Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

IN DEFENSE OF GLOBALISATION Jagdish Bhagwati (2004) Oxford University Press.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "IN DEFENSE OF GLOBALISATION Jagdish Bhagwati (2004) Oxford University Press."— Presentation transcript:

1 IN DEFENSE OF GLOBALISATION Jagdish Bhagwati (2004) Oxford University Press

2 Reading assignment (for classes 10/11 January)  Bhagwati’s style is characterised by a constant, sometimes difficult to follow, exchange of arguments and counterarguments. While reading the chapter, focus on the eight common accusations against multinationals and analyse the author’s line of argument (identify arguments in favour of multinationals, those against and those that are neutral). For each argument, use the words listed on the slides, so that you can report on the argumentation in class. Use linking words (connectors) where necessary.

3 Corporations: Predatory or Beneficial? (Ch. 12) Suggested text structure:  INTRO (pgs. 1-5)  TAX BREAKS (pgs. 6-12)  LARGE & SMALL (pgs )  POLITICAL INTRUSION (pgs )  EXPLOITATION (pgs )

4 Common accusations against multinationals 1.Multinationals bypass the countries that need them. They accentuate the divide between those who are fortunate and those who are not. 2.Multinationals created enclaves within countries, with no spillover effect for the host countries. 3.In a competition among themselves to give generous tax breaks to foreign investors, poor countries wind up net losers. 4.Large corporations are infinitely stronger than small countries and make unreasonable demands to them. 5.Large corporations mean there is monopoly power. 6.Multinationals intrude dramatically into the political space of the host countries. 7.Multinationals display neglect for the political issues of the receiving country. 8.Multinationals exploit workers in the poor countries.They run sweatshops in poor countries.

5 IIntro (1-5)  1. Multinationals bypass the countries that need them. They accentuate the divide between those who are fortunate and those who are not. Line of argument: -indeed, post losses, political stability and economic advantages (cheap labour or exploitable natural resources), attributes, harsh reality, suffice, saviours, offset, public aid

6 IIntro (1-5) cont. 2. Multinationals created enclaves within countries, with no spillover effect for the host countries. Line of argument: -extractive industries, however, fierce debate, malign influence, benign influence, argue

7 IITax breaks (6-12) 3. In a competition among themselves to give generous tax breaks to foreign investors, poor countries wind up net losers. Line of argument: -doubtful, benefits, outweigh, giveaways, adverse outcome, rule out - donor, recipient, Trojan horse -taxes, employment, diffusion of know-how and management practices, inward direct investment - bargaining power, imposing restrictions, subsidies, distort

8 IIILarge companies and small countries (13-19) 4. Large corporations are infinitely stronger than small countries and make unreasonable demands to them. Line of argument: -misleading statistic, sets of data, gross value, value added, flawed comparison -play off one against another, invite tenders

9 IIILarge companies and small countries (13-19) cont. 5. Large corporations mean there is monopoly power (J.K. Galbraith). Line of argument: -barriers to entry, sheer size -weak governance, corrupt -however, calls for transparency, disclosure, rip-off model

10 IVPolitical intrusion (20-28) 6. Multinationals intrude dramatically into the political space of the host countries. Line of argument: -2 examples -less likely, highly improbable today, democracy, salience, political blunder, change course

11 IVPolitical intrusion (20-28) cont. 7. Multinationals display neglect for the political issues of the receiving country. Line of argument: -oil proceeds, allocate, claimants - environmental damage, pollute freely and knowingly, justify - seizures, violence, non-violent resistance

12 VExploiting workers (27-35) 8. Multinationals exploit workers in the poor countries.They run sweatshops in poor countries. Line of argument: -create job opportunites -effective prices -inappropriate comparisons -sharing excessive profits -competitive environment (profit performance on foreign assets)


Download ppt "IN DEFENSE OF GLOBALISATION Jagdish Bhagwati (2004) Oxford University Press."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google