Y10 - For this homework you need to write whether you think that MNCs are positive or negative. Remember to use examples in your answer to help back up the point you are making. Read other people's thoughts and comment on them in your writing.
I think that it is worrying that people with such power in the world can live knowing that they are treating people so badly. Do they have a conscience?!?
I think that MNC's have a both positive & negative effect. They help provide jobs with higher pay than most local companies but they also treat their workers unfairly. I think that the big companies should take more responsability in finding out where there products are being made & face the fact that they are responsable for sweat shops & the poor conditions their workers work in.
Overall, i think that MNC's are positive because they help the country develop in lots of ways. There are always going to be richer countries and poorer countries. I just dont agree with teh child labour.
I think that MNC's are mainly positive because they boost the local and overall economy of countries, which helps them to develop and create links with other countries. Child labour might not always be the MNC's fault but the subcontracters.
I think that MNC's are mainly negative due to child labour and their workers can get treated unfairly, also because countries can become too dependent on MNC's and a closure of an MNC factory can have a big negative impact on the local economy.
I think that some MNC's, for example Nike are positive because they ensure that children are not working in their factories as well as providing their employees with a clean and safe environment. These MNC's also motivate smaller, local companies to develop which is a positive. However other MNC's like Primark are employing children who may be treated badly which is a negative. Overall there are more positives then negatives.
I think that MNC's are generaly a good idea because it brings humanity into a new stage of development,as well as giving the workers a decent wage, education and the MNC's that do this generaly make the comunity,that they have built in/on, richer which helps bring down poverty. But MNC's also have their bad sides. For example some MNC's employ subcontractors who make the product for them, this means that the MNC's can't garenty that the subcontractors don't use child labour, don't give workers a bad wage, or don't have a unsafe work place. But in conclusion i think that MNC's are generaly a good idea.
i think there is good and bad things about medc's the good things are that people in the ledcs get jobs but the bad thing is about the child labour and bad working conditions...
I think there are both positive and negative factors to MNC's. The positives include the fact that it is cheaper for the consumers, and the jobs they provide in the LEDC's, usually pay higher wages, like Nike. However there are no work condition guarantees and most profits go overseas. All in all, I believe that the positives outweigh the negatives.
There are both advantageous and disadvantageous factors that come with MNCs .MNCs are good because not only do they provide the local community with more skills, money and experience which can be used to help develop the host countries through paying for education and through doing higher qualified jobs, but they also provide both the local and national economy in LEDCs and NICs with much needed capital which can be reinvested into the country .Also, MNCs help increase the rate at which globalisation happens because they create more links between countries. However, in order to make these advantages MNCs often use poorly paid adult/child labour and often put people in conditions which would be approved in MEDCs. Not only is this unfair on the employees but it also means that some MNCs have more control than governments, which causes social conflicts.I believe that MNCs are more beneficial to the host countries than they are non-beneficial, despite most profits being sent over sees and the pollution concerns with the transportation of goods, because they provide the country and local areas with finance which can be used to help stimulate development.
I think that MNC's are a good idea this is because the the workers can be paid up to three times the amount that they would if they where on minimum wage, and they also help to improve other MNC's in the local area.
i think that MNC's are mainly positive because most of the people that work in their factories are paid well, have breaks, are trained for free and there is no child labour.this helps the area develop. it is usually only a negetive thing when MNC's like primark pay people low wages, give people no breaks and employ children.
I think MNC's have both positive and negative factors, positives would be that it gives people in LEDC's jobs and most have quite a good pay, it also boosts the local economy. However the negatives are that some MNC's use child labour and have low pay.
I Think MNC's have positive and negative factors MNC's can be good because there are alot more jobs ledcs which can also improve education but its not always that good because it can be harmfull to the enviroment also some MNC's cannot guaratee their is child labour.
overall i think MNCS are posotive because it gives different people the oportunity to work in a plesant enviroment and gives them a chance to have decent pay and a good time, also the managers do not employ persons under the age of 18 so this means no child labour is involved
I think MNCS have mainly positive factors as they provide well paid jobs for people in LEDC'S, they help to improve their workers skills and knowledge and also boost the local economy. However the working conditions are not guaranteed to be good like Nike's and child labour is still an issue in some factories.
I think that MNCs are positive because they boost local economy and provide jobs for people and develop the skills in that area, all contributing to industrialisation. However the working conditions and the issue about child labour is not always researched to see what the place is like.
