Davos: “You will own nothing, and be happy”. I’ll trust in them when there is more mobility from lower to upper, and ownership of assets increase for middle class

@AdlerMow

2 жыл бұрын

This right there! Can anyone tell me when a government did something to favor the middle class? I belive none!

@iamaconcernedcitizen4851

Жыл бұрын

The middle class is being eradicated. They only want the Surfs and Masters. This is a shift of wealth away from middle class to the Masters as simple as that!

@maywalker997

Жыл бұрын

Social mobility tends to suffer under conservative governments and all the evidence points towards people becoming increasingly divided and right wing.

@stapleman007

Жыл бұрын

Decarbonizers: "You will be nothing, and you won't be"

Distributed, Decentralized, Resilient, and with redundancies. That is what we need. No centralized control of anything. Also, no to WEF with their creepy stakeholder capitalism nonsense. No ESG, no stakeholders, no group of people trying to control everything.

@rof8200

2 жыл бұрын

Exactly. Especially, unelected people should not have any say in how countries run their own countries. If they wish to have a say, they need to get elected by the people in each country.

@peppersghosttheater

2 жыл бұрын

@Nemusis 999 that would be fine but the west has stolen and marginalised Africa and many Asian countries for years. Even transfering jobs to the east as they are to cheap to pay western wage's. I agree with much of what you say but all western countries then in turn have to bring the jobs back to the countries they are based and pay taxes to those countries also

@peppersghosttheater

2 жыл бұрын

@Nemusis 999 so you agree with me.

@user-vi7jn5ph9b

2 жыл бұрын

@Петро Ґ I understand the misunderstanding. I read it like that myself first time through. So many words have been assocaited with large topics that just the use of the word sometimes gives a false context. @Nemusis 999, good try but your point was a little buried in two topics in one post I believe, I could be wrong on that.

Does growth need to be the only driving goal? If economies are a little sluggish but nobody is starving or losing their homes, the only tragedy being rich folks can't get richer as fast as they like, why wouldn't that be acceptable?

@kirstinstrand6292

2 жыл бұрын

The World is their stage, upon which to roam and flaunt their stuff. Now what fun would they have if the rest of us no longer worship them?

@Clifford_Banes

2 жыл бұрын

We'd have to change from capitalism to something else

@sfbuck415

2 жыл бұрын

@@Clifford_Banes you mean we have capitalism now? it looks a lot like socialism for rich people and anyone who is buddies with a Congressperson.

@ricardosmythe2548

2 жыл бұрын

There has to be constant growth because the money supply is constantly growing. Stop partaking in fractional reserve banking and divert from our debt based financial system and its possible. Were screwed by design

@sfbuck415

2 жыл бұрын

@@ricardosmythe2548 I don't care how you rig the game. When the civilization collapses under the weight of this top heavy economy you're going to be dinner.

"The way China is going" you mean the way its been for the past 40 years

@ph11p3540

2 жыл бұрын

You mean the way they were trade dumping.

@2KSnSLifestyle

2 жыл бұрын

@@ph11p3540 No one is forcing anyone to trade with China. It's a free market. Deal with it.

@rickjames18

2 жыл бұрын

@@2KSnSLifestyle Exactly, that is why countries are moving away from trading too much with China. Get used to it.

@rickjames18

2 жыл бұрын

@@yeetian2774 But US labor is not 2 bucks per hour not even close. No more flooding markets, trade dumping, and subsidizing will be accepted.

@2KSnSLifestyle

2 жыл бұрын

@@rickjames18 Yeah right. The reality is the majority of countries still trade with China because there's no other alternatives.

Globalization, where everything is concentrated and depends on 1 or 2 places or nations, sounds like a dichotomy for the concept of global: through the whole. Maybe it's time to put an end to the stupidity.

The bottom line of globalization is how can we exploit cheap labors.

@jimbocho660

2 жыл бұрын

And also hide ill gotten wealth.

I find this topic both very interesting and amusing at the same time. Amusing because the host and his guests are young and might not remember when ‘Globalization’ was introduced by politicians and corporate sharks as the way into the future in order to create a more free and prosperous people. When in fact the people of the 90’s and early 2000’s marched on the streets protesting against it knowing that the only prosperity that this was to bring were to the world’s elite. And it did. The gap between us and them has expanded beyond imagination. Of course the majority of the western worlds population could never have possibly been wiser then our elite. So here we are. And here we are. And all I can say is that we told you so. Which of course is sadly pointless.

@arhus12

2 жыл бұрын

Are you saying the the rest of us have just stayed the same, that only the elite has become richer? Would you rather have it that everyone is poorer but with smaller gaps in society? I feel that this is the ever present dilemma and I'm not sure what the solution would be

@user-vi7jn5ph9b

2 жыл бұрын

'We told you so' what? What did you tell us? That we would go through a global pandemic and a climate collapse?, which is where we were this time last year. (No one, practically no one, is going to remember just how close we came.)

@h3egypt

2 жыл бұрын

I'm sure you wouldn't have that phone or the same opportunities you currently have neither would I without globalization... we won't have cheap and diverse food as well you can see the signs already with food prices and shortages

@bradhombre6912

2 жыл бұрын

The rise in the wealth gap has a lot to do with changes in domestic policies (changes in tax structure, policies, regulations, social programs, spending priorities etc. to favor the wealthiest over the middle class) Automation also plays a role. Blaming trade or immigration or cultural change or any of that stuff for the decline of the middle class is mostly a distraction. That said, a rapidly growing economy will generate more millionaires, and that isn’t necessarily a bad thing, as long as its coming from overall growth and not from policies that gouge the middle class.

