Is Globalization a Good Thing

Globalization & Mexico Much has been made of the fact that world has gotten much smaller due to globalization. There has also been an associated shift in regardless to where products for sales in retail stores around the world, the West in particular, are made. Indeed, many of the items that were previously made in the United States are now made in Latin America and Asia with Mexico in particular being one of the ubiquitous countries that are involved.

When it comes to globalization, many are prone to point out the positive outcomes and attributes that are developing. However, neither the prevailing opinion about the subject nor the ostensible effects of globalization are monolithic. Indeed, there is evidence and scholarly opinion out there to suggest that the effects of globalization are sometimes bad, if not quite bad.

While the smaller nature of the world in terms of technology and communication can be touted as a good thing, there are some bad things that have to be pointed out as well. Literature Review One thing that cannot really argued about globalization and Mexico is that it truly did start off with a bang. Indeed, the years that ran from 1870 to 1911 show that there was a \"vast wave\" of technology imports into the country of Mexico during that time period.

This allowed for a good amount of economic growth in the area as this wave developed and continued. These imports were shown to be stimulating the patenting activity that was happening in Mexico. However, it did pale in comparison to the same sort of activity that was seen in North Atlantic countries over the same time period.

This led to a bit of a disparity as local technicians in Mexico were ready to go and grow but the opportunity that they had was muted in comparison to what was seen in other countries. In other words, there was indeed a boom of technology and development at the turn of the 20th century. However, Mexico did not realize and absorb the benefits that were seen in other countries like the United States over the same time period (Beatty, 2015).

Another effect that has been rendered on Mexico is that the increased globalization has led to a litany of brand names \"imposing\" their marketing and products on the people of that country. As explained by Bogin et al. (2014), globalization is described as a \"biological, social and ideological process of change.\" This is rendered, also per Bogin, in the form of multinational corporations marketing and selling their products in an aggressive way in countries like Mexico.

It is not as if the people who buy those products are being forced to do so. However, what is being shown is that at least some people are and the health and nutrition outcomes that result are not always the best for the people of the country (Bogin et al., 2014). When it comes to food products, prices and markets, there are other effects and trends that cannot be ignored as they greatly affect Mexico in other ways.

For example, one can look at the food market in areas like Guadalajara, Mexico and see palpable changes in access equity and social engagement. There are some that say that globalization and its effect on food markets in Mexico over the course of the 20th century is good in some ways and bad in others.

With that in mind, authors like Harner (2007) assert that while Mexico should not treat foreign investment and market presence as a pariah, they should also not \"forsake\" the local vendors and sellers that are local and native to Mexico. Indeed, Harner goes on record as saying as saying \"Mexico should not forsake traditional retail food outlets for globalized forms of retailing, but should seek a better articulation between the two (Harner, 2007). Many people think of manufacturing when it comes to offshoring and outsourcing.

However, this is far from being the truth as many firms outsource information technology and other service sector jobs as well. That being said, Mexico usually falls behind other countries like India and other countries in Asia when it comes to the destinations for these jobs.

Of course, Mexico would be wise to take advantage of whatever they can glean in the form of outsourcing given that getting such jobs is much more economically and socially advantageous than simple manufacturing jobs that are the staple of what is normally outsourced to Mexico. A main issue is that Mexico\'s information and similar industries are under-developed when it comes to meeting the needs and requirements of firms that could theoretically outsource to them.

As such, they are usually playing second fiddle (if not third or fourth and beyond) when it comes to vying for the higher-end jobs that would help the Mexican economy much more than agriculture and manufacturing jobs (Mullan, Kenney & Dossani, 2008). Even with the challenges that Mexico faces when it comes to the nexus of globalization and knowledge sector workers (like those in information technology), all is not lost as the country is certainly doing its best to catch up with the rest of the world.

Indeed, Mexico has been making a strong effort to become the most open country in Latin America when it comes to the presence and development of knowledge sector workers with university education. Given that, Mexico may not be developing as quickly as they would like when it comes to attracting outsourcing from other countries when it comes to knowledge sector jobs. However, they are certainly moving in the right direction and they stand to reap the benefits at some point in the not-so-distant future.

One proverbial roadblock that is being dealt with is the presence of what is known as patriarchal business practices. In other words, so much of the Mexican business environment is based on men and their seat of power. There is also a pervasive amount of nepotism and other hiring and promotion practices that are based on traits other than merit.

Indeed, someone getting a job because of who they are related to and/or who they know is antithetical to a modern economy and this will only hinder the Mexican economy\'s ability to grow and enter the global marketplace so long as it goes on (Boutilier, 2009). One has to focus on the cultural narratives when it comes to how Mexico and other countries interact. Of course, the primary country to speak of when it comes to this is the United States.

To that end, the cultural narratives that relate to globalization are rather strong along the border that the United States and Mexico share. Women in particular are at the proverbial epicenter of this cultural back and forth. It has been shown that the \"occupants and ideas that inhabit these spaces are in constant flux, resulting in the reformulation of the nations of mothering, pedagogy and pace, resulting in variable educational outcomes\" (O\'Leary, Gonzalez & Valdez-Gardea, 2008).

To dovetail and interface this with another source, the traditional culture and mindset in Mexico has certainly been patriarchal in nature but it is clear that times are changing and more women are starting to roil and wretch at this structure. Over time, this should lead to a shift in what is acceptable and normal when it comes to the standing of women in society as compared to men.

