the world is flat disccusion post

7/27/2019 The World is Flat Disccusion Post

1/5

The global economic playing field is being leveled, and you Americans are not

ready. (9:10)

Great achievement of human development What are the problems that arise?

Japanese speaking Chinese running

Mcdonalds Call Center- 15:22

Thesis: 3 great eras of globalization: 1492-1820s. (globalization 1.0) countrysglobalizing. you went global through your country. England colonizing India.

1800s-2000. Companys globalizing. Companies globalizing for markets andlabor. Globalization 3.0. Individuals globalizing themselves. No longer built onwhite westerners.

$1 trillion investment in fiberoptic cables in five years. Communicate for free.(23:30)

mid 1990s genesis of the flat world. Global platform for multiple forms of

collaboration.

Wireless-steroids for the previous six forces

3 convergences- 2000- all 10 forces started working toegether. 2nd

convergence-adapting to new flat platform. 3

rdconvergence- India, china, Russia, become

available,3 billion. The mother of all inflection points perfect political storm-

9/11, enron, dotcom bubble. 44:00

Adaptation required after electrification for productivity boosts.

no such thing as an American job anymore

4 communities that are not in the flat world. 1.too sick hiv/aids/tuberculosis. 2.Too unabled. Rural china, rural india. Need a step stool if they are too participate.3. Too frustrated. Arab world. 4. Too many Toyotas. Need a new source of energy.

Global warming. Run out of oil.you can innovate without having to emigrate

What are your thoughts? Do you agree or disagree with theFriedman's ideas? Why or why not? How do you see your world? (Be


2/5

sure to specify sources for any other references you make or use.)

After watching Thomas Friedmans speech at MIT, I can say that I

completely agree with his assertion that the world has become flat. One of themain points that resonated with me was the three eras of globalization. Friedman

states that Globalizations medium started as countries, progressed to companieslooking for untapped markets and cheaper labor, and currently globalizationoccurs through individuals globalizing themselves. In his lecture, Friedman gavetwo quotes that combined with the current medium of globalization combine topaint a picture that I think ties into the way I see the world. First, Friedmanrestates that there is no such thing as an American job anymore. Secondly headds, The global economic playing field is being leveled, and you Americans are

not ready. With the infrastructure set in place by the ten forces that flattened theworld, such as the trillion-dollar investment in fiber optic cables in the early2000s, the global economy is no longer built on white westerners. Essentially, a

poor student in Hong Kong with access to the internet (technology that Americanstake for granted) now has the opportunity to better himself or herself and competewith privileged Americans in the global economy. As a Lehigh looking foremployment in a weak job market, I now have to compete for jobs with myclassmates on campus, as well the brightest students from around the world whoare probably willing to do my job for less pay.

While the flattening of the world has undoubtedly created benefits forbillions of people around the world, Im interested what the group thinks aboutsome of the downsides created by this phenomenon and what we can do aboutthem. For example, globalization and new technology have eliminated the need formany jobs that once fueled Americas growth. Is there a point where globalizationand technology reaches a point of diminishing returns and starts to do more harmthan good to the United States?

I think youre final thought was somehow cut off, but I believe that globalization has hadsome harmful impacts on religion. This Digital Journal article(http://digitaljournal.com/article/331306) cites a 2012 study that religiosity had declined

by 9% since they last performed the study in 2005. I think there is a direct correlationwith globalization and the decline of religion. Before the days of wireless internet,religion had a much larger impact on society. Now, scientific discoveries and ideas thatpoint away from a Creationist view spread quickly to anyone with an internet connection.The article also says that individuals in lower economic brackets are 17% more likely tobe religious. I think this is indicative to the impact that globalization has had becausepoorer individuals are less likely to have access to the internet. Whether you believe inGod or not, its hard to argue that organized religion can have a positive impact on groups
http://digitaljournal.com/article/331306http://digitaljournal.com/article/331306http://digitaljournal.com/article/331306http://digitaljournal.com/article/331306


3/5

of people. Religion (I can only speak from my experiences with Christianity) provides aframework for living moral lifestyles. I think some of the problems our society has todayare a direct result of the decline of religion.

Another negative aspect of globalization is that it has provided a medium for radicalbranches of religion, especially radical Islam, to spread their views. For example, one ofthe popular theories regarding the two Boston Marathon bombers is that they wereradicalized by visiting Jihadist websites on the internet from there apartment inMassachusetts. As a result of globalization, the internet provides a limitless market forrecruiting new individuals to extremist religious groups.

I think that although globalization has, like you said, created benefits for billionsof people around the world, it also has its drawbacks. I believe that the UnitedStates has been in the process of experiencing disadvantages of globalization.We can look at almost any product we own in our house and it will almost

undoubtedly say it was made in some far eastern country. This means thatoutsourcing is taking away jobs from unemployed Americans. We may be gettingthese products for cheaper prices but at what cost to those who are struggling inour own country. There are millions of Americans that would most likely be willingto do the same jobs that are outsourced if they had the opportunity. Withrespect to the question of whether it will eventually reach a point of diminishingreturns for developed countries, it is my opinion that yes it will. I think that unlessthe United States starts producing more products and services and reducesoutsourcing, anything and everything will be available at a cheaper price in adeveloping country. What are your thoughts on this?

