the middle class in latin america is marginalized and the upper class have the resources whereas the lower class dont even hold a home on their name. you'll have to convince this group that their lives have bettered, but they view the inequality in property as injustice and leaders that bring on ideas of nationalizing industries where a thing waiting to happen.

well local authorities in the EU are not allowed to engage in external contracts, it is an exclusive task of the EU and decisions has to come through the council which consist of nation states with veto-power.

the proces of integration of the eu market was enforced by judges who dealt blows to the nations for keeping up barriers indirectly, it could not have been done without the position of this court standing above the sovereignty of the member states. trust me, countries in europe where all but willing to liberalize their trade, even though they acknowledged the goals of the common market.

I don't see what the point in comparing your wealth to that of others. You'll always find richer people anywhere you go. What should concern one that wants out of poverty is not how well others are doing but how well one self is doing. Nationalizing industries won't fix economic gaps, it'll do just the opposite. Now there will be a class of poor people and a class of rich people with political power (the state).

It is yet debatable if regionalization will one day lead to globalization.

__________________

you'll also find that the rich are tied to the common wealth differently in every state through taxes, and different legislation on monopolies and competition. as you see the oportunities to rise out of poverty differ in every country and if it is impossible to rise out of it different views on neoliberalism emerge.

Neo-liberalism wants to break down state involvement in trade in order to have economic growth, and so it'll fail because of state involvement in trade? That's begging the question.

__________________

neo-liberalism does, but the global market is not free of state involvement. where did i say neo-liberalism would fail? it is being rejected, but that doesnt mean the concept doesnt work.

You're speaking as if neo-liberalism discourages people out of poverty, that it is being rejected by other countries, I call that a failure. If it works, it will reduce poverty and countries will accept it.

__________________

than you misunderstand me, i only speak of the political proces that is taking place and why people have lost faith in certain regions and what motivations lie behind it. i am not discussing wether neoliberalism works or not.