Flat World Essay

Friedman proposes in his book that one of the primary concerns of anti-globalization persons in the United States is for the most part unfounded.   The fear is that Americans would lose many important jobs and industries to nations who are capable of doing the same work for much less money, and to be able to do it just as well as or better than American workers.  Friedman counters this argument by claiming that through a variety of means there will always be plenty of jobs, if not more so than now, for American workers.  There are several aspects to his argument.  Friedman spends some time acknowledging that these concerns of job losses are very legitimate and very real, and makes it clear that he understands and sympathizes with the concerns of the worker who's job is at stake.  Ultimately, he considers the future benefits to be worth the sacrifice in the current job market, citing constant change being an inherent part of the market. 

 From a pragmatic standpoint, his primary claim to the long-term benefit of the exchange and movement of jobs overseas is that new industries will emerge from globalization that will more than make up for the loss of these jobs.  He cites new positions relating to international coordination and management that did not exist before.  In Freidman's view, these new types of jobs, as well as future industries that have yet to emerge will compensate for the loss of lower end manufacturing and service jobs.  

 Friedman asserts that in order to survive in the "new global economy" Americans will have to renew their focus on education and even current workers must constantly adapt and learn in order to compete with other workers across the globe, if their job is not in a unique, non-transferable position, such as most of the medical field and law enforcement.  He argues that this new state of the job market, while challenging, will ultimately be beneficial to Americans provided we are ready to meet it.  As part of this concern he lays down a mandate for more rigorous and thorough education for American citizens, as well and health care insurance to be subsidized and regulated by the state in order to have universal health care for Americans.

 The primary issue I have with the book is that it is not complete in addressing these concerns.  Friedman does a good job bringing important questions to light and underscoring the vast potential of globalization for business and individual growth.   However, he rarely explains in detail the how of many of these issues, and often skims over criticisms without given them an equal consideration to the potential benefits he sees.   The first point of his that I wrote on, that our labor force won't be challenged due to the emergence of other jobs and industries, has a lot of open questions that no one can truly answer.  Sure, the 'lump' is never truly finite, but it takes time for those new jobs to emerge.  Friedman does not address this source of potential extreme friction other than to essentially say "You're on your own now - deal with it.  Hopefully you can afford to go to a vocational school".  Who's to say that our portion of the ever-changing lump won't be smaller than it is now?  Friedman doesn't explain how he knows Americans as a whole will benefit, except on faith.  He may be right, but I don't think there's any evidence one way or the other - no one knows if this shift in the work force will be ultimately beneficial to the nation.

 I agree completely with Friedman that the U.S. education system needs to be a lot more robust and useful for our citizens.  This is primary to our continued dominance in a wide field of industries, especially related to computers and engineering.  In fact, I would include all of the sciences in that.  I could not disagree more with his ideas about expanding and guaranteeing health care coverage for Americans - especially Medicare and Medicaid.  He emphasized the focus on individual companies offering packages without being liable for their employees, but the universal guaranteed aspect makes me shudder.  Perhaps it comes from too much contact with people who are, in my opinion, leeches on the system who live off of welfare checks and get Medicaid to cover many drugs that they either don't really need or wouldn't have needed if they have bothered to get regular exams and medical treatment.  It is my opinion that Medicaid has a crippling problem of being a crutch for many free-riders, encouraging de facto dependency on the government for medical care that the government and taxpayers should not be responsible for.  

 I hope that David Ricardo was right.  At this point in time I have no way to tell whether or not globalization is a good thing.  I disagree wholeheartedly with the idea that we should be 'concerned citizens of the world' first, and American citizens last.  To identify with groups is an intrinsic part of being human.  We divide ourselves up and split into factions.  Europe is going through a cultural identity crisis and plummeting birth rates as they globalize.  French voters rejected a constitution that would marginalize their identities as Frenchmen and put them more into the category of Europeans.  People like being different.  In South America the entire McOndo movement is a rejection of the corporate blandness that supercedes the local culture.  In short I think there are some very big cultural walls that when society starts taking them down, people will notice and react.  I think globalization will have some very very good aspects and some very bad ones, both of which can be seen.  Friedman went on and on about the new tech cities of India and Asia, but only mentioned in passing the poverty of much of China.  India's new economic status was supposed to bring wealth to all of its people, but it has been concentrated in a relatively small group of people.  Most of the poor in that nation are still horrendously poor with no government help in sight.  I think I personally stand to benefit from globalization, as do most college educated persons.  I can see a globalization where the poor get poorer and the rich get richer, and there is indisputably some of that going on.  There is also plenty of Friedman's idealist vision happening as well.  The truth is I have no idea what the ultimate result will be and if that end will be a net gain or loss for this nation and the world.  The only certainty is that globalization is occurring and that people need to prepare for it as best they can.