MNC's are good for different areas in the short term, but if the company decides to move the factory from an MEDC to an NIC, it can be extremely detrimental for the local economy which was heavily realiant on the MNC for mass employment. Also, child labour and factory conditions aren't as regulated in NIC's and LEDC's as they are in MEDC's.
I think that MNC's are more positive than negative because MNC's boost the economy and provide jobs, but the workers conditions can be quite bad, for example when watching the Primark video it showed that some workers in sweat shops had the worst conditions possible to work it, and were paid next to no money, but the conditions in a Nike Factory are quite good and the workers are just earning less than minumin wage
I think that MNCs are a good thing because they can help all of the other business' in the are to improve how they work and this can help the country to develop. But I also think that the MNCs must be closely monitored otherwise the workers who expect great oppurtunities can get exploited (as in the case of Primark). Another benefit of MNCs is that some of the money that they make is put back into the local community in education and health and this helps the country to develop even more. So overall MNCs are great for the country but they should be monitored better.
i think that MNC's are mostly positive because they can offer employment and development to local areas. However, they can have negative effects, for example: if an MNC has a factoy that moves because of cheaper laboutr else-where then the local area can become destabilised as most jobs would have been at the factoy.
I think that MNC's are good because in most cases they boost the local economy by providing jobs for people and providing a good, clean, friendly place to work in. However in poorer countries where MNC's are, they can have a more of a negetive effect by bringing in 'western' culture to the local area. They also often have an enviomental effect on the surrounding areas by polluting the water sources and atmosphere by the waste products created by the factories. Many of the MNC's have sub-contractors which provide the same goods but at a lower price, this normally means that either children are being made to work or adults are earning very little, and working long hours.
i think that MNCS are positive because they boost an economy and hekp to provide jobs.It can help with children for education.. but one negative effect is that it can be harmful to the enviroment.
i think MNC's are more positive then negative because MNC's employ local people and few companies like Nike - give employees lunch breaks - holiday pay , but they can be negative as well by a local town/cities becoming dependant on a factory for employment local shop delivery and then the factories have to be De-industrialised
MNC's are greatly benificial for LEDC because they start the process of industrialisation which is a nessecary stage in the development of a nation. Having a multinational corporation in a community will stimulate the economy and help other local companies grow. Although I believe MNCs should operate in LEDCs I don't think their presence in NICs is good. After a while they stunt the grow of local businesses because they're inable to compete with international corporations. Companies such as Nike which have good ethical policies should be given TAX breaks in LEDC to intice them to set up factories in that country.
I think that MNC's are a great way for LEDC's to develop and can also develop a wider range of skills which will benefit the country greatly. MNC's also provide a number or jobs and those who are employed receive a higher wage than most local companies. However, despite the advantages of MNC's there are a few negatives. One being the speed of which MEDC's can close factories in one country and reopen in another. The closure of that company will mean that the employees will lose their jobs and then results in a negative impact on the local economy. Other disadvantages are the danger of countries becoming too dependant on MNC's, the fact that MNC's can influence government decisions and the concern that a company will bring aspects of 'Western' culture to poorer countries.
There are both positive and negative factors about MNC's. An advantage is that they can provide jobs for the local economy, bringing in more income, and as Nike showed, the jobs are sustainable and not just a short term thing. They are provided a lunch and work in a clean and safe environment. Although Primark showed us something different, for example child labour, and recieving less than half of the minimum wage. It all depends which MNC you work for, and where in the country you are working.
i have a mixed opinion about MNCs. bigger buildings have better conditions; the factories are clean, the workers get good meals, there's reasonable pay and the workers get game courts for breaks. some MNCs do not supervise their workers, for these unfortunate people the conditions are almost opposite to the big buildings. they earn about 52p a day and people work from as young as 9-10 years old. Although i do think our daily lives would be allot different without MNCs.
I have mixed views on MNC's working in LEDC's. There are some very reasonable positive effects, yet there are some negative effects that contrast.
Here are some positive factors: - They provide jobs for LEDC's, it gives them something to do - Provides money so families can be looked after (education, food etc.) - Some companies like Nike for example provide loans to help people set up their own smaller businesses and give a fraction of their profit back - Most companies have clean and stable environments, have lunch breaks with food provided, and have sport and social events
Some negative factors: - Companies like Primark claim to not employ children under 16, but when deeper research was done, children as young as 9 was found making clothing - People are paid under half the minimum wage - A majority of people working for MNC's are working in humid, unstable conditions with no breaks and under strict observation.
