Globalization, does its associated policies lead to greater social and economic inequality? It hasn’t been hard to find the idea of globalization leaves people behind. Individuals thatargue against the globalization state “the poor have next to no capital, partly due to lack ofentitlement rights and destitution. Second, due to uneven development, globalization exacerbatessocial and economic gaps within and among states by reinforcing a process of creativedestruction” (Kacowicz 2007, 572). The first point, I will be looking at is internationalorganizations’ role in globalization and how nation-states have been forced to follow theneoliberal economic policy. In addition, forfeiting the concept of the countries to follow theirown creative economy policies because debts that are owned by international organizations. Thesecond point will look at the role of neo-liberal economic policies and the false discourses thatresulted in more impoverished conditions than the keynesian economics model. In addition,looking into the stats of poverty in developed and undeveloped countries, and the roletechnologism and how it should advance under neoliberal economic policies. The third point, Iwill look at is the rise of the new public-sector managements’ role in inequality. Furthermore,has transferred social responsibility to the individual, resulting in economic hardship forindividuals. The fourth point I will look at, is the voluntary sector’s reliance on funds fromgovernments’ due to the neoliberal economic policies that has promoted inequality. The lasttopic I will argue, is proposing a different alternative, looking at Cubas resistance to theneoliberal ideology. I argue that globalization and policy decisions resulting from globalization,enhanced inequality globally.                                           The problem of international banks.              The international monetary fund and the world bank are two organizations linked to thepromotion of the globalization model. Globalization is the notion all markets cooperate to ensure the economy is fully functioning on a global scale (Harvey, 2005). When countries’ start to runinto deficits is how international banks take a foothold in the nation states’s respective economy(Harvey, 2005). Therefore, to get out of a deficit and to continue to build your economy,international banks will provide bailout packages (Harvey, 2005). Thus, if you buy into theirphilosophy, resulting in cutting social services within the country and replacing it withinternational trade, in detail, is the core of the neoliberal model (Harvey, 2005). As Miller (2011)states “the World Bank and IMF use of conditions on desperately needed loans to shift overseventy countries toward greater reliance on market forces and away from state-directeddevelopment is the current paradigm of this domineering influence. The benefits of this alteredpolitical framework for self-advancement to the people of developing countries are, to put itmildly, subject to dispute” (P.91). Schneider (2012) gives a recent example, of the scenariowithin Greece now where the International Monetary Fund will provide funds, also known as abailout package, to Greece in exchange for them to drop social welfare programs and adopt strictneoliberal policies. It seems like the consensus within Greece, is that they do not want to acceptthe International Monetary Fund’s original proposal. Schneider (2012) states the figures of theoriginal proposal of the international monetary fund was that it “agreed to contribute $36 billiontoward Greece” (Schneider 2012, 1). Likewise, these bailout packages are not only happeningwithin Greece but Globally. In fact, Miller (2011) suggests the issue is occurring, when youadopt these loans along with their policies attached to the loans. Hence, can lead to actions ofthese policies lead to less economic sovereignty within a country (Miller, 2011). As a result,reduces a country chance from independence for the neoliberal system, at the current momentand in the future (Miller, 2011).  This specific philosophy of thought leaves the nation-state with little power. Forexample, Miller (2011) states an account if the United States or the European Union decide tochange policy or go in a different direction, the countries that borrow from these the world bankor the international Monetary Fund would be doomed. Thus, countries are now tied to thedirection because these countries have limited economic freedom (debts) and their nation-state,which leads to control by a foreign bank or countries that developed the international banks(Miller, 2011). For example, Miller (2011) uses greenhouse gas and omissions to demonstrate hispoint in which the undeveloped countries have little control, due to the developed country’sagenda which gives them little independence. Due to the little independence, they cannot protectthemselves from such issues such as the environmental concern because they are bound to whateconomic fate of developed countries (Miller, 2011). This keeps undeveloped countries with animpossible place to prosper and keeps the developed countries rich exploiting nation states thathave weak power on the global stage through law or corruption. In addition, this contributesto social inequality within these undeveloped nations which offer them next to no assistance.Dutt & Mukhopadhyay (2009) conduct a study to see if international institutions andglobalization cause inequality, the method was “to apply econometric time series analysis tomeasures of the extent of inequality across countries and the degree of globalization using aslarge a set of countries as data allows” (P.328). Furthermore, this study focused on “inequalitywith the standard deviation of the logarithm of per capital income, a measure of inequality acrossnations” (Dutt & Mukhopadhyay 2009, 328). In conclusion, international organizations andglobalization was directly correlated with an increase of a gap between wealthy and non-wealthy countries, which has resulted in inequality (Dutt & Mukhopadhyay, 2009). In addition,“if international institutions are to reduce the inequality among nations, they should be followingpolicies other than the type of globalization that they have advocating and promoting around theglobe” (Dutt & Mukhopadhyay 2009, 336). If equality among developing countries are to berealized, international banks must allow for developing countries to be their own creating agentsin terms of their economy (Dutt & Mukhopadhyay, 2009).                                            