The one big problem I see with globalization, as it's currently practiced, is that it allows capital to freely cross borders while denying labor the same access.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/01/18/5-facts-about-race-in-america/
"A growing share of Americans say that racism in society is a big problem. Half of Americans now say this, up from 33% five years earlier, reflecting an increase across all demographic groups.
"Nearly three-quarters of blacks characterized racism as a big problem, as did 58% of Hispanics. Although whites were far less likely to say racism is a big problem (44%), the share of whites expressing this view has risen 17 percentage points since 2010.
"There is a partisan divide too: 61% of Democrats say racism is a big problem, compared with 41% of Republicans – though the share of Republicans saying racism is a big problem has doubled since 2010, when it was just 17%.
I find the statistics in your last paragraph especially interesting. The partisan divide in particular is odd given the United States elected a black president. I suppose there would be two schools of thought on why race relations have gotten worse under president Obama. I believe it is a mixture of both things, with emphasis on item 1:
1) Barack Obama is a racially divisive person. It's been evident for two decades: in the church he attended, in his writings, in his statements like "the police acted foolishly", "if I had a son he'd look like Trayvon" and a plethora of other actions and attitudes.
2) Clearly there is some backlash against having a black president. But racism is essentially DEAD in America. You will likely disagree but I will make my case anyway. When the people crying racism have to resort to such trivial whining as "microaggression", complaining about the racial/racist implications of a peanut butter sandwich and other such silliness, that tells me that real, actual examples of racism are in short supply.
Now I do tend to agree with this:
The one big problem I see with globalization, as it's currently practiced, is that it allows capital to freely cross borders while denying labor the same access.
It so happens I started to work on my BS in Business in February. It has been a real eye opener in many ways. Of course, I am learning stuff about business. I never got a formal education and ran our real estate stuff just on stuff we all learned in high school.
The real eye opener has been global business. Globalists admit there are winners and losers in globalization. I believe you touched on one of the biggest factors in the formula that determines the winners and losers. Clearly if capital can be moved from a country where the average hourly wage is $25 (I think that's about where we're at) to a country where it's $2.50- obviously the workers in the $25 per hour nation are going to be the losers.
This is what globalization/one world government politicians of all stripes (hell, let's bee frank, probably 90% plus of our hacks are globalists) want to keep as secret as they can: we have nowhere to go but down in the globalization game. Here's my case, and I make it as a simple novice with only my life experience, my logic and 33 credits in business classes:
When a specific products gets to be ubiquitous around the world, it usually reaches Price Point Parity (PPP). That is, it costs the same everywhere when adjusted for currency conversion. Of course, it's not 100% accurate, but within a handful of points for minor and country-specific variations.
I submit to you the same will happen with labor. Eventually, when globalization itself is "ubiquitous", the cost of labor, raw materials and other factors will equalize. Again, that leaves only one direction for the USA to go in: down.