Clearly, women are fed up with being subjugated but the results of moving against that trend has obviously been mixed in nature and this will surely continue as women try to reassert their place in society within Mexico and near the United States border in particular.

Globalization will only further assert the case that women should have a seat of power at the economic table in Mexico and countries like it, not unlike what is seen in the United States and other more developed countries in the West (O\'Leary, Gonzalez & Valdez-Gardea, 2008). One negative effect that is touted quite a bit when it comes to globalization is income inequality.

While even the United States is prone to being the brunt of such an argument (in its own way, of course), the same thing applies to Mexico when it comes to some scholars and their research. One set of scholars that look at this question include Borraz and Lopez-Cordova (2007) and their recent study on the subject. Specifically, they have looked at the income distribution that exists in Mexico and how it had shifted in the country for the decade immediately prior to the publication of their treatise.

They define globalization as the \"rapid integration to the global and North American economies.\" They look at the income distribution both at the national level for Mexico as well as across the individual states within the same. Rather than bearing out results that show globalization is a problem-creator for Mexico, they instead assert that income inequality is either the same or even less of an issues in states where globalization is clearly a factor in income levels.

As stated by the authors, \"we present compelling evidence showing income distribution is more equitable in states that are more closely linked to the world economy and that those states exhibit larger declines in inequality (Borraz & Lopez-Cordova, 2007). Another dovetailing between sources related to the earlier mention of women and their challenges when it comes to reaching economic and social equality given the partriarchal and corrupt nature of business in many corners of Mexico.

Borraz and Lopez-Cordova assert that globalization rests in \"better work opportunities for low-skilled women relative to more educated female workers\" (Borraz & Lopez-Cordova, 2007). Indeed, the benefits for knowledge workers are lagging a bit but the lower end of the economic spectrum is surely seeing benefits from the influx of outsourcing from countries like the United States (Borraz & Lopez-Cordova, 2007). As one might expect, there are people in Mexico that are actively resisting globalization and its effects and changes in Mexico.

Beyond that, this is nothing and it has been going on for at least a generation in earnest. For example, a journal article written in 1997 explains that there is an active resistance to globalization in Mexico. A lot of this chaos, at least at that time, was brought on by the fact that the banking system in the country was in terrible shape. Indeed, half the bank debt at that time was overdue and much of it was unpayable by those who owed it.

The customers of those banks were demanding bailouts and assistance so that they could get back on their feet. Something that seemed to aggravate the situation greatly was the rampant involvement of the state when it came to bank ownership, state involvement with the same, and state control over prices and such. Of course, state control over such things rarely goes well when it is use to excess or when it is used to address economic problems.

Fiddling with market supply and demand is something that rarely ends well because it goes against what the equilibrium price of the market really is. By contrast, globalization has pushed greatly for things like lessening (or getting rid of) price controls and other similar measures. As one might expect, this is something that has been vehemently and actively resisted by the powers that be in Mexico\'s government.

In the end, the efforts of multinational companies have proven that Mexico\'s future as an economic power depends in large part on foreign investment as they have been shown to be rather inept and growing organically, at least for now. One example of this are the foreign car companies that were able to scratch out good results despite the gloom of the Mexican economy at a national level. Basically, Mexico\'s economy needs to modernize and catch up with the rest of the world in many regards.

Since the direness of the 1990\'s Mexico economy, great strides have been made but there is a lot of work left to do (Barkin & Ortiz, 1997). Something else that cannot be dismissed is that corruption and ineffectual governance in Mexico has led to their slow rate of growth and modernization. The rather pervasive existence of drugs and violence does not help matters for Mexico either. As recently as the late 2000\'s, barely five to ten years ago, drug-related violence has dominated the national scene Mexico.

The corruption that exists in Mexico is so advanced that many people \"consider corruption central to both the illicit trade and to the government\'s war on it\" (Morris, 2013). While this is not the best of news, there was a time where the corruption of Mexico and the drug trade that now ravages the country in terms of violence used to exist side-by-side in peace as the government basically allowed it to go on and sometimes even profited and benefitted from it.

As one might expect, countries like the United States were less than happy about that due to the spillover that has occurred continues to occur in border states like Arizona and Texas (Morris, 2013). While international pressure has been a major force when it comes to reducing and eliminating corruption and complicity with illegal and violent activities like the drug trade, pressure from within Mexico and the rest of Latin America has also served as a major force and catalyst of change.

Mexico is far from the only country affected by this uprising and upheaval as the same thing is going on in countries like Brazil and Guatemala. When it comes to Mexico specifically, President Nieto has been having his feet held to the fire. The upheaval has coincided with a rather nasty drop in confidence in the democratic institutions of the area. Just as one example, there used to be an approval rating of more than a third (37%). That number has since dipped below twenty percent in Mexico.

While some Latin American countries are rather complacent when it comes to fighting against the direction of the country, this is certainly not true when it comes to Mexico. The direction and manifestations that will result, however, remain to seen. Overall, the trend would seem to be positive at this point (Castaneda, 2016).

A proverbial elephant in the room when it comes to Mexico is the sheer amounts of people in Mexico (and other Latin American countries, for that matter) that immigrate into the United States illegally and try to find a way to stay there either.