@bvkronenberg6786

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, I recall all the warnings about outsourcing manufacturing to China, but profit was the driving force. Now the US is no longer capable of making much of anything.

Globalization is seen by many people as a polite term replacing Imperialism. Globalization seems to serve the same people that Imperialism has served. Can the people, that own most of the planet, help us all between sips of champagne in Davos? I do not know. Moreover, I will not hold my breath waiting for the self entitled to help.

@Seastallion

2 жыл бұрын

No, there IS a critical difference between Globalization and Imperialism. Globalization is a WORLD Order, whereas Imperialism is sequestered systems where the economics are almost entirely contained within the territory of that Empire. Very little trade goes outside of it, as Empires didn't trust each other enough to rely on each other for critical goods. Globalization is the opposite of that, where nations are all relying on each other in a global network where nations specialize in this or that industry and those industries sell to everyone else in the world. Empires are similar, except that they typically only sell within the territory of the Empire largely due to protectionist policies. The European Empires prior to WWII worked exactly like that. There was some trade between them, but all critical components were kept in house, so to speak, because they didn't trust each other. In such a system something like Airbus in Europe could never exist. The competing Empires would never trust each other enough cooperate in building complex machines whose components are sourced from the various Empires. The end of Globalization is just that. Because of numerous reasons, not the least of which is shrinking populations, nations can no longer rely upon each other for critical needs. The last time wheat prices seriously spiked, the so-called Arab Spring happened with numerous governments being overthrown in the Middle East. With the Ukraine war, both the first and second biggest wheat producers in the world are getting knocked offline AT THE SAME TIME, and their biggest customers are in the Middle East. The consequences are likely to be much bigger than the Arab Spring. The shrinking demographics around the world (China in particular) is causing a shortage of labor AND a shortage in Consumption. International Supply Chains are becoming destabilized, and it was always going to happen. Covid just sped things up a bit.

@stevekontis8992

2 жыл бұрын

@@Seastallion You are absolutely right. Globalization is not the gunboat economics of imperial times. But it does allow one to produce cheap t-shirts in the collapsing factory in Bangladesh. As a world order globalization should assure global standards so that the workers in Bangladesh do not die, but it does not. Imperialism was the imposition of the powerful over the weak. Globalization is the taking advantage of the desperate by the powerful. Imperialism allowed the Empires, now politely called the West, to enrich themselves by fleecing countries that lacked the means to defend their interests. Now we have globalization and the descendants of the Empires still take advantage of weaker countries, only now it is polite. I benefit as a consumer from globalization as my ancestors benefited from imperialism. I just feel better because I did not send a gunboat.

@Seastallion

2 жыл бұрын

@@stevekontis8992 There is something to that, but at the same time, those workers in "Bangladesh" wouldn't have had better paying jobs (they'd still be on the Rice farm or whatever), and the country wouldn't be able to benefit from the income to build better infrastructure, etc. Those Bangladesh workers wouldn't have cell phones with internet access and possible schooling to improve their situation. Without the western investment, they'd still have been dirt poor and with no possibility of upward mobility. It's not as though the business relationship is one sided. Yeah, the business elites are making out profitably, but they aren't the only ones. In reality, it's the Middle Class of the developed countries that get screwed in favor of cheaper labor. Only now, much industry is coming back replacing the cheap labor overseas with even cheaper automated machinery. Textiles in particular are returning to the US leaving the overseas labor without those jobs now. So would the workers in "Bangladesh" be better off with the foreign business leaving their country alone now?

@stevekontis8992

2 жыл бұрын

@@Seastallion I will not argue with that. I just think that globalization means globalization. Globalize standards. Why should I, who works in an environment with health and safety standards, benefit from the cheap labor of people who do not enjoy the same benefits and protections. What exactly are we globalizing? I believe in globalization and will applaud it as soon as I see it.

@Seastallion

2 жыл бұрын

@@stevekontis8992 That is the only reason Globalization works. If the workers overseas were enjoying the same standards with the same environmental regulations, THERE WOULD BE NO GLOBALIZATION. There would literally be no point. The only exceptions would be in raw materials that couldn't be gotten elsewhere, and that wouldn't be Globalization either. It would just be international resourcing, but only as necessity required.

Centralisation of production makes any economy brittle. Top down control systems fail very quickly compared to bottom up ones

@kwekspeps7207

2 жыл бұрын

Monopolies seem to be doing well

@AbAb-th5qe

2 жыл бұрын

@@kwekspeps7207 About the only ones who are. When the dinosaurs were wiped out fungi did extremely well.

I believe globalization will be far more diversified 30 years from now. Regional economic blocs will aim to become far more self-sufficient.

@kirstinstrand6292

2 жыл бұрын

I can see that; within the respective blocks, there would still be diversified trading partners.

@user-vi7jn5ph9b

2 жыл бұрын

30 years from now?, you, I, everyone, will not even recognize this place. Change started a little late but it is picking up speed, exponentially.

@Seastallion

2 жыл бұрын

Except, that's NOT Globalization. Economic "blocs" is precisely what Empires prior to WWII were. Those Empires rarely traded with each other, and competed for limited resources which led to wars. The Global Order created by the US via the Brettonwoods Agreement after WWII was an attempt to change that, so everyone could trade with each other freely, with Security guaranteed by the US. Both national security and shipping security. The US played international police, forcing everyone to play on the same side, even countries that don't like each other. That is going away. Those "blocs" (Empires) will start competing again for energy and other resources necessary to maintain modern life.

@stapleman007

Жыл бұрын

Regional blocs make sense. VS: Produce raw materials and ship them 1/2 way around the globe. Factory produces the goods, with the corporate headquarters 1/2 the world away. THEN, ship the finished goods 1/2 way around the world. Ok.