Striking the liberal model down.  The liberal model tells us that Neoliberalism will reduce poverty. When looking at “theliberal globalization thesis, a quantum leap in human affairs has taken place as the cross-borderflow of large quantities of trade, investment, people, and technologies have expanded from atrickle to a flood” (Kacowicz 2007, 573). The liberal globalization thesis argues that throughprocesses such as humanitarian aid will bring “about a brave new world of increasing prosperityand international cooperation and will eventually lead to greater equality and convergence in theperformance of national economies across the world” (Kacowicz 2007, 573). For example, if welook at examples such as India and Spain to demonstrate proof that globalization is reducingproperty, but the fact is India has a 25% of its population living below the poverty line (CIAWorld Factbook, 2012). Thus, a quarter of India’s entire population, which tally’s 1,205,073,612are living below the poverty line (CIA World Factbook, 2012). Furthermore, if we look at theexample of Spain a developed nation that follows the European union and its neoliberalism idea(CIA World Factbook, 2012). Thus, the stats indicate that 19.8% of its population living belowthe poverty line (CIA World Factbook, 2012). In turn, this has increased now when you includethe financial crisis in Europe with 21.7% of its population unemployed (CIA World Factbook,2012). Furthermore, Spain ranks in the bottom 30 in the world which rarely is seen by aEuropean or developed nation (CIA World Factbook, 2012). The liberal theorists tell the publicthat globalization will reduce poverty (Kacowicz, 2007). As a result, this promise that has fallenextremely short also within Canada. As the Standing Senate Committee (1999) that earningsamong young individuals has fallen 30 percent and the average income has fallen 6 percent in aspan of six years. Furthermore, the Standing Senate Committee (1999) states the homelessproblem in Canada has gone on unaddressed for years and is only getting worse. Likewise, to thepoint where now it could be addressed as a national emergency (Standing Senate Committee,1999). Therefore, the discourse around the promise of neoliberalism seems to have been anempty one.  Liberal theorists argue that advancement within technology in the north (developed countries), will reduce poverty when it is transfered to the south (undeveloped countries)(Kacowicz, 2007). As a result, will raise the living standards within these undeveloped countries(Kacowicz, 2007). This statement seems to be completely misleading, when the whole ideaconflicts with transnational exploitation. Consequently, explaining how globalization leads togreater social and economic inequality. Furthermore, globalization “generates transactionsbetween people and firms in developed countries and people in developing countries that areimmorally exploitive unless the benefits of commerce are used to relieve desperate needs”(Miller 2011, 90). This states that the payback the developing nations receive are barely enoughto keep them out of debt. In addition, providing them with fewer social services, in return thedeveloped nation’s gain a massive profit. Within this system, developed countries promotecompetition, which forces undeveloped countries with less power to negotiate and accept theterms because there is no other option available (Miller, 2011). Another way of putting this isthat exploitation that happens on an international stage, which one state benefits off anotherwithout something in equal in return (De-Shalit, 1998). In this relationship, one party finds a wayto keep the exploited party poor, thus limiting their purchasing power (De-Shalit, 1998). Thus,leads to a country being dependent of them sort of like protectorate status (De-Shalit, 1998).When developed countries are exploiting underdeveloped countries, anyone would have a toughtime understanding that liberal intention is a good one.Liberal theorist’s say they give back, but I disagree it looks like they are taking more  than giving. For example, this can be clearly demonstrated within a simple stat which is personalcomputer per 100 people. In addition, if we look at the statistics outside of Europe and NorthAmerica there is a low percentage per 100 people with computers (The World Bank, N.D). In aperfect liberal view, Individuals’ would be supplied with more computers (The World Bank,N.D). Thus, if we look over the existence of computer available to the public from 1990 onward,the stats have remained stagnant (The World Bank, N.D). Furthermore, this maintaining thesame imbalance in the world when it comes down to computers (The World Bank, N.D). If wedid deeper into the subject, we find that information technology is an important ally to theneoliberalism ideology (Harvey, 2005). Harvey (2005) states that the sectors associated with theentertainment industry have shifted public focus from social sectors and debates. Thus, heavyfunding in private sphere could continue while social welfare programs and basic income tookthe backseat, sustaining inequality problems globally. So, in practice the liberal ideology isflawed, as most individuals’ see more exploitation within a liberal perspective than a reducing ofinequality.                                                           