I think that MNC's have a bad impact on LEDCs rather than good. This is because of several reasons listed below: -The countires that they are in can become dependant on a MNC's. -People, in some cases, are being paid as little as half the minimum wage for that country or loccal area. - Although some of the workers have good suitable conditions to work in, there are the sides you do not see where, lots of people are working in a confined space with no breaks and also there are to many people in one area (crampt and over crowded). But, there are some positive aspects(which in my opinoin do not balance out the negatives): -They provide jobs for people in LEDcs and give them a good reliable and stable source of income for them and their families. -Some companies also try to help out the places that they are in and give out micro loans to other businesses because it helps boost the local economy.
Overall i generally think that MNC's are not a good thing but it is up to your own dygression.
MNC's have both positive and negative effects on the economy; they provide jobs for thousands of people and bring a much wider range of skills to the local community! However, long term they have a very negative effect on the economy, there is a high speed at which the factories are closing, causing thousands of people to loose their jobs!
MNC's have a positive effect on the country that they're in if they take care of there workers very well then the workers will enjoy it for example Nike they help boost the economy of the country that they are in they encourage the workers to work and help the local communities expand for example the work may barrow a small loan like Nike was lending people set up a small business and boost the economy even more on the other hand if the workers were in sweat shops and not getting paid much, it might seem mean but they're still boosting the economy Bradley Comerford
MNC's have advantages and disadvantages; However I believe that they have an positive effect on the local economy by offering employment this gives great opportunities for LEDC's so they have a chance to earn a decent wage and work in a safe and clean environment! community- Brings the community together as one to enhance the opportunity to boost the local economy. Mirco loans- Helps small local business's to expand by giving them loans. I think that the Nike factories show this well by not employing anyone under the age of 18 and earning just less than the minimum wage. Nehanna Probert
I think MNC's are posititve and negative. They are positive because they provide a job for people in LEDC's and can help communities grow. However some MNC's are negative because some can abuse their authority with low wages and long working hours. Overall I think it depends on the company whether the company is positive or negative.
I think that mncs are both posotive and negative. The good reason being that they provide jobs for people that wouldn't normally have jobs, its better to be paid something rather than nothing. The bad reasons are that some don't give their workers a good working condition and they can suddenly move to a cheaper country, this is bad when the country has become dependant on this MNC. But if they're giving them a good working life, like Nike showed in the video. Then they are good for the countries that they're in
I think that MNC's are both positive and negative. The negative points are the fact that some of the working conditions can be dreadful, the pay is sometimes low, and the hours are long. Also some countries can get dependent on a MNC and when they leave, it can cause a lot of trouble. MNCs so also provide jobs for people who usually wouldn't have one, and usually the pay is okay, if all MNCs were like nike, maybe all MNCs would be positive.
I think that MNC's are both positive and negitive, I think they are postive because they often provide many jobs (with higher pay then what you would get in any other job in the local area) for people in the country that wouldn't have had a job otherwise, they also therefore provide a more substansial living perhaps as the more money the more food supply they may recieve? Also they create whats called the multipler affect where once an MNC is created local business' benifit and follow. This then also helps to create stronger bonds between companies and employees recieve more training and education to higher there workability. However i think that MNC's are bad because big companies can influence the goverment to much and this can lead to a huge impact on local people as there views wont be expressed and the goverment will feel more and more relient on the MNC. Also factorys can lead to closure very quickly and factorys can not have the respect for workers from different races and culture within the area. I belive in both aspects of the MNC's and i find that different companies interprate different regilations dependent on their own reputaion for example Nike. Megan Bendall
I think that MNC's are positive and Negative because they do provide a lot of jobs for people. I know the pay is better in some places compared to others but the money it brings in, helps the country to economically develop. But the people and country may start to depend on it and be in real crisis when it leaves. The negatives are that some of the sweat shops have a terrible working conditions, low pay and really long working hours. But on the video, it showed that Nike's working area is really good, but that isn't true for every MNC.
Alicia Showering said…. I think MNC’s can have either a positive or negative impact on the host country entirely depending upon the particular company. They are positive because: • Provide jobs for local people • Higher average wage • Taxes paid to government • Government can afford to improve infrastructure • Help in development of country • Micro loans-help small business to begin • Boost economy • Training in new skills The negative impacts include: • Working conditions can be dreadful • Child labour can take place • Long hours • Host country can become dependent on MNC • Government decisions can be influenced • Dependence on MNC • Sudden closure If all MNC’s were like Nike and provided great facilities for the workers and never employed anyone under the age of 18 then it would be great for the host country to develop. If a country became dependent on a MNC it would be difficult to become independent again if the MNC chose to leave the country.
