Outlook on the Neoliberal Agenda - Article Example

Media Journals Name: Institution: Media Journals Neo-Liberalism Ostry J. D., Loungani P., Furceri D. (2016). Neoliberalism: Oversold? International Monetary Fund. Vol 53(2). Retrieved from www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2016/06/ostry.htm Article: Neo-liberalism: Oversold? This article focuses on the fact that neoliberal policies increase inequality and threaten sustainable economic growth. It suggests that proposers of the neoliberal agenda overplay its benefits since financial openness allows investment of funds in the most productive ventures across the globe with total disregard for important economic factors especially in developing nations. As suggested in (Federici & Cohen, 2000 p.11 neoliberal agenda revolves around elimination of controls and involvement of citizens in the development agenda with major benefits emerging from liberalized capital flows. This is a pessimistic outlook on the neoliberal agenda suggesting that its benefits are overrated and may eventually cause more harm than good. International competition emerges as a crucial deterrent to intended purpose of the neoliberal agenda. The flow of funds to areas with available resources and abandonment of barren areas translates into an imbalanced economy (Snyder, 2001 p.44). This inequality leads to a long-term effect on sustainability since the underdeveloped areas still form part of the economy hence the costs and benefits counter each other. The article however does not oppose the move to a neoliberal economy but warns about its unforeseen implications that economists should consider. The obsession with the term neoliberal should therefore accompany education on its meaning and a detailed analysis on operation. Redistribution policies emerge as a strongly proposed measure to curb the resulting inequality in addition to policies meant to deal with negative implications in advance. An optimistic approach on the neoliberal agenda focuses on free flow of capital resources as well as privatization of government functions. The approach visualizes an economy without mobility restrictions hence resources reach the points of demand and surpluses move to areas of deficits as seen in (Saad-Filho & Johnston, 2005 p.65). It however neglects to include the aspects of risks involved in adoption of liberal policies to local economies. The neoliberal agenda aims at controlling nations’ fiscal policies but neglects to indicate the optimum level of debt for countries to use as a guide. Leaving these, important details to interpretation indicate the weaknesses of the neoliberal campaign and loopholes to manipulation. The agenda views capital controls as a deterrent to economic growth hence liberalization strategies take the centre stage. It advocates for a laissez faire economy as the best way to promote growth especially in points of deficit. This proves that despite the benefits of neoliberal agenda, nations should not ignore its effects in terms of facilitating inequality, which affects the overall economic growth. There is therefore a need for reconsideration on the meaning of the neoliberal agenda to avoid implementation of harmful policies whose effects may take long to counter. References Federici S., Cohen M. (2000). Neoliberalism. Brooklyn: Red Balloon Collective. Saad-Filho A., Johnston D. (2005). Neoliberalism: A Critical Reader. London: Pluto Press. Snyder R. (2001). Politics After Neoliberalism: Reregulation In Mexico. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. Globalization and Resistance Elliot L. (2016). Brexit is a Rejection of Globalization. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jun/26/brexit-is-the-rejection-of-globalisation Article: Brexit is a Rejection of Globalization The article features an incidence of resistance to globalization by Britain’s exit from the European Union. It upholds that some nations attribute their problems to globalization and they would rather remain secluded to the world than accommodate other nations not focused on economic development. Globalization involves free movement of resources, people, goods, and services with the globe operating as a single economy hence diminishing the role of individual nations (Teichman, 2002 p.75). The article views globalization as an obstacle to individual nations’ growth by association with nations that do not share similar development agendas and lack resources to reach a certain level of economic development. Britain is an example of countries that feel that globalization derails its economic progress due to dependence of other nations on its resources and having fewer benefits from international partnerships. According to (Laible & Barkey, 2006 p.31) globalization has various negative implications to developed nations since they do not seek to gain as much as developing nations in these interactions. Developing nations are the largest beneficiaries of globalization since they lack important resources such as technology, capital, and expertise, experience, and the pool of knowledge. The unequal level of benefits causes the least benefactor to question their position in international agreements hence contemplate their independence and disregard for international issues. This argument makes perfect sense since no one wants to make deal where he or she seeks to lose rather than gain. Britain for instance felt that its obligations to the European Union interfered with its focus on important national matters and that the affiliated nations had taken advantage of the situation to become over dependent on Britain. (Davies, 2011 p.112) suggests that a nation cannot survive on its own hence the need to make partnerships with other nations for purposes of trade, security, and capital, among other reasons. International trade is a product of globalization hence resistance to globalization has serious implications on the GDP of a nation. The business