Public Sector Reform.            The public-sector reform has been closely tied to the neoliberal ideology. However,Suzan (2009) states the public sector reform indicates that to “absolve the state of responsibilityfor the distribution of society’s resources and demand the demonstration of entrepreneurship,autonomy, efficiency, and individualism” (P.211) This has transferred the states previousideology that supported individuals in the nation-state to one of the individual reliance. The newpublic sector reform stated by Suzan (2009) informs us that “individuals to become self-disciplined, multiskilled, entrepreneurial and resilient” (P.211). consequently, this has affectedinequality at a global level, that once the public responsibility of the state has been transferred tothe individual inequality increases. For example, Suzan (2009) gives an account of this problemwithin the health care sector, such as the raised medical fees and increased the costs of surgeries.Thus, within the health care sector, what has happened is that due to new public management.In the event, that governments have reduced subsidized payments to health care sectors, resultingin higher payments for users of the medical system and those who do not have proper healthinsurance. Thus, these individuals would be left with options of going into debt for health careservices are not addressing their health care needs. Suzan (2009) gives an example of labour inCanada relating to Canada employment insurance act were changed, to give individuals lessaccess to employment insurance by raising the hours deemed to qualify. Furthermore, labourtraining markets provided by the state where given to the private sector. In addition, thesefollowing changes resulted in individuals having to pay for education to upgrade their skills andfor some without any assistance from time granted by employment insurance. Thus, pushingindividuals without savings into circumstances where they can’t improve their situation asprevious generations have. As a result, of the fact the costs previously subsidized programs bythe state become completely unsubsidized. In addition, this has given the unrestricted marketaccess to labour market and how the overall labour market is conducted. As a result, has likelyresulted in such results located in the Standing Senate Committee (1999) report that of a highdiscrepancy with older workers’ high skilled jobs with good pay and benefits, and youngworkers with low pay and low skilled jobs. Where as, the uncontrolled market has resulted in theincrease of contract and seasonal work by 7 percent and the rate of involuntary part timeemployment which has raised by 24 percent in 19 years (Standing Senate Committee, 1999). The fall of the voluntary sector.   The voluntary sector was established to meet the needs of individuals that the state or market could not incorporate. This concept changed in the 1980s in connection to the neoliberaleconomic policy. Evans and Shields (2005) state that the neoliberal ideology has attempted tooverhaul the voluntary sector as the third sector. Thus, in doing so Evans and Shields (2005)suggests this has resulted in the transferring the state social services to the newly acquired thirdsector, resulting in the overburdening of the voluntary sector. The voluntary sector is now taskedwith difficult circumstance, such as losing money at an alarming rate due to the fact the sectorhas grown more independent from the state. Evans and Shields (2005) state that the voluntarysector has fallen into the choice of either being philanthropic or being merchants of care industry. Thus, this has been tied back to the public sector reform that has expanded not only to the publicsector, but the voluntary sector as well to create profits. In addition, Phillips (2009) gives aCanadian example relating to how the conservative government cut one billion in funds underfour premises unused funds, money for value, efficiency and non-core programming.Furthermore, Phillips (2009) states in economic crisis of 2008 the conservatives did not includeany funding to help the voluntary sector. This has resulted in the problem if the federalgovernment does not inject any money into the voluntary sector who suffers? The answer isvoluntary sector does because the lack of funds it can contribute to helping individuals in thecommunity. In addition, individuals suffer as the Standing Senate Committee (1999) states that“social exclusion, poverty, the marginalized, the underclass, the ‘have nots’ – there is a sharedconcern that the benefits of the macroeconomic and social policies that we are pursuing arefailing to reach some groups; that some people are ‘falling through the cracks’ and them, as aresult is losing the capacity for full social and economic participation” (P.1). In turn, theneoliberal ideology has legitimized through funding, inequality of people throughfinancialization.                                                                  Alternatives?             Alternatives to the globalization and neoliberal economic tradition have always beensustainable development. Cuba faced one of the most difficult times in its history with thecollapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the country found its largest ally and trade supportertransferring into the global market, a direction that was undesirable at the time for Cuba tofollow (Stricker, 2010). What is the alternative? The alternative is sustainable development andthe only country by the world-wide fund for nature to meet all the criteria (Stricker, 2010). A  system where you “elevate the status of nature and community above that of the accumulation of  capital; equality and justice above individual greed; and democracy above the market. A new  accord with nature is needed” (Stricker 2010, 186). In addition, this system places moreemphasis on not exploiting people in international markets, instead an emphasis on justproviding for the citizens of its country with the right amount of product (Stricker, 2010). Thus,to sustain the population, while adding in a factor of environmentalism, to preserve the land forfuture generations.  