Rhetorical Analysis of The Globalization of Poverty

I was raised to be a hard-core republican. My parents, though well-informed and supportive of my independence, would breathe fire if I ever so much as dared to whisper the words "inequality" or "United Nations" or "elite class." They aren't bad; they know what they believe.
Because I am young, I am slightly more liberal minded, but when I read The Globalization of Poverty, I couldn't believe how strong the liberal voice trumpeted unrestrained.
The good aspects of this essay include allusions to September 11th, quotes from compelling, recent sources such as the CIA, professors of Economic Schools, and The World Bank (which is exceptionally compelling because it's quote against globalization is counter-intuitive), and giving strong statistics on the income gaps and world poverty trends.
If this piece was to appeal to people like my parents, however, serious changes would need to be made. First off, the theme of this essay is that economic globalization is a cause of global poverty and inequality, but it never shows HOW. It states that is exists, but never gives examples of exactly HOW globalization causes social classes to be marginalized, and without proof the entire point of the article seems frantic and unsupported. The article also states that increasing evidence that globalization increases inequality is coming from within globalized companies, and no evidence is given until three paragraphs later. The proof should come faster, and simple organizational tweaks could have quickly remedied the problem. Counter arguments are occasionally mentioned, but more is needed to address to counter arguments of increased foreign jobs and increased corporation wealth would need to be included.