The single most interesting thing I have learned when reading this book is the way that inequalities were so obvious in close regions. The fact that a very small percentage of the people control most of the wealth in most of the countries does not surprise me. However, what does surprise me is the discrepancy between the rich and poor peoples of the world. The poorest rich people are, in some regions, seven times wealthier than the richest poor people, and the gap is growing. My family is now considered an upper middle class family, but what about 100 years from now? If the trend does not cease then my family will, not all that far from now, be called lower middle class. Eventually we will become poor and probably die out. Although this does not directly affect my immediate family, or me it does force us to work hard and aspire to be incredibly successful so that out name will live on forever. I want our name to be thought of as one of the lucky, not one of the unfortunate families who could not survive.

In almost every situation discussed in the Global Inequalities book there is one side wanting one thing and another side wanting something entirely the opposite. These conflicts produce a social world in which people gather to speak their mind or to simply get away from those who are talking.

The second contribution this book makes is to fill in the holes left by the first two theories. When doing this, the book claims that the countries in the Americas are developing due to a new wave of economic consolidation. They many trading blocks but their growth is due mainly to the trade they carry on with each other.

Multinational trade unions are widely viewed as positive unions that are beneficial for all involved. But what about those who aren't involved? Many small-market countries that are not involved get left behind. They are already at a disadvantage in the global market and this disadvantage is greatly enhanced when other countries can purchase goods much cheaper. If these countries ever expect to compete then they too must get involved in a trade agreement. This brings us to a second argument against these unions. If everyone is involved in trade unions, wouldn't that create political tension? Here is an example. Ten countries are in one union and thirteen are in another. Country A has a dispute with country B from the other union. Country A asks its union to ban all trade with country B. Country B responds by asking its' union ban trade with not only country A, but all the other countries in its' union as well. Country A's union then bans trade with the rest of the countries in country B's union. As tensions grow, the countries of their respective unions become nervous and one little international incident sparks a war between opposing unions. If a few of these countries are involved in multiple unions then you have the makings for World War III.

This is a very compatible theory with today's world. Today's world is becoming more and more globalized. As this happens, countries around the world must be careful not to lose touch. If they become egocentric or do not pay attention to the past, they risk repeating the mistakes that others have already made. The book talks about the European Union as a good step in the direction of fixing Europe's problems. If a country is too egocentric to join, then it may very well face many hardships ahead as it will not have any

Some common words found in the essay are:
Modernization Theory, World-System Theory, Bradshaw Wallace, Personal Reflection, Critique Multinational, Synthesis Alexis, Latin America's, European Union, Modernization Theories, Latin America, modernization theory, latin america, social change, european union, contribution book makes, social world, today's world, book makes, section deals, poor countries, latin america's, world system theory, ban trade country, union ban trade, world-system modernization theories,
Approximate Word count = 2295
Approximate Pages = 9 (250 words per page double spaced)