world views globalization as a messiah and attribute growth of international trade to this phenomenon thanks to technology that creates a global network through which resources flow. According to the text however, globalization is not only about economic gains but features other benefits necessary for a nation’s growth and sustainability. This outlook is important when analyzing the Brexit since the Britons cite immigration as a con of immigration but fail to realize other benefits tied to the phenomenon. They fail to recognize the big picture in terms of economic, social, and political implications of their opposition to globalization. Clearly, it is important for a nation to consider international relations with its interests in mind. Globalization may offer potential benefits to certain nations but attracts geographical inequality hence the need to reevaluate its pros and cons. References Davies A. (2011). The Globalization of Corporate Governance: The Challenge of Clashing Cultures. London: Routledge Publishers. Laible J., Barkey H. (2006). European Responses to Globalization: Resistance, Adaptation, And Alternatives. London: Elsevier. Teichman I. (2002). Globalization. London: Watts Publications. Energy Resources and the Environment Gosden E. (2016). What Would Brexit Mean for Britain’s Green Targets? The Telegraph. Retrieved from www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/13/what-would-brexit-mean-for-britains-green-targets/ Article: what would brexit mean for Britain’s green targets? This article highlights the implications of Brexit on the UK and the global economy due to gained freedom from the European Union’s restrictions. It raises concerns that the country could tailor environmental laws that only favor its environs while paying no attention to the global environment. Environmental conservation is on the list of international and regional blocks that intend to control environmental policies of individual nations to ensure a safe environment. The article raises concerns about the choice of energy sources and their implications on the environment since some sources cause irreparable damage. The European Union requires its members to adhere to certain environmental precautions through formulation of favorable policies. Brexit threatens to free Britain from these obligations hence giving it the freedom to make policies that do necessarily promote a safe global environment. This is a genuine concern since every nation requires a check system that controls its operations and sets limits to its operations. Giving so much freedom to a nation with a high-energy consumption rate may spell doom to the environment since the country will concentrate more on increasing its production capacity now that it has broken major trade agreements with the world. the nation will tend to choose energy sources that saves on costs and promotes efficiency in production while and may disregard policies that require use of renewable energy sources, recycling, provision of clean air, protection of endangered species, and restrictions on genetically modified crops (Hinnaw & Biswas, 2000 p.64). Environmental conservation is a global issue and every nation should adhere to certain restrictions in its operations since its actions affect the entire world. According to (Ristinen & Kraushaar, 2000 p.99), the environment is not territorial hence; pollution at one point inevitably spreads to other areas regardless of the intentions. The global community therefore has a say in the energy policies adopted by various nations since their implications cause pollution, climate change, and depletion of energy sources. There is therefore a need for bodies that oversee the energy policies of various countries to ensure they do not endanger human life in the short run as well as the long run. The world therefore needs to worry as super powers seek independence since this leaves their actions unmonitored and unrestricted. It is upon citizens of these nations to ensure their government formulates policies that protect the environment hence preserve human life for generations. (Heshmati, Abolhosseini & Altmann, 2015 p.31) proposes the use of terms and conditions that involve environmental conservation as a requisite for trade agreements with certain nations. This pushes the nations to abide to the environmental conservation agenda, which not only benefits the individual country but the entire globe. References Heshmati A., Abolhosseini S., Altmann J. (2015). The Development of Renewable Energy Sources and Its Significance for the Environment. Singapore: Springer Publishers. Hinnaw E., Biswas A. K. (2000). Renewable Sources of Energy and the Environment. Dublin: Tycooly International Press. Ristinen R. A., Kraushaar J. J. (2000). Energy and the Environment. New York: Willey Publishers. The Rise of China and the New Geography of Production Wei X. (2016). China’s Soybean Industry on the Rise. China Daily. Retrieved from m.chinadaily.com.cn/en/2016-05/05/content_25093004.htm Article: china’s soybean industry on the rise This article features china’s expansion of its agricultural sector through increased production of soybeans despite the decline in maize production. It also features government support of these efforts through price stabilisation to protect farmers from incurring losses. (Strawbridge & Strawbridge, 2010 p.84) identifies government support as the key to economic development in terms of formulation of policies and initiatives that promote development of various industries. China demonstrates its prowess in the manufacturing industry, which has overtaken the performance of other sectors within the country. Its rising population does not help with the situation since it demands that the nation focuses more on its agricultural sector. The high population and less acreage available for cultivation poses a major risk for the nation going hungry due to lack of enough food. Self-sufficiency is the