The tiniest news studio table in the world makes a reappearance, lol. 🤣😹 Love DW!!! ❤❤❤

@whohan779

2 жыл бұрын

It's only for the daring. The antagonist of Putin's table, à la "Covid-19 for all if one has it". 😂😬

IMO each country should be able to sustain itself as much as possible then import/export things they don’t have or produce excess of. Obviously it would be easier for larger countries but it would help minimize an incident having a catastrophic effect on a country not having what it needs. The on-demand type of ordering has now been shown to have too much risk when it comes to important products like micro chips. Hopefully lessons learned.

@faris7000

2 жыл бұрын

shortages of microchips was a result of de-investment in manufacturing during the pandemic, and it will take time to recover regardless of source. It has nothing to do with geopolitical issues or trade wars. There is only a handful of microchip manufacturers in the world.

@Seastallion

2 жыл бұрын

@@faris7000 Covid sped things up, but it was always going to be an issue. The Global demographic implosion was going to see to that, which is itself a direct consequence of Industrialization. Nearly the entire industrialized world is aging beyond their capacity to maintain their industries on the levels needed to maintain Globalization. China is the fastest aging country of all thanks to their One Child Policy and cultural bias towards having sons resulting in mass selective abortions of girls. As a result, 40 Million+ men in China will never get married and have a family. China's population may be half of what it is today by 2050. The situation is worst in China, but they aren't alone. Most of the industrialized world stopped having children in meaningful numbers and nothing can fix it. It takes 20 years to grow a 20 year old, and urban living makes raising children expensive, so people don't particularly want to. Ultimately, the world is going to have to find a new balance between demography and Industrialization and that is going to take time. Immigration is not a long-term solution and only a handful of countries are even capable of doing that well. China certainly can't do it, or more to the point, won't.

@awonoto

Жыл бұрын

Can the people be convinced that sustenance is better compared to abundance? With current inflation, there are so many pressure for politicians to "do something" to combat inflation. Imagine not buying cheap products from abroad, would the people accept even worse inflation?

@medeliworld

Жыл бұрын

Micro chips are not important products. Food and fuel are critical items.

The disdain for the US is thinly veiled by the presenters. Too bad everyone is coming late to the table. We have folks like Peter Zeihan who have been forecasting this breakdown of globalization for years.

What Europe needs is to do is to separate itself away from American warmongering. The US has been seeking conflict with Russia for decades now and European countries have been so witless as to agree with the US's catastrophic schemes.

@patriot5550

2 жыл бұрын

Nice try kremlin bot. Together with the US and the rest of the world, we can isolate Russia to the point of collapse for it's warmongering.

@kirstinstrand6292

2 жыл бұрын

France and Germany may be the first breakaway countries! Wouldn't that be s Door Opener?

@peabase

2 жыл бұрын

​@@kirstinstrand6292 How have the two supported US warmongering? I remember only too clearly how both opted out from the Iraq War, much to then chagrin of Dubya and his merry band of neocons.

@wokeaf1337

2 жыл бұрын

We, Europe, need to step away from anything non related to democracy. Stop trading with dictators, One by One and the renewable energy will make this possible.

@abbottshaull9831

2 жыл бұрын

The U.S. isn't a warmongering Nation. Far from it, it was prop up at a World-wide Security Force by the U.N. The U.S. hasn't been itching for a war with Russia/Soviet Union either. We realized it war neither could win. It funny how the bad apples keep on repeating history. Just saying.

Thank you DW

I believe that, in these events, ultimately financed by large corporations in the world, everything that is discussed boils down to how to achieve or strengthen the power of these large corporations.

In principal globalisation has the potential of increasing the prosperity of all, however by ignoring political reality it can have a darker consequence. The other issue is the way globalisation has been implemented has increased unrest in the developed world, even if its has improved the developing world. The final issue is the rules under which globalisation operates is based on the overwhelming military power of the US. With the rise of the developing world the relative strength of the US decreases and the rules under which globalisation can work is weakened. The way we have implemented globalisation is self-destructive. The more successful it is, the quicker it will crumble. The short term decline of china actually will strengthen globalisation as china will be more reliant on globalisation to overcome its economic issues. However this is temporary and the self-destruction of globalisation will continue. As for the issue of bottlenecks, these are all short term disruptive effects which can be resolved even if they cause a short term hick up in the system. As for the future, I have no idea but I suspect the world will start dividing into trade blocks or alliances. What has happened to Russia is a good example. The sanctions against Russia are only supported by the anglo-sphere and some of its closest allies, such as Poland, japan, etc. The bulk of the world, by population, is not part of this. 8 members of the G20 do not support the sanctions for example. We are already seeing the birth of trade blocks based on political alignment and i suspect this will grow.

@siddeshnaik2296

2 жыл бұрын

First go to other countries genocide on them loot them as much as possible take that wealth to your countries and store it there design rules by which all others will play in a way that benefit you the most try to open the markets of other countries so that your pvt companies can earn more and when other countries which were first looted through their hardwork start beating you in your own game start whining about it.

@siddeshnaik2296

2 жыл бұрын

8 members do not support so why d you need 20 members and 20 opinions if you want them all to be same. Also who sanctioned USA for Iraq, Somalia, Libya, Afghanistan.

@marczhu7473

2 жыл бұрын

Trade block means multipolar world thus China objective being attained.

@peterfmodel

2 жыл бұрын

@@siddeshnaik2296 True, which is why the current rules based global system will collapse, if it has not already collapsed. We will be going back to a world of major power blocks, similar to the early 20th Century. Each will contain its own trading block, for the simple reason trade will once again be a tool each block will use in its conflict with the other blocks.