I think MNCs can have positive and negative effects.
Positive effects include: *Good wage *Nice working conditions and places to stay *More technology so more cures for illnesses *People become more educated, they have the money to afford to go to school *Communication with other countries *Better transport
Negative effects include: *Bad working conditions *Very long working hours *Causes pollution *Not paying wages on time *Local businesses suffer
MNCs like Nike for example take a lot of care over their employees. Other businesses are allowed to look around the factories to take tips on how to look after their employees and how to make sure they provide the right facilities for them. They are inspected regularly and have help to industrialise many countries.
Primark is a bad example of an MNC they employ child labour, the factories never get inspected and employees are force to work in slums and alleyways of high streets just so they get their piece of clothing made before the dead line. They get paid a very low wage, only getting paid 7p an hour. They would move to another more well looked after factory is there was one near by who would take them on straight away, but there isn't so they have to stay working there just to earn the money to keep their alive. They say that it is too much hard work for so little money.
I think that MNC's are positive and negative. They are positive because they bring better jobs to the country and make it more developed, people can earn more money and there is less poverty. They can also have negative effects on a country such as the factories can be in bad condition, the workers have extremely long working hours, low wage pay and sometimes even young children can be found working for the company. Also small local buissinesses such as farming and agriculture can suffer because more people are working in the factories and less in the feilds. Primark is a good example of a negative effect on MNC's, their factories are in poor condition, the workers dont get payed on time and get payed as little as 7p an hour! people are found working in back allies and in their own homes overtime and their has also been some cases where children have been found working for them. But however Nike is an example of some good effects of an MNC's,they have really good working conditions for their workers, they also provide regualr breaks for them and brilliant facilities for them to use. Their workers are also well payed on time and the company will also pay for their children to go into education and for them to be educated so they can be promoted to higher managment status. MNC's have both good and bad effects to a company so globalisation is neither a good thing or a bad thing.
i think mnc is a positive thing because they take materials and profitable thing and give back something to help the less econimicaly developed countrys. by dan baxter
I think MNC is a positive thing. This is because the workers usually get paid more than minimum wage, it creates lots of new jobs, the taxes paid by workers make the country better (health care, education etc.), if built in LEDC's or NIC's the workers learn new skills, company exports goods so they have better links with other ountries or MNC's and globalisation encourages some other similar companies to do well.
On the other hand there are disadvanteges.This is why; Some factories close down unexpectadly, some countries rely on MNC's, brings western culture which is bad for some islamic countries and some have child labour.
Altogether though, I think the advantages are better and there are more.
Im going to agree with most people on this, as i think that MNC's are both positive and negative. Having MNC's in a coutnry means that the country can develop and progress. The MNC's also give the country jobs, which means that poverty levels decrease.
On the other hand, MNC's aren't always great as some of the factories are in a very bad condition, The work hours can be long and the pay can be very low. Local businesses can also suffer as more of the workers work in the factory rather than the other smaller businesses.
Some other big MNC's do have a positive effect. Nike for example provide good conditions for the workers, give them free lunches and also give the workers regular breaks. This means that they work harder and produce more items.
Overall i think that MNC's in a different country are a good thing! Chris Palmer
I think that to say that M.N.C.'s as a whole are good or bad is a massive generalisation. Especially as there are so many variables which change with each individual company, a decrease in scale is in order when talking about them.
What I mean is that because one company is usually is so different to another it is unfair to even group similar companies together, as it is the way in which they are run which is the main factor.
Also, it depends a lot on where the specific company is based both categorically (M.E.D.C.'s, L.E.D.C.'s or N.I.C.'s) and more definitively (individual countries/regions). This is because governmental restrictions can have a significant effect which even if desired may be difficult to counter balance in the world of business. The population which the company will have the biggest impact on should also be given a bigger chance to say whether it is benifiting the local comunity or not.
The avaliability of suitable areas in which to set up and expand might force companies to take disputable measure in order to maintain pocession of their market. Unfortunately the people who find out about these atrocious methods do not distinguish between any sort of varying levels building up to an extremity.
