GLOBAL POVERTY AMID GLOBAL PLENTY - RODRIK

1.  Rodrik uses the example of Japan's Meiji government during its industrialization to argue that healthy economic policy arises from more government regulation—not less, and that Japan has been able to remain to this day a major power in the global economy because of this. However, during most of this period in history Japan was also under martial law, in which the military led the government and individual rights suffered. Would it be worth it to you to live in a militarist country if things like wages, job security and food prices were stable and secure?

Personally I believe militarism would not be worth stable wages, job security or food prices. As an individual and a member of society I believe that a democratic state, separate from the government would make me feel more secure and stable. The military should not be an internal enforcement, and should not be in charge of internal affairs and the making of laws. The military should have the central goal to serve and protect the people, not govern wages, etc. "Individual freedom" is more important than financial consistency.  The ability and opportunity to attain any job appropriate for my experience/ability, and to get get paid according to the quality of my work depending on demand is not so terrible. You need to earn the wages you receive  as an individual or a company, food prices varie according to supply and demand. THis is how the economic cycle works, with constant ups and downs balancing price with the value of the currency. Trading freedom for stable and secure financial consistencies is a communist notion, which removes all possibilities for ambition and improvement.

 2. According to Rodrik, 'domesticating' globalization is the only way to "tame" it. How was China able to 'domesticate' globalization when it came to foreign investment?

China was able to domesticate globalization by taking advantage of specialized economic zones. They were able to make international exports, duty free, while also being able to gain knowledge regarding superior infrastructures. Thus, improving their own. This duty free trade attracted privatized global investments while China was still able to maintain domestic/governmental control over production, wages, etc. Once China had built up a strong enough industrial base with a solid infrastructure they were able to enter the WTO grasping globalization by the leash. Only to improve their economy and stature as a global economic power.