In order to achieve this a production revolution of sorts took place in many advanced economies, countries shifted from Fordism to Post-Fordism. Fordism was based upon Henry Ford's use of production lines and mass production. This model de-skilled the workers involved and made flexibility on the production lines difficult. During the early 1960's a larger range of products were being demanded which meant that companies were losing profits as they could not keep up with demand due to the inflexible production process. The changes which came with the adoption of Post-Fordism were largely implemented to increase flexibility on the production line and consequently boost profits, as Mitchell stated “Post-Fordism has been portrayed as a
The requirement was to buy fewer foreign products but sell more of their own goods in order to achieve the purpose of maximizing the accumulation of precious metals. However, with the development of commercial economic, the worldwide economic exchanges and the merchandise trade are growing prosperity, but the trade expansion of the competition is increasing. Thus the mercantilists began to promote “Trade Surplus Differential theory” they thought they only need to ensure the sufficient trade surplus in order to increase in national currency. This is the late mercantilism. The center of the late mercantilist is Britain.
Changes in operations will help increase job exports. For the U.S., companies export new capital equipment and production to help create potential competitors. Importing countries demand that exporters shift part of their production to the purchasing nation in order to gain their sale over others. The emphasis on exports to developing countries combined with the focus on sales of new capital goods may introduce inappropriate technologies into nations with high unskilled labor pools. Exports of mining, petroleum, and infrastructure equipment may help multinational corporations and developed countries access cheaper raw materials, with few benefits for the residents of developing countries.
There is a failure to realise that long term better economic welfare also means general higher standards of living, as people have enough money to buy everything they need and some of what they want, competition is rife so drives quality up and prices down, and the government are able to take in more taxes from firms who are much healthier financially. This mass employment may lead to more jobs, but the workers themselves or the way they’re used is hugely inefficient. Another reason that labour production in the UK is so low is the lack of competition. There is a strong body of evidence that competition enhances productivity. So, with a lack of one there is a lack of the other.
Developing countries also benefit as the population get access to employment and the development of new skills, leading to more money being spent helping the economy to improve infrastructure and services improving the quality of life in the country. TNCs that do well in the developing countries raise the status of the country encouraging investment from other well know transnational corporations and most importantly it will improve the country’s economy drastically as valuable export revenues will be earned. On the other hand, most developing countries do not benefit as much as developed countries do, for example, sometimes much of the employment is low paid, low skill and long hours meaning that the country does not develop economically or give the opportunity to develop their skills. Another drawback is that there has been large negative press about TNCs and the poor working conditions in which people operate in; this includes the lack of safety requirements and the long hours of working. Transnational corporations like high profit, and countries where there is less regulations, therefore they often go to countries where there is less ‘red tape’ with regard to safety leading to TNCs
Imports and exports rose greatly according to Source A- Imports and Exports 1700-1900. Source D shows a new railway in India 1880s if Britain didn’t take over these countries they wouldn’t have new technologies such as the railway spreading British ideas and inventions. Overall the British Empire improved Britain by spreading its values, keeping the economy going, showing off how modern and advanced Britain was, creating jobs and increasing trade, money and power. On the other hand it could be said that having an empire didn’t make Britain great because of Britons attitude. They considered non white people to be lower than them.
Much of this investment came from already industrialized countries like Germany, Great Britain, and France whose business owners looked for new investment opportunities in the United States. These investors put money into the work of mechanics and engineers with the expertise to develop new, more efficient ways of mass-producing goods. Machines benefited the United States by allowing business owners to specialize in the production of goods and manufacture them in large quantities to distribute throughout the nation or export. As a result, the cost of mass-produced goods went down as their quantity went up causing industrial profits to rise. With the creation of transcontinental railroads and telephones, marketing nationally was available to distribute these goods.
Mass production also lowered the cost of the products. The quantity of the of the products were not scarce anymore, so the seller didn’t have to sell his products at a high price in order to make a living. The United States was looked at as a world power because of this new “technique.” Mass production also allowed for more jobs to open. Factories needed many workers in order to maintain the upkeep of the flow of items. The United States was facing hard times in the jobs aspect.
They wanted to extend their political, military and economic control all over the world. With the booming economy in the United States in the late 1800s, there was a problem with the surplus of goods. Excess production led to declining profits. Americans needed more consumers to buy their products. Industrialists wanted trade to expand into new overseas market where American products could be sold.
Age of Exploration – The European Colonization of the World The 16th century presented a huge social and economic change in Europe and even the world with the start of European exploration. Explorers from European nations such as Portugal and Spain changed the way the Europe worked at the time and shaped the world into what it is today. Many factors lead to this time period becoming the Age of exploration. The state of financial success and economic stability in the western nations put them at an advantage to explore compared to other nations. The merchant class created a connection and trade route to other areas which gave way to financial gain in those areas.