The case for

The case for globalization is important to note that among the advocates of globalization are current with conflicting views, and radically different in their perception of the benefits of globalization, is the case of libertarianism and neoconservatism in politics, or the Austrian school and monetarism / neoclassical school in economic doctrine. Liberals Libertarians and other proponents of laissez-faire capitalism say that higher levels of political and economic freedoms in the form of democracy and capitalism, have been valuable end in itself in the developed world and have also produced high levels of material wealth. They see globalization as a beneficial process of expansion of freedom and capitalism. Those who support free trade claim that the increase in both economic prosperity and opportunities, especially in developing countries, increase civil liberties and lead to a more efficient allocation of resources.Economic theories of comparative advantage suggest that free market produces such effective resource allocation, the greater benefit of all countries that are involved. In general, this leads to lower prices, more jobs, increased production and living standards especially for those living in developing countries. There are also “global” or “world” proposing a “democratic globalization”.They believe that the first phase of globalization, driven by market or economic, should be followed by a phase of building global political institutions representing the views or aspirations of the “global citizen” The difference between “globalists” is that they not define in advance any ideology to orient this will, leaving it to the will of those citizens via a democratic process of globalization proponents argued that the anti-globalization movement is protectionist and use timely and anecdotal evidence to support their visions, while statistical sources provide strong support to globalization: Although some would dispute, income inequality appears to be globally decreasing, as the economist Xavier Sala-i-Martin’s argument in 2007 – . Leaving who’s right side, it can be argued that more important is the measure of absolute poverty: if everyone lived in poverty, income inequality would be very low.From 1981 to 2001, according to World Bank figures, the number of people living on one dollar or less per day income has declined in absolute terms than fifteen hundred million thousand one hundred million people. At the same time, the world’s population increase. Thus, in percentage terms the numbers to decline in developing countries from 40 to 20 . population. with the largest decreases occurring in economies that have cut more barriers to trade and investment. However, some critics warn that it would be desirable to use more detailed measures of poverty. The percentage of people living on less than two dollars a day income has fallen a lot in areas affected by globalization, while rates poverty has remained stable in other areas.In East Asia, including China, that percentage has declined by 50.1 compared with an increase of 2.2 in SSA. Source: World Bank, Poverty Estimates, 2002 Life expectancy has nearly doubled in the developing countries since World War II and is starting to cut the distance between it and the developed countries, where improvement was minor. Even in sub-Saharan Africa, the least developed region, life expectancy has risen from less than 30 years before that war some 50 years before the AIDS pandemic and other begin to reduce it back to the present level of around 47. Infant mortality has declined in all regions of the developing world. The presence of democracy has increased dramatically: from a position in which there were very few nations with universal suffrage in 1900 to be present in 62.5 of all countries in 2000. women’s rights (see feminism) has advanced.Even in areas such as Bangladesh they are making access to jobs that provide stability and economic independence. The proportion of the world’s population living in countries where the victuals of food per capita is less than 2,200 calories or kilo joules 9.200 per person per day declined from 56 in 1960 to less than 10 in 1990. Between 1950 and 1990. world literacy rate increased from 52 to 81 .