goal of every nation as is seeks to hold reserves that can cater for the needs of its population when need arises without over relying on other nations. Food is the most important resource and the china has definitely realised this importance hence its deliberate actions towards promoting agriculture. Increased production of grains assures the population of food even during tough climatic conditions. Promoting the soybean industry is an excellent move to developing the agricultural sector and producing raw materials for the manufacturing industry. This move therefore kills two birds with one stone with the overall effect of a self-sufficient economy (Haddad, 2007 p.113). Government involvement in industrial development may cause both positive and negative implications as the government seeks to achieve certain goals. On the issue of china’s government intervention in the agricultural sector, it has played a positive role in its expansion. However, tight price controls eliminate the free market mechanism that determines prices depending on the level of demand and supply. This deters farmers from taking advantage of market conditions to adjust their production capacities hence leading to surpluses stored in government warehouses that citizens cannot access. The surplus output fails to flow to areas of deficiencies where people need the commodity but have no access to it. It also denies farmers the freedom of choice where they weigh options depending on the level of gains to determine the most profitable crop to grow. A sustainable economy however requires the support of the government in controlling various economic conditions to realise a desired outcome (Taylor, 2000 p.80). Self-sufficiency is an important element for developing nations to consider amidst the strong wave of globalisation that gears nations towards mechanisation while neglecting the primary industries within the economy. References Haddad M. (2007). Trade Integration in East Asia: The Role Of China And Production Networks.Washington: World Bank Publication. Strawbridge D., Strawbridge J. (2010). The New Self Sufficiency Bible. London: Dorling Kindersley Publishers. Taylor S. L. (2000). Practical Self Sufficiency. London: New Burlington Publishers. Work & the Self under Neo-Liberalism Monbiot G. (2016). Neoliberalism-The Ideology at the Root of All Our Problems. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot Article: neo-liberalism- the ideology at the root of all our problems This article raises the issue that neo-liberalism causes major problems on the lives of ordinary citizens and is attributable to major crises in the world. It suggests that competition equals liberty hence its inhibition interferes with the basis of the neoliberal system. Neo-liberalism is a situation where there is absence of tax and regulations and privatization of public service hence creating a wide gap between the rich and the poor. Neo-liberalism fails to protect the ordinary citizen from oppression of the economic system that denies him the right to raise concerns through trade unions. This means that workers cannot negotiate wage rates as well as working conditions since the neoliberal system seeks to eliminate collective bargaining and trade unions. Absence of regulation translates into oppression of workers and pollution of the environment with toxic wastes that once again affect the lives of citizens. Absence of tax and regulations eliminates redistribution of wealth meaning that the wealth remains with the rich while the poor remain in poverty. The argument that neo-liberalism portrays inequality as virtuous is warranted since circumstances favor the rich while the poor lack access to resources that may improve their livelihood. It promotes a system of winners and losers in the wake of competition that favors those already armed with resources. Job seekers and workers undergo a regime of scrutiny and monitoring to identify winners and punish losers (Krinsky, 2007 p.97). The author’s argument justifies the undesirability of neo-liberalism that has caused more harm than good to the economy and disorientation of the social structure. An opposing view portrays neo-liberalism as a means to promote democracy and freedom among individuals (Luxton & Braedley, 2010 p.82). Democracy emerges as the freedom of choice exercised through spending habits of consumers on commodities of choice (Stokes, 2001 p.34). Elimination of restrictions and regulations also work towards promoting this democratic right of individuals and maintaining consumer sovereignty. This approach demonstrates the intended purpose of this regime, which turned out to mean something very different. Some individuals have more to spend than others hence have more rights than the poor and can access commodities and services of choice while the poor only access items within their income range. Circumstances also favor the rich who amerce wealth through inheritance, have access to better education and health facilities. Neo-liberalism is therefore a system that failed at the implementation stage by failing to produce desired results. Its effect is not only on the overall national systems but also on individuals’ personal lives and working environments. It promotes a system that does not guarantee a healthy working environment and that facilitates comparison and branding of individuals as winners and losers. Inequality is therefore a prominent component of neo-liberalism, a phenomenon that requires assessment and correction for people to appreciate the purpose of the regime. References Krinsky J. (2007). Free Labor: Workforce And The Contested Language Of Neoliberalism. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press. Luxton M., Braedley S. (2010). Neoliberalism and Everyday Life. Montreal: Mcgill-Queen’s University Press. Stokes S. C. (2001). Mandates and Democracy: Neoliberalism by Surprise in Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Read More