Conquer Club

if you think the benefits have outweighed the negatives, you might vote "success"
if you think the negatives have outweighed the benefits, you might vote "failure"

its too complex to answer the poll.

got tonkaed wrote:its too complex to answer the poll.

Of course it is

Phatscotty wrote:

got tonkaed wrote:its too complex to answer the poll.

Of course it is

Define globalization.

Asking an opinion on globalization is kinda like taking a poll on the sun. It's incredibly broad, it's been a part of human civilization as long as it's existed, and there's nothing we can do to stop it, anyhows. There are aspects of the sun I don't enjoy (sunburns, the fact that it occasionally shines on Dick Cheney) and there are things I like about it.

spurgistan wrote:Asking an opinion on globalization is kinda like taking a poll on the sun. It's incredibly broad, it's been a part of human civilization as long as it's existed, and there's nothing we can do to stop it, anyhows. There are aspects of the sun I don't enjoy (sunburns, the fact that it occasionally shines on Dick Cheney) and there are things I like about it.

not opinion, but RESULTS THUS FAR

for who, under what criteria? Which aspect of globalization? What constitues success or failure?

What does this poll even mean? And what are we supposed to do about globalization if it's bad?

Globalisation is an ongoing concept. It has neither succeeded, or failed, because it hasn't finished.

Skittles! wrote:Globalisation is an ongoing concept. It has neither succeeded, or failed, because it hasn't finished.

of course you can't say. With something that isn't finished yet, you would have to use your little brain and actually think something through.

"My house is on fire, but since the fire is ongoing, I can not say my house is burned to the ground just yet.....or that fire consuming is house is either bad or good. Just not enough information. let the fire burn and then I'll make a decision." You really represent the best of sheeple.....

Phatscotty wrote:

Skittles! wrote:Globalisation is an ongoing concept. It has neither succeeded, or failed, because it hasn't finished.

of course you can't say. With something that isn't finished yet, you would have to use your little brain and actually think something through.

"My house is on fire, but since the fire is ongoing, I can not say my house is burned to the ground just yet.....or that fire consuming is house is either bad or good. Just not enough information. let the fire burn and then I'll make a decision." You really represent the best of sheeple.....

At the very least offer up some criteria to decide. Without it, to use analogies like you are it would be asking someone who is not seeing an immediate benefit from the industrial revolution if the whole thing is going well.

got tonkaed wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

Skittles! wrote:Globalisation is an ongoing concept. It has neither succeeded, or failed, because it hasn't finished.

of course you can't say. With something that isn't finished yet, you would have to use your little brain and actually think something through.

"My house is on fire, but since the fire is ongoing, I can not say my house is burned to the ground just yet.....or that fire consuming is house is either bad or good. Just not enough information. let the fire burn and then I'll make a decision." You really represent the best of sheeple.....

At the very least offer up some criteria to decide. Without it, to use analogies like you are it would be asking someone who is not seeing an immediate benefit from the industrial revolution if the whole thing is going well.

the criteria should exist in your own head. If you don't know anything about the topic, why comment on it?

Well considering you are the TS it is ultimatly your interpretation on which the thread was built. It would seem to have been as good a starting as any. Any considering youve offered no real information about your viewpoint other than the simple first post, its quite possible you really dont have any idea what your talking about. Id have no problem being proven wrong as it would make the thread more interesting than people asking you "in what way" but it doesnt seem you are quite ready for that step off the front porch so to speak.

By all means make as many threads as you like, but its kind of silly to expect people to agree or disagree or really even to just set up flaming if you cant put together a few sentences on the topic. Its not even really good baiting as it were.

got tonkaed wrote:Well considering you are the TS it is ultimatly your interpretation on which the thread was built. It would seem to have been as good a starting as any. Any considering youve offered no real information about your viewpoint other than the simple first post, its quite possible you really dont have any idea what your talking about. Id have no problem being proven wrong as it would make the thread more interesting than people asking you "in what way" but it doesnt seem you are quite ready for that step off the front porch so to speak.

By all means make as many threads as you like, but its kind of silly to expect people to agree or disagree or really even to just set up flaming if you cant put together a few sentences on the topic. Its not even really good baiting as it were.

im not giving a point of view, im asking yours.... if you want to get into it, throw something against the wall and see what sticks. I love debate and hate name calling. that's why I'm here

for me the topic is too broad to discuss in the way that you would like without additional clarification. It is what i have asked for in a few previous posts, yet have not seen so far. And to be fair in your initial post you did give a point of view, but you did not support it.

