strongest and have the biggest influence in a particular society. When we talk about the mafia and organized crime we do not even see how well organized and what type of impact they have on people in a society and really control the growth and development and progression of people. Many factors come into play when we talk about the mafia and the control they have over a society by drug trafficking, extortion, racketeering and even illegal prostitution, and all of these factors will definitely influence how a society is organized and ran. In a lot of times the government closes an eye on such activities due to payoffs and many influences forced by these organized crimes on influence on political decisions. That’s why they are considered real organizations and institutions because they have as much influence as your local mayor or governor sometimes. You also mentioned money laundering and corruption in this chapter but that is quite obvious who is taking part in these activities once again the mafia would be in some way involved. This is why they should be opposed and dismantled as you say.
Good institutions really encourage the growth and development of the society and all above have a guarantee the security of transactions and encourage technical and social progress. Countries who can ensure stability and possible to adapt in a fluid way to changing natural and cultural conditions, these are the ones that are the real successors. But you mentioned in your book that these kinds of countries are really the minority in the world and I definitely agree with you. There could be far more countries that could ensure such growth and development to their nation but they turn to the other side of the coin in this corruption and illegal activities and really block they possibilities for their country and people.
(1525.) The smallest company from Poland with a good business idea can make it in the global market. The Internet and great transportation network between countries and cultures allows people to export their ideas and knowledge to other side of the world. At the other hand huge organizations rule the market… Isn’t it wrog?
“Anything can be made anywhere and sold everywhere.” as says Lester Thorow, quoted in Truth, Errors and Lies. The statement is partly true since we all own for example American labels which were made in Taiwan. European cars are being produced in China and even relatively small operator in Finland gets its Internet services from India. Big companies use cheaper labour and benefit from lower production costs elsewhere. So where is a small entrepreneur?
Yet five years ago I was visiting Polish city Bialystok which is the biggest city in northeastern Poland but still relatively small. During my staying I was shopping in local grocery stores enjoying Polish food. As an entertainment I was visiting big market place where you could get cheap clothes and many other things. Nowadays in the centre of Bialystok is a bar street and people buy their groceries from huge supermarkets as Carrefour or Auchan. Small shops don’t pay off any more since big shopping centers attract buyers more effectively. Of course it is convenient to shop in centers where you can get everything you need from one place. Still it is sad to notice that in Poland, Sweden and Germany we have pretty much the same stores, labels and organizations that rule the market.
For example in Finland there is only one type of little kiosk you can go to just quickly buy a milk or a chocolate bar. The whole chain of those kiosks is the same organization and provides services exactly the same way. It is like unwritten monopoly. Sure we need more creative ideas to put desirable products on the market. Then we will have something new and fresh. But still those huge organizations, for example food labels, are able to get the ingredience and products very cheap from Asia or so.
It is a huge relief that trends are going into direction of locally produced healthy food etc. Unfortunately it will take time before our buying habits and ethics change.
(1524.) I have lived in Thailand for sometime now and decided to write about the foreign migration that has swarmed the nation in recent years. Some of my opinions expressed are based on personal experience and articles that I reviewed, in context with your views from the book. You can definitely say that one of the attractive measures when deciding to migrate to Thailand are the very low costs of living, and reasonable income for employment seekers. From it becoming a worldwide tourist destination it also has become a place to reside for many retirees as well as the many foreigners working in the country. In Thailand you can see that there is an international workforce in major cities, but it’s relatively low compared to other Asian countries. You can take notice that Thais aren’t a homogenous country. Over three fourth of the population are ethnic Thais (Siamese) , but also not homogenous consisting of Thai-Lao populous from the Northern part of the country, near Laos. The other half populous is of Chao Phraya Delta and there are many other groups that have their own specific dialect and cultural differences.
Basic needs are much cheaper than let’s say the US. With the average person spending over 120 Euros every month for groceries compared to an average person in the US spending over 5-10 Euros a day. The local restaurants are priced relatively cheap depending on its location, although many restaurants try to attract tourist offering higher prices. If you are working in the city you can find reasonable prices when looking to rent an apartment, or buying property. The usual offers for renting apartments are in the range of 200 Euros per month and over depending on the standard of living. You will still find accommodations in half prices when compared to western countries.