@peterfmodel

2 жыл бұрын

@@marczhu7473 You raise a good point and while I have never considered this idea, its very possible China did want to create its own power and trading block, divorced from the one created by the US in 1945. However I suspect China has not thought it through to that point and are simply chasing short term objectives. A China trading block would not benefit china’s current manufacturing focus, unless China was pivoting to a consumer based economy. Only time will tell.

Globalization will work if countries follow the rules like fair competition , human right , democratic government , worker rights, transparency, respect for others, common values etc

@Seastallion

2 жыл бұрын

Good luck with that. It's a nice thought, but naive in regards to human nature. Piracy and Drug Cartels exist because humans aren't angels. Left to our own devices and given no reason to behave, humans can be, and often are, barbaric.

Great video!

This sounds way too much like 1914 all over again. I really thought the 21st century would be peace at last. The movie Dr. Strangelove is more reality than fiction. DW Thank you for these excellent programs even though it looks to me like the human race is going nowhere fast. I was born in the late 1940’s.

@jose98937

2 жыл бұрын

you were born in good times.. now onward aint no fun!

@jonspambottomly4105

2 жыл бұрын

When we hit 1910, people knew that we were in 'Strange Times'. There was a foreboding in the air.Then it kicked off. WW1 moved seemlessly into WW2. What can you do? This is a good channel.

@Fuehrenundfolgen

2 жыл бұрын

George Orwell and Aldous Huxley joined the conversation

@pj61114

2 жыл бұрын

@@jonspambottomly4105 Thank you for your contribution. A great channel indeed. I concur WW1 & WW 2 were the same war. Since the Atomic bomb the Great Leaders do not declare war anymore. Like the USA in Korea & Vietnam & Russia in Ukraine it is correctly called Special Operations. The USA has been involved in several Special Operations and they lie and call it a war. Only congress can declare war according to the constitution. Lets see what China can do now to take back Taiwan. Endless wars ( special operations) until we can finally unleash Hydrogen Bomb Missiles to bring World Peace.

@pj61114

2 жыл бұрын

@@jose98937 Thank you for your contribution. Yes I am very fortunate to be born in the USA in these times . This may go down in history as the best time to be alive ever. And soon after I was born the United States did special operations in North Korea then they did special operations in Vietnam. The USA lies and calls them a wars but only Congress can declare war according to the US Constitution. I am in great times right now with all the Internet and information we can get and still we have many special operations all over the world. Of course it’s the same thing as war. When was it ever really any good? To be a cynic or pessimist like I am I call it being a realist. Being an optimist must be a wonderful thing I call it denial. Not just thinking of myself I feel so bad about all the people who have to suffer under the great leaders in our world.

I don't know why, but I never before imagined seeing these two gentlemen in the same room.

Great show

this is wonderful news. finally other countries like guatemala, bangladesh, vietnam that need development get a chance instead of always china, china, china

@rickjames18

2 жыл бұрын

That is the plan, many other countries in Asia/other will get more foreign investment, companies, jobs which will help them. Vietnam, Mexico, India, Cambodia, Singapore, etc are starting to gain all the outflow from China. I believe this is part of the diversification they were speaking of. It will give other countries a chance to grow.

@wenweisu99

2 жыл бұрын

@@rickjames18 when china first opened up under deng, many smaller countries were all threatened by the flight of foreign investment to china. the west was just enamored by the huge chinese market. now xi has become so emboldened that he will quash democracy in hongkong, implement genocide of minority ethnic group in xinjiang, contemplate invading instead of peacefully reuniting with taiwan. a hongkong that is the same as mainland china actually does a great disservice to mainlanders from a judicial standpoint.

@rickjames18

2 жыл бұрын

@@wenweisu99 I agree, if things had gone differently China may have reached its full potential. The Chinese people would have been better off and who knows, maybe the west wouldn’t see it as an adversary. Ever since Xi started entrenching the country deeper into the red things have gone sideways. Hong Kong was doing well so why mess with it?! Taiwan is always a worry as I do not want to see a war break out. The CCP does not need Taiwan but they cannot let it go. Now the trend is building in reverse, globalization is being modified and no one wants a repeat of Russia. Personally I hope Taiwan stays free but it doesn’t seem like the CCP will back down.

@jetblockmoth5961

2 жыл бұрын

China has had massive growth for 35 years but they’re hitting the point where it’s no longer sustainable to have that growth. I think all the countries you mentioned will grow, and Mexico is going to have massive growth too

@rickjames18

2 жыл бұрын

@@jetblockmoth5961 Agreed, I actually think Mexico will likely benefit the most. The issue in Mexico is the cartels. China is still going to be an issue for a long time but I don’t see how they stop the issues that are building. Demographics alone are going destroy Chinas growth. Worst in the world. The CCP keeps creating more problems with bad policies. So, I see them lashing out once people realize the decades of crazy growth are over.

Thanks

It was a bad idea from the start. Allowing capitalists to not only move manufacturing to cheaper labor areas but allowing the same people to move their profits to no tax areas only serves to make the rich richer. We can can't make everything ourselves but we can make a s much as possible. If you trade in a country you pay tax in that country.

Excellent documentary. The UK is one of the most globalised countries and being global doesn't work without a cheap source of energy

It's a bit sad, because there was a huge opportunity to do it better from the start. Just once again drives home the importance, nay the very meaning, of the term "sustainable". Quite simply put if something is not sustainable then it will come to an end. If a long term risk analysis ignores the sustainability involved in such an important thing as global trade then there is something wrong.

