Do you like free market principles and global economy?

[Anthony]

Or should countries be self efficient and keep production within the homeland? Meaning should huge multinational corporations exist? Are they beneficial at all to governments or societies?
Okay, a few things to add. first i think multinational corporations are more trouble than they are worth. one of the things i hate about the free market system is that huge multinational corporations can manipulate weak governments in developing countries and get away with paying its workers slave wages. workers in these countries with weak government are vulnerable to being overworked and underpaid. look at mexico and the cases of poor working environments and coniditions in huge corporate factories. the problem with mega sized corporate monsters is that they have too much power and are essentially owned and operated my an elite few with little concern for the working class. when a corporation gets too big it knows beforehand that it can manipulate government, corrupt its leaders, receive unfair benefits, monopolize at will and avoid all penalites and sanctions if they happen to make a "mistake." so, while in theory global trade is highly productive and creates diverse economy it alwa

[Matt M]

Trade always carries the possibility of making both parties of trading better off. This is because of something called comparative advantage, you can look that up here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage, but comparative advantage is for another post.

Our societies have morphed to capitalize on comparative over thousands of years, so that almost always, when we trade, we make both sides better off.

When we restrict economic activity to just our home country, we limit our trading partners, and thusly, fail to take advantage of trading opportunities around that world that can make our partners and we, in our home countries better off.

Huge multinational corporations just coordinate trade on a massive scale. Yeah, big companies can sometimes crowd out mom and pop companies around the world, but a huge company isn't always the most efficient business model for every industry. The mom and pops across the world that can't compete with whatever huge company is crowding them out of whatever market, need to get into an industry that they can compete in. Then, everyone's better off.

I mean, if a wal mart opens up in some third world country, and can deliver goods that people want at a lower price than the mom and pop stores, most people are better off. If the mom and pops can get into some other industry, let's say doing something better or more cheaply than wal mart or anyone else can, than EVERYONE becomes better off.

I mean huge multinational corporations come from all sorts of countries. You've got wal marts in india and china, replacing small retailers, but you've also got indian Mital Steel operating in America, taking over smaller American companies.

Either way, when trade is allowed Across boarders, the economy as a whole can be, and generally will be better off.

[?]

Do you think a small fish & a shark can exist in same place? how a small national capital & a huge multinational corporate can compete in a same market? The last result of free market & global economy will be REVOLUTION in social structure, because of a large dig between rich & poor.

[Mukesch Kaley]

You have a valid point.
Only huge multinationals can afford to go global.
but if the smaller players form groups on basis of " co-operative movement" in India ... they too can go global. but, mostly MNCs will block every effort as by now, they control most of the governments which matter.( the western)