R

E

A

D

T

H

I

N

K

C

R

E

A

T

E

In order to have a win-win globalization, we have fair rules must have transportation, traffic signals and traffic police. The rule of law is, "What is the most powerful," must be replaced by rules to ensure that the location of one of the poorest highway. Otherwise fall in the global financial free market under the control of imperialism. The same way the local, regional, national, and the market needs in order to control and the rules are reasonable and protect the interests of poor people in them. Such control is missing, and wealthy people can easily bend it in their own interest conditions. Endless negative impact on the monorail between blocks are visible in the company's global capitalism every day at the factory location in the world's poorest countries, where cheap labor (including children), please feel free to available, in order to increase profits, the company contaminated air, water, soil and save money on equipment and technology and environmental protection; false advertising and marketing activities to promote the unwanted hazardous products.           Poverty and Capitalism     Since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, free markets have swept the globe. Free-market economics has taken root in China, Southeast Asia, much of South America, Eastern Europe, and even the former Soviet Union. There are many things that free markets do extraordinarily well. When we look at countries with long histories under capitalist systems—in Western Europe and North America—we see evidence of great wealth. We also see remarkable technological innovation, scientific discovery, and educational and social progress. The emergence of modern capitalism three hundred years ago made possible material progress of a kind never before seen. Today, however—almost a generation after the Soviet Union fell—a sense of disillusionment is setting in.    To be sure, capitalism is thriving. Businesses continue to grow, global trade is booming, multinational corporations are spreading into markets in the developing world and the former Soviet bloc, and technological advancements continue to multiply. But not everyone is benefitting. Global income distribution tells the story: Ninety-four percent of world income goes to 40 percent of the people, while the other 60 percent must live on only 6 percent of world income. Half of the world lives on two dollars a day or less, while almost a billion people live on less than one dollar a day.   Poverty is not distributed evenly around the world; specific regions suffer its worst effects. In sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and Latin America, hundreds of millions of poor people struggle for survival. Periodic disasters, such as the 2004 tsunami that devastated regions on Indian Ocean, continue to kill hundreds of thousands of poor and vulnerable people. The divide between the global North and South—between the world's richest and the rest—has widened.   ... What is wrong? In a world where the ideology of free enterprise has no real challenger, why have free markets failed so many people? As some nations march toward ever greater prosperity, why has so much of the world been left behind?   The reason is simple. Unfettered markets in their current form are not meant to solve social problems and instead may actually exacerbate poverty, disease, pollution, corruption, crime and inequality.   I support the idea of globalization—that free markets should expand beyond national borders, allowing trade among nations and a continuing flow of capital, and with governments wooing international companies by offering them business facilities, operating conveniences, and tax and regulatory advantages. Globalization, as a general business principle, can bring more benefits to the poor than any alternative. But without proper oversight and guidelines, globalization has the potential to be highly destructive.    Global trade is like a hundred-lane highway crisscrossing the world. If it is a free-for-all highway, with no stoplights, speed limits, size restrictions, or even lane markers, its surface will be taken over by the giant trucks from the world's most powerful economies. Small vehicles—a farmer's pickup truck or Bangladesh's bullock carts and human-powered rickshaws—will be forced off the highway.   In order to have win-win globalization, we must have fair traffic laws, traffic signals, and traffic police. The rule of "the strongest takes all" must be replaced by rules that ensure that the poorest have a place on the highway. Otherwise the global free market falls under the control of financial imperialism.   In the same way, local, regional, and national markets need reasonable rules and controls to protect the interests of the poor. Without such controls, the rich can easily bend conditions to their own benefit. The negative impact of unlimited single-track capitalism is visible every day—in global corporations that locate factories in the world's poorest countries, where cheap labor (including children) can be freely exploited to increase profits; in companies that pollute the air, water, and soil to save money on equipment and processes that protect the environment; in deceptive marketing and advertising campaigns that promote harmful and unnecessary products.   Above all, we see it in entire sectors of the economy that ignore the poor, writing off half the world's population. Instead, businesses in these sectors focus on selling luxury items to people who don't need them, because that is where the biggest profits are.   I believe in free markets as sources of inspiration and freedom for all, not as architects of decadence for a small elite. The world's richest countries, in North America, Europe, and parts of Asia, have benefited enormously from the creative energies, efficiencies, and dynamism that free markets produce. I have devoted my life to bringing those same benefits to the world's most neglected people—the very poor, who are not factored in when economists and business people speak about the market. My experience has shown me that the free market—powerful and useful as it is—could address problems like global poverty and environmental degradation, but not if it must cater solely and relentlessly to the financial goals of its richest shareholders.         — Muhammad Yunus, Creating a World Without Poverty: Social Business and the Future of Capitalism                           Indexes/20