You mentioned in the fourth chapter of the limits that globalization faces due to the many restrictions countries impose on immigrants. In relation with Thailand these restrictions are mentioned as you described in the book. Immigrants don’t have such freedoms in similarity to the citizens of Thailand. For example foreigners cannot be sole owners of property usually these results in a less than 50% share of a company. You can register a company and purchase land through the firm but only 39% can be owned by foreigners. The law has recently been amended from 33%. We can say that these laws are nationalistic, and for foreigners looking to live in Thailand it provides a setback to the very convenient lifestyle the country provides.
(1523.) When speaking about globalization, I would like to focus on the role state-owned enterprises and NGOs play nowadays; as well as the shift in power from state-owned companies towards NGOs due to their increasing role in the development of our society. I agree with the points presented in the book, where Prof. Grzegorz W. Kolodko stated, that throughout the history, globalization influenced the balance of power between these two types of institutions. However, we can observe that the degree of power varies across the globe- in some countries the government promotes natural competition, and, thus, contributes to the development of NGOs (US); and in some parts of the world state wants to have a full control over the activities of the business (South Korea, Belarus).
This transformation can be portrayed on the case of Poland, a country that went through the transition process towards market economy. The state no longer has a full control over the companies, promoting the growth of importance of NGOs. These days, NGOs are playing more and more important role and benefit Polish society. While making important decisions, state has to take into consideration the opinions of the big non-government corporations. For instance, when it comes to the food sector, not only opinions of the representatives of the state (who represent various sectors of the food industry) are considered, but also opinions of multinational corporations like Carrefour, as well as large Polish NGOs, i.e. Biedronka. This promotes domestic trade, increases the competition – that drags the prices down – and fosters decision-making processes, which can be very valuable as far as the growth of the market is concerned. The help of NGOs can also be very valuable for the government in terms of how to foster an enterprise to promote future development.
Another aspect worth mentioning is the increasing role of the NGOs in the promotion of environmental protection, social welfare, and health sectors (as mentioned in the book). For instance, more and more NGOs are now concerned with the issue like sustainability, by forming organizations that will help to preserve the environment over the long-run (i.e. Greenpeace). In Poland, this trend is also gaining popularity with more and more organizations starting to operate in this particular industry.
As mentioned in the book, through the process of globalization, NGOs will gain more and more power in the future. All in all, the role of NGOs is increasing nowadays, leaving the stereotype of the state having a full ownership over the activities of the companies far beyond. Nowadays, NGOs are taking an active part in decision-making processes, as well as are the driving force for a change as far as the development of the market is concerned.
(1522.) According to me the most appealing aspect of the book “Truth, Errors and Lies” by Prof. Grzegorz W. Kolodko, was the last chapter named “The Uncertain Future”. The author implies “By the time anything turns out to be true or false, it belongs to the past” (pg. 342), thus can we actually be certain of our future before it actually takes place? There are two ways of looking at the implications of the potential future, namely the theoretical and practical approaches. There has always been the debate between theory and practice and the extent of how certain theories will work in practice; it is valid to say that new discoveries can be only supported by the theoretical knowledge whereas on the other hand some modifications of already existing ones by practical. The chapter “The Uncertain Future” mainly focuses on the description of “Twelve Great Issues for the Future”. The issue that I would like to focus on is the “the rate and limits of economic growth”.
It is important to notice the fact that Poland was the only country which managed to have a positive GDP growth rate during the latest financial crisis. What was the reason for such phenomena? Was it the implication of globalization and its effect on government and banking sector policies? All the developed countries, the leaders of globalization experienced tremendous downturns, and Poland a country which is developing and still following the path to globalization came out to be better off. I think that the only reason for which Poland got the score as it had was its “backwardness” in comparison to developed economies. Imagine what would have happen if Poland was on a more advanced stage of globalization at that time, if the government and banks would change its policies to resemble the ones of the leaders’ policies. Having in mind that Poland of course would not be a developed country yet, it would be devastating. Due to the fact that Poland is still a developing country it would not be able to deal nor fully recover after such crisis as opposed to the leader economies. Globalization, thus modernization of certain policies does not always yield in good implications. Coming back to the uncertainty of the future, how can we know when would be this right time for changes? In Poland’s case it was very fortunate to be behind in the path to globalization.
Therefore it is valid to say that globalization in theory is good for the development of a country, but what effect will it have in practice given uncertain future? Advanced progress in globalization in this particular instance proved to limit economic growth in practice. It was Poland’s “backwardness” to a certain extent that resulted in the positive GDP growth rate.