The global economic playing field is being leveled, and you Americans are not ready.

(9:10) Great achievement of human development What are the problems that arise? Japanese speaking Chinese running Mcdonalds Call Center- 15:22 Thesis: 3 great eras of globalization: 1492-1820s. (globalization 1.0) countrys globalizing. you went global through your country. England colonizing India. 1800s-2000. Companys globalizing. Companies globalizing for markets and labor. Globalization 3.0. Individuals globalizing themselves. No longer built on white westerners. $1 trillion investment in fiberoptic cables in five years. Communicate for free. (23:30) mid 1990s genesis of the flat world. Global platform for multiple forms of collaboration. Wireless-steroids for the previous six forces 3 convergences- 2000- all 10 forces started working toegether. 2nd convergenceadapting to new flat platform. 3rd convergence- India, china, Russia, become available,3 billion. The mother of all inflection points perfect political storm9/11, enron, dotcom bubble. 44:00 Adaptation required after electrification for productivity boosts. no such thing as an American job anymore

4 communities that are not in the flat world. 1.too sick hiv/aids/tuberculosis. 2. Too unabled. Rural china, rural india. Need a step stool if they are too participate. 3. Too frustrated. Arab world. 4. Too many Toyotas. Need a new source of energy. Global warming. Run out of oil. you can innovate without having to emigrate

What are your thoughts? Do you agree or disagree with the Friedman's ideas? Why or why not? How do you see your world? (Be

sure to specify sources for any other references you make or use.)
After watching Thomas Friedmans speech at MIT, I can say that I completely agree with his assertion that the world has become flat. One of the main points that resonated with me was the three eras of globalization. Friedman states that Globalizations medium started as countries, progressed to companies looking for untapped markets and cheaper labor, and currently globalization occurs through individuals globalizing themselves. In his lecture, Friedman gave two quotes that combined with the current medium of globalization combine to paint a picture that I think ties into the way I see the world. First, Friedman restates that there is no such thing as an American job anymore. Secondly he adds, The global economic playing field is being leveled, and you Americans are not ready. With the infrastructure set in place by the ten forces that flattened the world, such as the trillion-dollar investment in fiber optic cables in the early 2000s, the global economy is no longer built on white westerners. Essentially, a poor student in Hong Kong with access to the internet (technology that Americans take for granted) now has the opportunity to better himself or herself and compete with privileged Americans in the global economy. As a Lehigh looking for employment in a weak job market, I now have to compete for jobs with my classmates on campus, as well the brightest students from around the world who are probably willing to do my job for less pay. While the flattening of the world has undoubtedly created benefits for billions of people around the world, Im interested what the group thinks about some of the downsides created by this phenomenon and what we can do about them. For example, globalization and new technology have eliminated the need for many jobs that once fueled Americas growth. Is there a point where globalization and technology reaches a point of diminishing returns and starts to do more harm than good to the United States?

I think youre final thought was somehow cut off, but I believe that globalization has had some harmful impacts on religion. This Digital Journal article (http://digitaljournal.com/article/331306) cites a 2012 study that religiosity had declined by 9% since they last performed the study in 2005. I think there is a direct correlation with globalization and the decline of religion. Before the days of wireless internet, religion had a much larger impact on society. Now, scientific discoveries and ideas that point away from a Creationist view spread quickly to anyone with an internet connection. The article also says that individuals in lower economic brackets are 17% more likely to be religious. I think this is indicative to the impact that globalization has had because poorer individuals are less likely to have access to the internet. Whether you believe in God or not, its hard to argue that organized religion can have a positive impact on groups

of people. Religion (I can only speak from my experiences with Christianity) provides a framework for living moral lifestyles. I think some of the problems our society has today are a direct result of the decline of religion. Another negative aspect of globalization is that it has provided a medium for radical branches of religion, especially radical Islam, to spread their views. For example, one of the popular theories regarding the two Boston Marathon bombers is that they were radicalized by visiting Jihadist websites on the internet from there apartment in Massachusetts. As a result of globalization, the internet provides a limitless market for recruiting new individuals to extremist religious groups.