Removing their production in East Asia means losing their influence in the region as well; in short, China would have more influence in Asia eventually which something US trying to prevent to happen.

@princedukenkanteen2636

2 жыл бұрын

They shd move it to Africa and see the games changes simple.

@encabsss

2 жыл бұрын

@@princedukenkanteen2636 That would be good for Africa, and if that happen, hopefully, they'll be in control not other way around like what happen few decades ago. But the only problem I see in Africa is that governments are pretty unstable; too many coup.

@w.m.e.cantinoobtrader1334

2 жыл бұрын

thats the core problem why there cant ever be peace on earth. usa want to isolate china russia which are 2 super powers that have their own view and interests and when you push them into a corner for too long something gonna happen. its sad that usa seek world dominance and try isolate 2 super powers cuz russia china know excactly what usa doing to them, even india feel the pressure

@bitter_truth8646

2 жыл бұрын

@@encabsss Take businesses back to Europe so that Europeans can work. Businesses with production, not only services. This reasoning that you and many others have, building our factories in poor areas of the world and selling them in Europe and America MUST stop. You and others like you have destroyed us. If Africa after 40-50 years becomes strong enough, then people like you are going to say "let's move our businesses/factories somewhere else". No mate, you are totally wrong with this kind of thinking

@jukio02

2 жыл бұрын

It's too late for the US, they are too late to the ball game.

Globalization did not arise in the last century because humans learned to be more civilized and cooperative, it arose because the US had the will to largely subordinate its interests to a rules-based order over and the power to enforce that order over and above the strategic interests of lesser powers. The US appears to no longer be interested in maintaining this order, and without such a power enforce the rules, globalization cannot exist. Freed of the consequences of transgression, states will resume pursuing their local interests and grievances, just as Russia is doing right now. Can China fill these shoes? No, absolutely not, it has neither the means nor the will to do so. China's economy is collapsing, its population is about to collapse, and its navy cannot project power beyond even its immediate shores. Moreover, the idea of China consenting to sacrifice its own interests in order to guarantee international rule of law is frankly absurd. China is an authoritarian state that fails to follow even its own domestic laws. Globalization is over and regionalization will take its place.

@garthy4u

2 жыл бұрын

Interesting take. As much as the criticism against the US military industrial complex is warranted, people take for granted the stability of the part 70+ years. It was for the betterment of all. Europe never had to spend any money on weapons/military, and instead could focus on rebuilding, and developing their people. Russia shows what happens to a country/culture that's stuck in the past century. So much spent on the military, yet the majority of their people enjoy a very low standard of living.

@williamhenry8914

2 жыл бұрын

@@garthy4u Yes, well-publicised excesses, like Iraq or Afghanistan, are easily perceived and felt, while the reverse is true for the effects of the conflicts that don’t take place because they were avoided. What we have been living in, which appears to be ending, is called the ‘long peace’ in history and IR. While the resulting ability of countries to focus on development rather than security is called a ‘peace dividend’.

@williamhenry8914

2 жыл бұрын

@Nemusis 999 I agree that change through trade has totally failed to foster democracy. I’m sure the US will continue to support the order in some ways, but I don’t see it make huge efforts to guarantee it anymore. Guaranteeing requires willingness to make major sacrifices and enter enter conflicts if needed, which seems to difficult now. Perhaps I am wrong, but Trump’s Nationalism and Biden’s speedy Afghanistan exit have persuaded me otherwise. I would not say only US allies have become addicted to trade with the main fascist powers. The US has an enormous trade with China, for example. I agree we need to stick together.

@spencergoh5077

2 жыл бұрын

China collapsing ? Which century you live in ?

@williamhenry8914

2 жыл бұрын

@@spencergoh5077 substantiate your point and I will be able to respond to you.

Always love DW news Reporting 🇩🇪💜

Great skill as an interviewer and excellent guests

We need to start buying less junk and make what we have last longer. Then we can afford to pay higher prices for locally produced products that give jobs to our citizens.

@konmoe121

2 жыл бұрын

Well put. 👏

@Auriflamme

2 жыл бұрын

Say that to the average young family struggling to make ends meet. It's all very well to have noble aims and virtues but the majority of people can't afford to or just don't care about the future of the planet.

@aarhusnord

2 жыл бұрын

Totally agree. We make people poorer, quality goods more expensive, there are less jobs ... it can't end well.

@olivierbeltrami

2 жыл бұрын

@@Auriflamme My point is that if people were willing to pay more for local products and services, then people could live decently even from non-skilled jobs. Personally I am tired of dealing with automated tellers and voice navigation systems. I’d be willing to pay more to have human tellers and phone operators earning a decent wage.

@MathieuDeVinois

2 жыл бұрын

Sure. But there is another reason people buy and throw away things very soon. It’s the technological benefit new products promise. Some are just marketing but others are real. Still, having better quality would make it viable to change the old product to the new version for a fair price. The customer gets the benefits of the new product. The producer can use the old one as a resource or refurbish them to make cheaper offers for people who don’t need the newest versions. Then trash would be minimized too. And the company actually has a healthier customer base.

The world doesn't belong to man, but given to harvest fruits and share among the poor. Blessings 🙏 be at peace ➕

Very patient young lady.

