- Kapalli Srirama
- Hyderabad
- India
This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Globalization is helping increase Wealth of Developed World
Globalization is enabling consumer & related products / services at cheaper costs to people of developed world. Technology & patents for most products needed by majority of world population is controlled by Developed world.
Education system of Developed world is geared towards Innovation / leaders. Education system of Developing world is geared towards making more engineers who can be good subordinates. Due to high unemployment in developing world most young population is focused only on ensuring they are employed (they cannot even dream of failing); whereas Developed world respects failure by its work-force.
Barry Palmer 50+
This is a simple fact which can be confirmed by any number of statistics.
Globalization is encouraged by the developed world because it increases the wealth of the developed world.
I do not understand what you expect to debate.
Rustam Eynaliyev
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
After then a lot of things might just fall into their place. Because there is not much to gain from disorder or lawlessness.
Mathew Naismith 10+
I live in a developed country & I can see how it's sucking off underdeveloped countries. The developed countries around the world have always sucked of underdeveloped & non-developed countries for their wealth, it's a fact.
Even in Australia we pay a lot more for everything compared to the US who we are obviously financially propping up.
Developed countries might give assistance but they certainly get back their monies worth many times over in one way or another.
Love
Mathew
Lars Mews
What i mean is, if all developed countries would dissapear, the non-developed would not improve. They might fall down even more, because their life standard also benefits from standards in developed countries.
So what do they suck off? Deposits? Well, these would simply stay in the ground untouched, because non-developed countries have no use for them. Workforce? Only were they have not invented a machine yet.
Some people seem to have the image that "the evil first world" stole the secret of evolution and hides it from the non-developed countries. Even the first world had to invent all that first, before they could benefit from it. It was not there before, so it was not stolen, nor sucked off somebody in non-developed areas.
And what is wealth? Money? Well, arabian states are very wealthy, but once you subtract everything made or invented in first world, what is left over then? Deposits, which are not used. And lots of sand.
How did the first world become all that what is is today? They stopped civil wars, intercontinental wars and began to work/live together in peace. The so called non developed countries were pretty much on the same level or above back in these days.
Mathew Naismith 10+
Don’t take offence but this argument is quite lame & a little ignorant, what happened to the American Indians & why is the US in particular so dominantly wealthy? Simple they took what wasn’t there’s to get where they are today. How much gold was taken out of the land that was either swindles or taken by force for starters & this is only the tip of the ice berg. The American Indians where used & abused & guess what it is still happenings to day. If the yanks want what is on Indian land they just move them somewhere else & this is only one part of the world I’m talking about.
Recently we had a more highly developed countries invade another country for oil & of course they didn’t find any weapons of mass destruction unlike you would find in the invading countries .
If you want me to go on about how developed countries have used & abused less developed countries I will but I think it’s pointless, I live in a developed country but I can see less developed countries plight because why? I’m not afraid to look at the wrong we have done & are doing in the world unlike some.
Love
Mathew
Kapalli Srirama
george lockwood 20+
Lawren Jones 10+
Kapalli Srirama
Vasella will receive the "golden handshake" in tranches of 12 million francs over six years if he respects the non-competition clauses of his contract, triggering criticism across political camps.
"This self-serve mentality undermines confidence in the economy as a whole. It causes enormous damage to the social cohesion in our country," socialist justice minister Simonetta Sommaruga told Swiss Sunday newspaper Sonntagsblick.
Vasella, who has been chairman of Novartis since 1999, serving as both chairman and CEO for 11 years from 1999 to 2010, gave details on the amount he is entitled to on Friday, following reports on website insideparadeplatz.ch.
He said in a statement Novartis would pay him a maximum of 72 million francs "according to fair market value" if he refrained from making his knowledge and know-how available to competitors, adding he intended to donate the whole amount, net of taxes, to charity.
Novartis spokesman Eric Althoff said Vasella did not wish to comment further before Friday's annual general meeting in Basel, at which he is not going to stand for re-election as chairman.
Vasella faces stiff criticism from activist shareholder groups. "This is scandalous," Roby Tschopp, head of shareholder group Actares, told Reuters. "All we can do is try to motivate as many shareholders as possible to refuse to discharge the board of directors on Friday."
He said, however, it was unlikely a majority of shareholders would refuse to grant discharge of liability to the board because information on Vasella's golden handshake had come too late to be taken into account by some bigger shareholder groups.
"It only came out because it was leaked. That is not a transparent way of communicating," Tschopp