How does Cuba Accomplish this? As a result, by a variety of factors such as throughfood security. For example, “the government continues this commitment through a universalfood subsidy programme that roughly covers 65% of a family’s needs. Elderly people, childrenand pregnant women are given extra rations of milk and other goods in addition, to thetraditional offerings” (Stricker 2010, 187). Thus, aside from food services the Cuban governmentprovides “a free health care system that is considered as one of the best in the global South.Health care in Cuba is a right and offered without cost to Cubans. Through the decentralisedpoliclinico system of local-based health centres and a focus on preventive care, Cubans havehealthcare service in proximity to their homes. Despite its tiny per capita GDP, Cuba rivals themore “developed” neighbours to the north, Canada and the US, in all standards of living andnotably outperformed them in terms of physicians per person” (Stricker 2010, 188). Furthermore,Cuba also gives the right to free education past the high school level, which is considered not aprivilege but a right and this has contributed to Cuba 100% literacy rate (Stricker 2010, 188). Inaddition, sustainable agriculture, which Cuba created a revolutionary technique that “they formedthe Vegetable Biotechnology and Biological Agriculture, an inter-disciplinary group of scientistsand technicians from 36 institutions to perfect such alternative technologies as biologicalfertilisers, plant tissue cultivation and the biological control of pests and plant diseases and toimplement the successful techniques in the field as soon as possible” (Stricker 2010, 190).Thus, after implementing this system, there became less opposed to it and more productivity (Stricker 2010, 190). The retreat of the state in favor of the global market has only hampered social cohesion in nation states. Sustainable development may not be perfect, but it has provided a better sense of welfare and equality for the people.                In conclusion, I have discussed several topics. The first is that International banks are a major problem contributing to inequality, as they fund programs of neoliberal policies, Inaddition, they cut social welfare programs such as the situation that has been proposed withinGreece. Furthermore, these countries are stuck because they can’t adopt other policies becauseneoliberal policies restrict their economic freedom such as the European union. The secondissue is the liberal theorist’s modernization theory is falling short. For example, globalization hasbeen producing more equality and has been shown computer stats. This has showed computersare not even nearly as common in developing or countries as they are within developedcountries. Thus, in liberalism theory globalization technology would expand, but this is not thecase. The third point is the public service reform that has transformed the public sphere into abusiness and the responsibilities have been transferred to the private sphere or the voluntarysector. The last issue revolved around the transferring of social responsibility of the state toindividual responsibility in turn, resulting in further inequality. The final point is there is analternative to neoliberal policy, such as in Cuba’s case that demonstrates low levels of inequality.BibliographyDe-Shalit, Anver. 1998. “Transnational and international exploitation.” Political Studies 46(4): P.693-708.Dutt, Amitava Krishna, and Mukhopadhyay, Kajal. 2009. “International institutions, globalization and the inequality among nations.” Progress In Development Studies 9(4): P.323-337.Evans, B. Mitchell, and John Shields. 2005. “The Third Sector: Neo-Liberal Restructuring, Governance, and the Remaking of State-Civil Society Relationships.” CERIS Policy Matters 18: 1–10.Harvey, David. 2005. Chapter 6: “Neoliberal on Trial.” A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Harvey, David. 2005. Chapter 3: “The Neoliberal State.” A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Ilcan, Suzan. 2009. “Privatizing Responsibility: Public Sector Reform Under Neoliberal                   Government.” Canadian Review of Sociology 46.3: 207–234.Kacowicz, Arie. 2007. “Globalization, Poverty, and the North–South Divide.” International Studies Review 9(4): P.565-580.Miller, Richard. 2011. “How Global Inequality Matters.” Journal Of Social Philosophy 42(1): P.88-98.Phillips, Susan. 2009. “The Harper Government and the Voluntary Sector.” The New Federal Policy Agenda and the Voluntary Sector: On the Cutting Edge. Ed. Rachel Laforest. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.?         Schneider, Howard. 2012. “IMF approves its share of new Greek bailout.” March 15. http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/imf-approves-its-share-of-new-greek-bailout/2012/03/15/gIQApec9ES_story.htmlStricker, Pamela. 2010. “Bringing social justice back in: Cuba revitalises sustainable development.” Local Environment 15(2): P.185-197.CIA – The World Factbook. 2012. “India.” https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/in.htmlCIA – The World Factbook. 2012. “Spain.” https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/in.htmlThe Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology. 1999. Final Report on Social Cohesion. Ottawa: Canadian Senate.The World Bank. N.D. “Personal computers (per 100 people).” http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.CMP.PCMP.P2/countries?page=6&display=mapGet Help With Your EssayIf you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!Find out more