Too lazy, cheap, and don’t learn, man he hit the nail on the head with that one…

I think it is safer to link one's economy with those who are considered allies. This way if conflict does occur, your economy is not as likely to be crippled by a sudden lack of supply related to a vital component or raw element. So, I think globalization will continue to some degree, but with a lot more care. There may also be a group of nations and factions who trade with one another and avoid others. For example, I can see the U.S. decoupling from China quite a lot in the future. I'm not saying that the U.S. will stop buying from China, but almost anything of a strategic nature will not be purchased from them. I also don't think that Europe will be buying things like gas from Russia in the future. Russia is far too likely to use that in blackmail to help it achieve political and military goals. Some countries of course will try to play both sides (like India) but it is unlikely they will receive the same trade deals as others because they will be viewed as an external party who isn't quite to be trusted.

German industry is what made sure to make Germany dependent on cheap Russian gas. When economics get to decide how things are done, without reasonable control of a government to prevent becoming to reliant on one source, of course it will end badly. Especially when that party you are dependent on is an autocracy. And we see similar bad signs in world trading as well, of course it has to be under control.

@sebokimre892

2 жыл бұрын

the biggest autocracy have in usa. what are you talking?

@wowJhil

2 жыл бұрын

@@sebokimre892 Yes troll, be noticed.

I have a feeling those guys in Davos are not being completely honest. And yes, I sort of like euphemisms.

Greatest fallacy is the belief markets are free.

@dylancatlett6580

Жыл бұрын

Right--not with central banks.

Cleaning the "financial crimes activities" like corruption, monopolistic trade, money laundering, tax avoidance and so on are the biggest challenge on putting the "World in Order"!

Some veteran European leaders talk about isolating Russia, but they frequently call Putin behind their backs, giving Putin a strong hint as if Europe is afraid of Russia. Military victory is the only and reliable way to end the war once and for all. At present, Germany and France are very slow to synchronize with several countries in Eastern Europe. This may pay a certain price for their future politics

Globalisation Will be finished in a few years. How can you have globalisation without cheap fuel?

To DW team can you do a report on the Defi world of transactions especially flash loans Danke!

Instead of dumping all the manufacturing eggs in one basket (China), pick 5 high pop countries and divvy up the load. Nigeria, India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Philippines, Vietnam, Mexico, plenty of high population areas that could support lots of manufacturing. This way, if any one goes down (name your crisis), the others continue operating. Right now we see China do covid lockdowns and lots of the world stops. China has too much of the world's industry.

@john_doe_not_found

2 жыл бұрын

Also, after the war, Europe maybe wants to set up Ukraine to be the low cost manufacturer for Europe for a few decades.

@rickjames18

2 жыл бұрын

That is the plan I believe.

@siddeshnaik2296

2 жыл бұрын

The reason China was chosen is because the western world in the second half of the cold war wanted to pit China against USSR and hence pumped their economy it is politics that decides economy not the other way round

@mutkaluikkunen3926

2 жыл бұрын

Or maybe just move as much of the manufacturing as possible back to the EU and then automate the heck out of it. Push automation as far as possible, everywhere it's possible. We're already having a worker shortage in the EU so pushing automation to the extreme wouldn't kill too many jobs. In the end what we really want is to become more resilient and especially not dependent on authoritarian countries like China and Russia. We've trialed it for some decades now and all we ended up doing was giving up a huge chunk of the Western competitive and technological advantage to countries like China almost for free. China made full use of the "technology transfer" and gained the technologies for free, which western companies had spend years of R&D and money to perfect.

@ricardosmythe2548

2 жыл бұрын

Manufacturing should be localised wherever possible. Globalisation is extremely wasteful in terms of resources it only makes sense because of the currency systems we use

We do not have free trade now. Part of the problem is the largest oil reserves are sanctioned by the US. How do the corporation's leave globalisation when nearly everything produced is made in China. Chinese wages are to high for the slave running Apple etc.

Is this the end of comfortable chairs?

great segment, very balanced view!

Once again the excellent Rob Watts: always delivering an on point interview. 👉 🌐

Rob Words moonlights as Rob Watts, a DW reporter.

Your guest Anahita Thoms works for Baker McKenzie which is classified by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalism as "an architect of the modern tax avoidance system" listed in the Panama Papers for its work in promoting and enabling offshore tax avoidance. This alone should have disqualified Anahita from having a platform on your show. Globalisation for WHOM?

@dagmarvandoren9364

2 жыл бұрын

She does not look "hungry"

Why is the lithuanian flag upside down on the thumbnail?

Thanks for address Cambodia, that is one of the destination for supply chain. Hopefully the election is transparent, and more approach to the democracy.

In a way, end of globalization may be cool. Diversity is more natural anyways. Some form of competition will be good for material products and for every local economy.

@maywalker997

Жыл бұрын

An end of globalization will lead to more aggressively closed boarders, more competiticion over resources, poverty and less social mobility. So much of the prosperity over the last 70 years has been driven by globalization and we don't have the infrastructure to deal with a sudden collapse of it (people will suffer).

stop the debate if globalization means westernisation

@DW - The Lithuanian flag is upside down in your thumbnail. Facts

North America and Europe need to look south. Moving production to Latin America and Africa would benefit local economies and help to ease immigration stress.

@Seastallion

2 жыл бұрын

They will, somewhat. Unfortunately for Africa and Latin America, geography will still make all the difference. Some of them will have opportunities, but parts of Africa in particular are going to get bad. Large segments of the world will begin de-industrializing. Especially significant parts of Asia. Quite possibly China, which is already suffering food shortages, which is why they banned the export of fertilizers a few years ago. They may very well force people to leave the cities and move BACK to the farms to avoid starvation. Rice farming is labor intensive, and is really gardening in that great care is given to individual plants. That takes a lot of people to do. Plus, China is the fastest aging population in the world. They won't be able to maintain their current industrial level.

What is left from so called globalisation just playing with words?!

