Leonardo Barral Lorena de Mello 2-4MB2 20.05.20
Is globalization a zero-sum game or a win-win
situation?
Since the beginning of the globalization in the fifteenth century the
question above mentioned is matter of debate and discussion
between economists. The colonial states, with their protectionist
politics, would say that wealth could not be created, but only
explored, therefore for one to profit, someone would have to lose
something. This idea would later again be sustained by John
Maynard Keynes in his book The General Theory of Employment,
Interest and Money (1936). Yet, on the other hand, during the 18 th-
century, physiocracy (economic theory developed by a group of
French intellectuals) believed in liberalism, which defines the global
economy as a win-win situation, and, consequently, there should be
no need for governments to interfere on the market; that could
regulate itself. As I am planning to study Finance and Economics, my
interest in this topic is rather academic than only a hobby and the
result of this research shall guide the way I will deal with the future
subjects in college. Aiming to prove that globalization is in fact a win-
win situation, I chose to resort to some renowned names, especially
that of the founder of the Austrian School of Economics, Carl
Menger. My presentation has the following structure:
Explaining the subjectivity of the cake
The first myth about the globalization, which must be clarified, is that
the existing wealth is solid and immutable. Comparing it to a cake
with a certain size, it would mean that, the bigger the piece of cake
an individuum takes, the less remains left for the rest to share, this is
the so called “zero-sum game”. This view, however, is not
considering some crucial aspects of production and exchange of
products.
First of all, according to Menger, the immense majority of things, as
they are in their natural state, do not allow us to satisfy our needs. As
much as all matter already exists and is available in nature, it has not