3. (a) What is meant when we read about "financial globalization"? (b) From the standpoint of less developed countries seeking to improve their economic position, is financial globalization a good, bad or indifferent thing? In this regard, one of our readings says that: "the welfare benefits of going from a situation without any capital mobility to a situation with completely free movement of capital is roughly equivalent to a one per cent increase in consumption for a typical emerging economy.2 One reason for the comparatively small estimated gains is that the low level of labour productivity associated with a low income level seems not to be primarily the result of a lack of capital, but is dependent on other factors, such as poorly functioning institutions." (c) Why is this remark largely beside the point? Explain. 5. There are conspiracy theories on the right, and there are conspiracy theories on the left. Of Goldman Sachs, Matt Taibbi writes: " The bank's unprecedented reach and power have enabled it to turn all of America into a giant pump-and-dump scam, manipulating whole economic sectors for years at a time, moving the dice game as this or that market collapses, and all the time gorging itself on the unseen costs that are breaking families everywhere high gas prices, rising consumer credit rates, half-eaten pension funds, mass layoffs, future taxes to pay off bailouts. All that money that you're losing, it's going somewhere, and in both a literal and a figurative sense, Goldman Sachs is where it's going: The bank is a huge, highly sophisticated engine for converting the useful, deployed wealth of society into the least useful, most wasteful and insoluble substance on Earth pure profit for rich individuals. Test the accuracy of Taibbi's claims about the nefarious conduct of Goldman Sachs by a thorough analysis of any one of the assertions above (e.g. that Goldman Sachs is responsible for high gas prices)