It can only be a positive Move

What about this: 'China goods credit system', so like carbon credits, you get a credit if you make something outside of china....

We are not interested in a unipolar US Imperium here in Europe.

Why not both?

That graph at 9:06 ist sehr disturbing!

This is not the end but the evolution and transformation of globalization. Globalization 1.0 was equal to westinization and the evolving globalization 2.0 is multipolar in nature. Interesting times ahead.

So many country forget one very fundamentally thing 'stand by your own two feet' Rely on globalization, rely on supply from other countries is wrong from very beginning.

Globalisation can work, there are countries that has more of a specific reasource than others. What needs to be done are guarantees that these countries wont be distabilized/invaded by a hostile country.

@princedukenkanteen2636

2 жыл бұрын

The best space is simply Africa and the singleness of Africa and an actions plans to work with Africa and the. Most problems shall go away simple

@tonykum2005

2 жыл бұрын

Point man. The past has shown us that you idea does not work.

@JamesSmith-ix5jd

2 жыл бұрын

Not possible, the US invades somebody, what are you gonna do? Cry at the UN about it? Declare war on nuclear superpower? Laws are meaningless when you can't enforce them.

@sebokimre892

2 жыл бұрын

no.because we know who wanna lead the world.and also we know the same country who start the wars in the planet.usa.

@mikevarga6742

2 жыл бұрын

@@princedukenkanteen2636 taxes are too high in Africa for serious players to even consider

Oh thank lord, finally some good news

@lovewillwinnn

2 жыл бұрын

There’s better good news in Psalm 37. Namely, verses 9 through 11. That’s what will soon take place. 🙂

Core interest of globalization affects by the US’s best interests.

President Trump had warning nato, but nato countries just laughed.. And now things happened in front of your very eyes.. Not 2 rely on Russian gas, and china supply chains..

Peter Zeihan; listen to his talks

Re-globalization should look to reward the good actors and taper-off support to those who go against existing, effective structures

Davos is not taking US Unipolar Hegemony, seriously. They all better get on the same page.

Planetary resources aren't equally distributed.

All over the world

Excellent Topic/Question. To determine this we must have a definition of Globalism. A more Peaceful World is a good Criteria. Define "Peaceful" comes next so we may have means to measure. Whatever is happening to globalization, it is good to build Resilience focused generally on Life Support Requirements. For now, the focus on Climate Change solutions is more focused on large Scale Behavior modification to reduce Carbon Emissions and Geoengineering while generally ignoring Resilience and Adaptation such as Planned Climate Migration. Building Resilience should become an area of higher awareness related to Climate Change. I used to present at Technology Conferences on Climate Change on the Carbon Alarmist side of the issue to promote reduction of Carbon. Now, I have changed under the idea "Climate Change is real because Climate No Change is Impossible" therefore we should focus much energy on Resilience particularly "Local" Resilience as it has less vulnerability to long supply Chain disruption. Long supply Chains are essential to Global Prosperity. Robust long supply Chains in concert with Local Resilience provide redundancy of Critical Life Support Resources. Hopefully, we can continue to improve balance related to serious issues we face. I'm encouraged by the shift in Conversation coming out of Davos. Good work Elites!

Globalization benefits the western economy most,regionisation is better for developing

Global trade results in manufacturing misalignments. As local politicians exploit those misalignments, everyone is damaged. As costs to business increase, businesses should contemplate coming home, with a mind to not making the same mistake. With green energy and country wide policies to ensure local manufacturing, let us hope that the West forgets trying to deal with thugs. And, we all know who the thugs are. Sustaining de-globalization means forgetting making commitments to governments that resemble Chicago mob theory. The future is deglobalization - and the faster the better.

@user-vi7jn5ph9b

2 жыл бұрын

Would you agree, we fix the local politicians exploiting global trade we eliminate the problem you refer to?

I have also watched the French 24 version of Davos forum and globalization. A lot less biased. DW just felt more like American Welle(AW).

most products China can design manufacture 100% except ones needing latest most advance microchips and China is building its own big brands in ASEAN India Africa actually many names are more famous esp in African countries

@xxxyyy9361

2 жыл бұрын

More famous than western brands

It is not the end of globalization but it is a real threat to a Dollar as a global reserve currency and the sanctions are to blame for the slow death of a Dollar.

@ernstwiltmann3918

2 жыл бұрын

Geoffrey Bayamukama The US $ is no longer trusted as a global reserve, since it lost oversight due to Quantitative Easing FIAT money enforcement, build on just military might, and imperial suppression.

Your word channel is happier than this.

Stoltenberg mentioned "a lot of prosperity to all of us...." I just want to mention that Stoltenberg has a $50,000 monthly salary

Does anyone knows what exactly is international order?!

@JamesSmith-ix5jd

2 жыл бұрын

USA orders and you obey

Investors will always seek out the cheapest labor globally, that should answer the question.

DW Business Special: Is globalization dying or transforming? Me: Well, is it dead or alive?

Perhaps the real estate market may become more accessible. 😉

The Lithuanian flag in the thumbnail is upside down

And guess who is doing the fragmenting to preserve their unipolar hegemony

I watched the whole report and got literally nothing. Are we heading towards decoupling? (De)globalization? Unclear.

@Shifty_

2 жыл бұрын

The answer is maybe

@wokeaf1337

2 жыл бұрын

Not deglobalization but decoupling from dictators. The further our energy dependency is reducing because of improved renewable energy the more likely to happen.