This video was made back in 2005, 4 years after China joined WTO and whenthe world was burgeoning with demand for more business intelligence andinvestments in new IT infrastructures. He offered remarkable insight that theinformation technology would inevitably transform how each one of us interactand connect with each other around the globe. That is what he had in mind whenhe said The global economic playing field is being leveled ...

As of now, "Globalization 3.0" is already happening. Social networks and mobileplatforms give individuals the power to reach each other and offer enterprises thepower to micro-manage its customers and tailor its products. On that note, I do

agree that the hyper connectivity enabled by the technology today has made theworld flatter. However, I think the flattening process has more subtlety to it. First,the flattening process will always be uneven. Some countries will benefit morefrom the technology transfer than the others. Second, the flattening process willnot necessarily level the playing field given that as those more homogeneous

jobs get commoditized by the power of instant communication, the level of skillsto do a job well will just keep going up. Jobs will become more demanding,differentiated, and complex. Therefore, I think the flattening process is happening.


4/5

However, the marketplace will also unlevel the field again by demanding morehigher-quality specialized jobs.

I think you are right to place an emphasis on the mobile platforms. My entrepreneurshipclass last semester was taught by two venture capitalists. Day after day they placed anemphasis on how many of the companies they worked with were a direct result of thenew opportunities created by the mobile platform. Silicon Valley is full of start-ups withtons of ideas for the mobile platform. The mobile platform has the ability to greatly alterour lives, from paying through your IPhone and not needing to carry a wallet to havingyour social networks always in the palm of your hand. However, right now companieshavent quite figured out how to monetize their ideas. Once companies develop revenuemodels that can be duplicated across the industry, I think we will see the mobile platformgrow at a rate similar to the original web boom in the late 90s and early 2000s. ThomasFriedman looked back and saw the Netscape IPO as one of the ten forces that flattenedthe world. Maybe the monumental occasion for the mobile platform has alreadyhappened with the public offering for Facebook due to the work they have doneoptimizing Facebook for the mobile platform.

Do you think my comparison of Facebook to Netscape is valid?

I think that although globalization has, like you said, created benefits for billionsof people around the world, it also has its drawbacks. I believe that the UnitedStates has been in the process of experiencing disadvantages of globalization.We can look at almost any product we own in our house and it will almostundoubtedly say it was made in some far eastern country. This means thatoutsourcing is taking away jobs from unemployed Americans. We may be getting

these products for cheaper prices but at what cost to those who are struggling inour own country. There are millions of Americans that would most likely be willingto do the same jobs that are outsourced if they had the opportunity. Withrespect to the question of whether it will eventually reach a point of diminishingreturns for developed countries, it is my opinion that yes it will. I think that unlessthe United States starts producing more products and services and reducesoutsourcing, anything and everything will be available at a cheaper price in adeveloping country. What are your thoughts on this?

I think we have pretty similar opinions on this topic. I think the level ofoutsourcing the United States relies on has already started having a negativeimpact on the country. Executives of large companies may love outsourcing,but I think the average blue-collar American has been hurt by cost reductiontactics like outsourcing and automation that reduces a companys labor costs.A prime example of the impact these forces have had on the United States isthe bankruptcy of Detroit. In a USA Today article,(http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/07/19/gm-ceo-akerson-bankruptcy-detroit-competition/2568787/) Dan Akerson, GMs CEO,acknowledges the impact the decline ofDetroits auto industry had on thecity. Akerson says that Detroit started having a lot of foreign competition
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/07/19/gm-ceo-akerson-bankruptcy-detroit-competition/2568787/http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/07/19/gm-ceo-akerson-bankruptcy-detroit-competition/2568787/http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/07/19/gm-ceo-akerson-bankruptcy-detroit-competition/2568787/http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/07/19/gm-ceo-akerson-bankruptcy-detroit-competition/2568787/http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/07/19/gm-ceo-akerson-bankruptcy-detroit-competition/2568787/http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/07/19/gm-ceo-akerson-bankruptcy-detroit-competition/2568787/


5/5

and didn't react particularly well to it. As the manufacturing jobs dried up,residents started moving away from the city looking for jobs leaving apopulation too small to handle the citys tax requirements.Detroits situationshould be a huge wake-up call for everyone, but Im not sure individualbuyers in a tough economy are willing to pay more for an American product

when there is a cheaper alternative from China right next to it on the shelf atWalmart.

"If you go back to the early '60s, Detroit was the Silicon Valley of America.If you were an engineer, you wanted to be in Detroit," Akerson said.

But starting in the 1970s and accelerating into the 1980s, the U.S. autoindustry that underpinned the Detroit area's economy "had a lot of foreigncompetition and didn't react particularly well to it," he said.

"What that meant for the city was fewer jobs. People moved out and kind ofrepotted themselves, and essentially the tax base dried up."

the world is flat disccusion post

Documents