by Wilson
Published on: Nov 30, 2006
Type: Opinions

The term ‘globalization’ has been already embedded in the social fabric: media, fashion, environment, politics, economy, education, culture and everyday life talk. Everyone seems to be more aware about the effects of local events across continents. Perhaps, this is because the phenomenon is touching our daily lives directly.

The world economy knows no boundaries; if you can trade and what you offer is in demand you got game, no matter what country you are in, liberal or conservative, friendly or unfriendly, religious or atheist. Nowadays you have to bring your assets outdoors in order to survive the aggressive global flow of goods.

Being aware of this phenomenon, poor countries bring to the table their most ready product on demand: young workers that work more and charge less. But unfortunately for the trade masters this good is not material but human and as such will never be reduced to the mere usage and disposal by the consumer. On the contrary, it will behave according to the fundamental human principles of satisfaction of needs and achievement of dignity.

This last factor is bringing the equation of trade to a gridlock that is causing consumers to behave erratically and sometimes act against themselves. That is, when the economy is booming, consumers shop, compare and buy, with the only thought that an item is or is not worth it. When the economy slows down, the powerful consumer wants a quick fix by zeroing in on the obvious factors of the economy.

As a result, and suddenly, the immigrant population suffers a sociological permutation under the majority’s kaleidoscope, from human capital to an inconvenient object that threatens to unfairly and invasively take over the scarce resources. And "it" is asked to disappear in the most inventive ways, except that "it" is not like the other capital goods that can be disassembled, recycled or storaged at will because "it" has a will of its own and will always refuse to be reduced to "it".

In the end immigrants usually stay because they are better off and because they are or soon will be needed by the oscillatory forces of the economy. Otherwise they will move as easily as they came. People in need follow the economy whether they are wanted or not. The good news is that immigrants tend to succeed and reproduce the system. In other words: why keep breaking your back if you finally have the means to afford someone else to do it for you for a very convenient price?

In some countries, more than in others, there has been so much influx of immigrants that it has become a necessary supply in the complex economic machine, and has created loops of low cost production and immediate consumption that accelerate and expand the market. After all, immigrants and their families around the world are also consumers and consumers can punish the market locally and globally.

Somehow Emma Thompson’s famous character Nanny McPhee rings a bell when saying "When you need me, but do not want me, then I will stay. When you want me, but do not need me, then I have to go."

« return.