debate for multinational comapny
For Multinationals
Offers employment to local workers
Promotes peace internationally
Creates sense of community crossing international borders
Allows entire world to improve standard of living
Gives access to quality products regardless of location
Promotes economic stability
Raises standard of living for regions involved in production
Gives local economies new economic opportunities
Fact of life which needs to be accepted
Reflects global economy
Against Multinationals
Ruins local economies
Depletes local work forces by drawing to metro centres
Stifles cultural growth and expansion on local level
Provides little help with problems which are local in nature
Creates cultural homogenization
Too big, little interest in the individual
Gives political power to outside interests
Creates economic unstability by being subject to the whims of the global economy
Replaces traditional values with materialistic values
Makes local economies subject to mass layoffs
The role of multinationals in development has never been free from controversy. But the arguments of both the critics and the proponents have gone through significant changes as structural changes in the world economy have occurred and changes in society and governance such as a growing civil society and spread of democracy worldwide have occurred. Equally, it is now clear that, if multinationals are to play a welcoming and beneficial role in the developmental process, they need to re-conceptualize the way they operate in the host countries. If they do so, they will become true friends of the developmental process, and the opponents who charge that they are foes instead will lose political salience.
Thus, we know that MNCs now source their inputs from many sources and they virtually guarantee external sales of the components they manufacture. Again, retailers like Wal-Mart are conduits for purchase in the host country and sales in foreign countries.
Offers employment to local workers
Promotes peace internationally
Creates sense of community crossing international borders
Allows entire world to improve standard of living
Gives access to quality products regardless of location
Promotes economic stability
Raises standard of living for regions involved in production
Gives local economies new economic opportunities
Fact of life which needs to be accepted
Reflects global economy
Against Multinationals
Ruins local economies
Depletes local work forces by drawing to metro centres
Stifles cultural growth and expansion on local level
Provides little help with problems which are local in nature
Creates cultural homogenization
Too big, little interest in the individual
Gives political power to outside interests
Creates economic unstability by being subject to the whims of the global economy
Replaces traditional values with materialistic values
Makes local economies subject to mass layoffs
The role of multinationals in development has never been free from controversy. But the arguments of both the critics and the proponents have gone through significant changes as structural changes in the world economy have occurred and changes in society and governance such as a growing civil society and spread of democracy worldwide have occurred. Equally, it is now clear that, if multinationals are to play a welcoming and beneficial role in the developmental process, they need to re-conceptualize the way they operate in the host countries. If they do so, they will become true friends of the developmental process, and the opponents who charge that they are foes instead will lose political salience.
Thus, we know that MNCs now source their inputs from many sources and they virtually guarantee external sales of the components they manufacture. Again, retailers like Wal-Mart are conduits for purchase in the host country and sales in foreign countries.