@RR-ep4qy

2 жыл бұрын

@@wokeaf1337 it doesn’t look like anybody is really concerned about renewables in Europe. The German government for example, was quick to try and find LNG alternatives (hardly environmentally friendly) from Qatar (hardly a democratic state), while the French president (similarly to Kissinger in Davos) was suggesting the Ukrainians to give up territory in order to please Russia, probably, since winter is coming anyway, there are barely any LNG terminals, or other sources of energy (in the case of Germany, nuclear energy is also out of question).

Like it or not, it will continue, because of the expansion of the Internet, people around the world will be more connected than ever (with a few countries as exceptions), and people will still want the best stuff from other countries, there might be hurdles, but it will continue.

niiiicee

The war in Ukraine 🇺🇦 is meant to open your eyes to the reality in the financial system. Real estate firm and other businesses are also closed too only crypto holders are spending money with ease..

@derickdillard7371

2 жыл бұрын

You don’t see opportunities with your eyes, you see them with your mind. If your mind is saturated with fears of losing money and fear of failure, you’ll always miss opportunities.* *life itself is risky, nothing is 100% guaranteed in life.the only thing that is 100% sure in life is that you and I will die one day!**If you don’t take RISK you can’t be RICH!

@jessemacron6059

2 жыл бұрын

I wanted to trade crypto but got confused by the fluctuations in price

@victoriatexas9786

2 жыл бұрын

a friend that I referred to Mr Logan Willie just received $7,050 profit after 10 days of investing..... I became jealous...lol

@eddiejim437

2 жыл бұрын

Really y'all know him, I even thought I'm the only one he has helped walk through the fears and falls of trading

Lithuanian flag upsidedown on intro. :(

@drunkpaulocosta9301

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah its a sign of distress... Lol whilst thats true i am definitely joking

@GoodBadCo

2 жыл бұрын

@@drunkpaulocosta9301 you not joking lol

@abdulnaseernadakkal4325

2 жыл бұрын

Who cares Lithuania flag , the world nothing to do with it

@GoodBadCo

2 жыл бұрын

@@abdulnaseernadakkal4325 chill bruh that sovereignty

DW News will become no 1 in the world by very fast because DW vision and content combination is close to best well done DW NEWS

Economic engine is like diesel engine, it need warm up to run smoothly, the difference diesel only need few minutes to warm up, while the Economic engine need dozens year to run smoothly, so the damage on Economic engine on state level took more devastated and strangled in vicious circle. We can see some country will having massive setbacks. That the price they can't afford caused by all sanctions that broken global cooperations.

Rob Words??!?!?!?!?!?!

No decoupling. Re-arranging. New allies. New enemies. New century.

Europe needs an energy revolution to start with and a second industrial revolution. The Le Pens and Orbans we have spread accross Europe thrive in de-industrialised, low employment regions. These threats to a free, democratic and peacefull Europe are then subsidised by countries like Russia that have an interest in destroying the unity and values of Europe. Values in world trade should matter.

@deniseproxima2601

2 жыл бұрын

Start your own.

This might also be about getting rid of the trade deficit the US has with China. If you solve this problem fast, lets say by hyper inflation and currency reform, then the result might be for the US to not being able to buy anything from China for a while. This situation on the other hand is good to combine with a war that also might have the same effect. Both sides will suffer more from this the more they are coupled. The decoupling therefore reduces the suffering. But most important is to prevent a nuclear war, because it might end human civilisation as we know it globally. Recommendation: form a global government, that has a monopoly on force and that might be able to prolong human civilisation on this planet.

@saadabu5986

2 жыл бұрын

THE INFLATION EVEN IF ITS 2% , IS BECOME AS TAX ON PEOPLE, THEN ITS CLAIM IS 9% AT THE MOMENT, WELL IS DOUBLE THAT, THINK WHEN YOU GO SUPERMARKET, OR BUY GAS ALL GONE UP BY MORE THAN 20%, SO WHAT THE GOVERMENTS CAN DO , THEY CANT SOLVE THE PROBLEM , IF THEY DO BY PRINTING MORE MONEY BY FED THEN WILL BE SUPER INFLATION, ME AND YOU MIGHT HAVE TO WORK UNTILL 80 YEARS OF AGE CAUSE

@hpw-ws6bj

Жыл бұрын

Got nothing to do with trade deficit. When US dollar is the global currency you’ll have trade deficits. It’s about the rise of China and the decline of western empires.

what are exactly the common values of US with Europe that brings them together? first of all what Europe is she talking about? Is she talking about a country like Norway or a country like Ukraine?

@georgioskaraiskakis2725

2 жыл бұрын

@Nemusis 999 my country is in EU, Check my name.

Brexit in the UK demonstrates why deglobalization is the wrong track, unless the planet wants to revert to the 1500 century.

@cetaepsilon

2 жыл бұрын

Sounds good actually. Simpler life, clean air.

@alexiskiri9693

2 жыл бұрын

@@cetaepsilon need to study history, don't you. Lice, diseases very short life spans backbreaking work just to feed your self and your family, constant wars, 4 out of five babies died before the age of 5, slavery the norm, women dying during childbirth along with the babies, starvation and famine are regular visitor, most people drank wine because the water was undrinkable, the list goes on and on.

@gpsfinancial6988

2 жыл бұрын

@@cetaepsilon The good old days when women were pregnant at 14 and people died in their 30s

@cetaepsilon

2 жыл бұрын

@@gpsfinancial6988 just like today then. You'd be lucky if you didn't get shot, stabbed or succumbed to drugs by your 30.

@gpsfinancial6988

2 жыл бұрын

@@cetaepsilon Even basket cases like the American South have an average lifespan over 75. In the UK lifespan in the "glorious" 50s was 69, but it has increased to 81. Admittedly the self flagellating UK choosing Brexit and Boris will not help matters.