Currently, there is a large debate surrounding globalization and its effects on many facets of life. One of the most important factors which is concentrated on by many is the effect of free trade and technology among multinational corporations. Opponents have chalked up a list of criticisms that seem viable on the surface, but crumble at the hands of simple business and economic laws upon further examination. In a philosophical viewpoint, it is comparative to utilitarianism and the theory that an action that produces overall good or benefit is therefore just or positive. Free trade and technology may at times seem to produce a minor and temporary negative for some people is outweighed by the larger positive results that follow.
Clearly, one of the debates regarding globalization is centered around whether or not technological advancements which have taken down international boundaries to the commercial, cultural, and political worlds is currently producing benefits or losses for people.
The answer is clear upon examination beneath the surface of the topic and the initial arguments opponents propose. The globalization of our economy produces winners and losers, but the aggregate effects have created a higher standard of living for people throughout the globe.
Most globalization opponents will cry regarding the negative surface effects they believe to be present. Most notorious among these criticisms involves multinational corporations operating in third world countries. It is the feeling of many activists and general critics of globalization that these companies are exploiting workers and forcing them to work in "sweatshops" and to accept extremely unfair pay. Ironically, this is a surface assumption made by people who don't realize what the local country's average wages are in that industry, and are comparing them to those of our country, in which obviously they seem extreme. This is an unsound assumption,