Its one thing to make a claim, it is another though if you make a claim that is contradicted by what you previously said.

got tonkaed wrote:for me the topic is too broad to discuss in the way that you would like without additional clarification. It is what i have asked for in a few previous posts, yet have not seen so far. And to be fair in your initial post you did give a point of view, but you did not support it.

Its one thing to make a claim, it is another though if you make a claim that is contradicted by what you previously said.

I haven't seen anything to respond to yet, other than nobody can look at the result thus far and make a decision. I Think Globalization thus far has brought more negatives than positives

Phatscotty wrote:

got tonkaed wrote:for me the topic is too broad to discuss in the way that you would like without additional clarification. It is what i have asked for in a few previous posts, yet have not seen so far. And to be fair in your initial post you did give a point of view, but you did not support it.

Its one thing to make a claim, it is another though if you make a claim that is contradicted by what you previously said.

I haven't seen anything to respond to yet, other than nobody can look at the result thus far and make a decision. I Think Globalization thus far has brought more negatives than positives

what aspect of globalization? Its such a huge topic to discuss. There are economic and social issues that relate to the topic which can be broken down quite a bit.

Without explaining what exactly you are referring to it is no more of a statement or claim than if i was to say so far religion appears to be on the whole more negative than positive.

are you referring to primarily economic globalization or more sociocultural aspects?

globalisation has been a fucking disaster, it has just widened the wealth gap between the top 1% and the rest of the human population.

Honestly, Im not sure the people to ask are really the ones who have computers and can find enough time to play an internet game. I think the ones to ask are the ones that cant perhaps, and how it affects them.

Is globalization helping or hurting people that once never had access to these things, is there more access, etc.

Unfortunately, it does seem that while the goal is to theoretically make this so, its clear that it really does just make it easier for the largest of corporations simply use their power to exploit more areas of the world, and in doing so, globalization may not be as successful as the idea would suggest.

If however, those in highly successful areas of the world, complain about oportunites being opened up for the less successful ones, that does not mean globalization is not overall good... It might just mean it is not good for them. In any case, its silly to even argue, because it is obvious, and always has been obvious that this is how the world would evolve, and I think its more important to discuss how it can best achieve the best outcome, while reducing the obvious negative consequences....though Ill imagine there are some differing Ideas on that one.

Pedronicus wrote:globalisation has been a fucking disaster, it has just widened the wealth gap between the top 1% and the rest of the human population.

I would wager that PhatScotty isn't thinking about the terrible things it has done to third-world countries as much as "they took our jeorbs!" It is for this reason that I refused to vote, he won't specify any criteria on which to vote on.

Frigidus wrote:

Pedronicus wrote:globalisation has been a fucking disaster, it has just widened the wealth gap between the top 1% and the rest of the human population.

I would wager that PhatScotty isn't thinking about the terrible things it has done to third-world countries as much as "they took our jeorbs!" It is for this reason that I refused to vote, he won't specify any criteria on which to vote on.

Technically, that Southpark episode was about illegal aliens, not globalization.

thegreekdog wrote:

Frigidus wrote:

Pedronicus wrote:globalisation has been a fucking disaster, it has just widened the wealth gap between the top 1% and the rest of the human population.

I would wager that PhatScotty isn't thinking about the terrible things it has done to third-world countries as much as "they took our jeorbs!" It is for this reason that I refused to vote, he won't specify any criteria on which to vote on.

Technically, that Southpark episode was about illegal aliens, not globalization.

Yes, but taking jeorbs extends to outsourcing (the main American complaint about globalization that I've heard) as well. For wealthy countries that is about as bad as it gets. Not so for others. If you want to see the real problems that globalization presents, watch "Darwin's Nightmare" (it has nothing to do with evolution just so I don't scare anyone off). I imagine you can watch it online somewhere if you've got nothing better to do.

Presumably it extends to outsourcing.

However, the hue and cry on outsourcing does not come from "conservatives" (or rather, it should come from liberals).

thegreekdog wrote:Presumably it extends to outsourcing.

However, the hue and cry on outsourcing does not come from "conservatives" (or rather, it should come from liberals).

I just feel that outsourcing is an inevitability. I'm not sure how one could prevent it.

Frigidus wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Presumably it extends to outsourcing.

However, the hue and cry on outsourcing does not come from "conservatives" (or rather, it should come from liberals).

I just feel that outsourcing is an inevitability. I'm not sure how one could prevent it.

Really? I can think of some things.