I think that although globalization has, like you said, created benefits for billions of people around the world, it also has its drawbacks. I believe that the United States has been in the process of experiencing disadvantages of globalization. We can look at almost any product we own in our house and it will almost undoubtedly say it was made in some far eastern country. This means that outsourcing is taking away jobs from unemployed Americans. We may be getting these products for cheaper prices but at what cost to those who are struggling in our own country. There are millions of Americans that would most likely be willing to do the same jobs that are outsourced if they had the opportunity. With respect to the question of whether it will eventually reach a point of diminishing returns for developed countries, it is my opinion that yes it will. I think that unless the United States starts producing more products and services and reduces outsourcing, anything and everything will be available at a cheaper price in a developing country. What are your thoughts on this?

This video was made back in 2005, 4 years after China joined WTO and when the world was burgeoning with demand for more business intelligence and investments in new IT infrastructures. He offered remarkable insight that the information technology would inevitably transform how each one of us interact and connect with each other around the globe. That is what he had in mind when he said The global economic playing field is being leveled ... As of now, "Globalization 3.0" is already happening. Social networks and mobile platforms give individuals the power to reach each other and offer enterprises the power to micro-manage its customers and tailor its products. On that note, I do agree that the hyper connectivity enabled by the technology today has made the world flatter. However, I think the flattening process has more subtlety to it. First, the flattening process will always be uneven. Some countries will benefit more from the technology transfer than the others. Second, the flattening process will not necessarily level the playing field given that as those more homogeneous jobs get commoditized by the power of instant communication, the level of skills to do a job well will just keep going up. Jobs will become more demanding, differentiated, and complex. Therefore, I think the flattening process is happening.

However, the marketplace will also unlevel the field again by demanding more higher-quality specialized jobs. I think you are right to place an emphasis on the mobile platforms. My entrepreneurship class last semester was taught by two venture capitalists. Day after day they placed an emphasis on how many of the companies they worked with were a direct result of the new opportunities created by the mobile platform. Silicon Valley is full of start-ups with tons of ideas for the mobile platform. The mobile platform has the ability to greatly alter our lives, from paying through your IPhone and not needing to carry a wallet to having your social networks always in the palm of your hand. However, right now companies havent quite figured out how to monetize their ideas. Once companies develop revenue models that can be duplicated across the industry, I think we will see the mobile platform grow at a rate similar to the original web boom in the late 90s and early 2000s. Thomas Friedman looked back and saw the Netscape IPO as one of the ten forces that flattened the world. Maybe the monumental occasion for the mobile platform has already happened with the public offering for Facebook due to the work they have done optimizing Facebook for the mobile platform.

Do you think my comparison of Facebook to Netscape is valid?

I think that although globalization has, like you said, created benefits for billions of people around the world, it also has its drawbacks. I believe that the United States has been in the process of experiencing disadvantages of globalization. We can look at almost any product we own in our house and it will almost undoubtedly say it was made in some far eastern country. This means that outsourcing is taking away jobs from unemployed Americans. We may be getting these products for cheaper prices but at what cost to those who are struggling in our own country. There are millions of Americans that would most likely be willing to do the same jobs that are outsourced if they had the opportunity. With respect to the question of whether it will eventually reach a point of diminishing returns for developed countries, it is my opinion that yes it will. I think that unless the United States starts producing more products and services and reduces outsourcing, anything and everything will be available at a cheaper price in a developing country. What are your thoughts on this? I think we have pretty similar opinions on this topic. I think the level of outsourcing the United States relies on has already started having a negative impact on the country. Executives of large companies may love outsourcing, but I think the average blue-collar American has been hurt by cost reduction tactics like outsourcing and automation that reduces a companys labor costs. A prime example of the impact these forces have had on the United States is the bankruptcy of Detroit. In a USA Today article, (http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/07/19/gm-ceo-akersonbankruptcy-detroit-competition/2568787/) Dan Akerson, GMs CEO, acknowledges the impact the decline of Detroits auto industry had on the city. Akerson says that Detroit started having a lot of foreign competition

and didn't react particularly well to it. As the manufacturing jobs dried up, residents started moving away from the city looking for jobs leaving a population too small to handle the citys tax requirements. Detroits situation should be a huge wake-up call for everyone, but Im not sure individual buyers in a tough economy are willing to pay more for an American product when there is a cheaper alternative from China right next to it on the shelf at Walmart.

"If you go back to the early '60s, Detroit was the Silicon Valley of America. If you were an engineer, you wanted to be in Detroit," Akerson said. But starting in the 1970s and accelerating into the 1980s, the U.S. auto industry that underpinned the Detroit area's economy "had a lot of foreign competition and didn't react particularly well to it," he said. "What that meant for the city was fewer jobs. People moved out and kind of repotted themselves, and essentially the tax base dried up."