This results in a company either being seen as extrodinarily good or unacceptably bad, with very few companies even coming in to a mid-/half way point. A better way to seperate companies that promote the continued existence of M.N.C.'s and those that disgrace it, would be to give detailed comparisons across the whole spectrum.
Doing this might also make it easier for other people who are still debating to make their minds up. However the complexity of this topic could, in itself, deem our original question unanswerable, unless altered...
I think that MNC's are negative. This is because they control so many countrys and are so large and important in these countries that smaller buisnesses and jobs that people are used to start to become less common and even stop altogether. In LEDC's, where many MNC's have companies like coca cola, the people that live there are more used to jobs like farming and working on the land. So when MNC's arrive, many people choose to have jobs in thse MNC factorys. This lowers the amount of people working on the land and then unbalances the whole economy of what people are used to in these ountrys. There are of course many positive things that come with MNC companys having factorys in places like africa and asia, but whether those positives out weigh the negatives long term is still hard to see. Also, if the factory that is there treats workers badly, then there is not much these workers can do, because they are now reliant on the wage they recieve from this job. I am not saying thatb MNCs are all negative because some are very nice to their workers, but long term, more people i think may suffer because there will be a lack of farming and important basics like water because the MNC may have absorbed all of these resources through the factory. For example, Coca cola wants the cheapest water it can find so it has many large factorys in africa. Obviousely, Africa does not have much water so the overall result is many people go without water over their job. This is just my personal opinion, thought i would do a different veiw to many other people. By Imogen Turner
I think that MNCs are negative because they are controling countries but having MNC's in a coutnry means that the country can develop and progress. The MNC's also give the country jobs, which means that poverty goes down. But nike has a possitive effect on workers and they get free lunch.
I think MNC's are a good thing because they provide much needed jobs in poorer countries. The pay is good for the people who get jobs and the conditions are often better that other local companies.The MNC's also provide good career opportunities by offering courses to help staff to move forward in there careers and learn new skills. the MNC's also treat there workers well by offering them free lunch and leisure activities. MNC's also have a positive impact on the community helping it to expand and become more wealthy by helping businesses start and leading the way for existing businesses. by Nick Manville
James Dunlop agrees with many of the above comments as MNC's have both positive and negative influences on the global community.
On a positive note MNC's do provide jobs and money through taxes in poor countries.
On the other hand the main aim of all MNC's is to make big profits and keep costs low, which is why they get cheap labour abroad-such as the Primark child labour scandal a few years ago. The profits they make are taken out of the countries where they can make more profit. I is imperative that MNC's are regulated carefully to ensure local people in poor countries are not taken advantage of.
I agree with J-man. I think thst MNC's would be a very positive thing if they treated there workers fairly. If workers were given a higher wage (over minimum), a clean working place and a safe working environment, then MNC's would be great. This could be possible if a big company, like nike, made all there factories like this, then other competition would follow suit. This would eventually lead to all companies having great factories. Then everyone would be happy :) This was Elliot Joyner btw if it doesnt say my name
I think MNC's are both positive and negative. As they do provide jobs for the community, which is normally above the average pay other surrounding companies offer, leading the country into development. However, most tend to treat their workers badly - low pay, bad working area, long hours. Overall, I agree with both Elliot and J-man, if the country was to treat their workers more fairly, the development of the country will speed up, causing globalisation to effect the counrty in a more positive way. This may lead into more companies expanding worldwide which could create more jobs, at a better life for the community.
I think that MNC's are positive and negative.Different companies treat their workers differently so it would depend on the company.
The positives are : *Creates a large number of jobs in that area *Wages are higher than local companies *Helps the countires trading *The taxes paid by the MNC'S to the host country can be invested in health,education and infustructure *Develops skills in that area
The negatives of MNC's are: *Country's can become dependant on MNC'S *Closure of a cmopany has a bad effect on the local economy *It can change the countries culture so its more like the western world *MNC's can influence government decisions and antidemocratic
I think that if the workers are treated fairly ,paid well and have good working conditions it is positive.But if they don't it is negavtive.So it depends on how well they treat there workers. Daisy Matthews
MNC's have positive and negative effects. They create more jobs, skills can be developed and the comptetive rates of other companies can result in a higher wage. However the workers are not always treated well and working conditions can be quite poor. I think that if the workers were treated with more respect and better pay then the devlopment of the country would increase. Lauren Weaver
I think MNCs have both positive and negative effects however i personally think that there are more positives outcomes than negatives. Such as boosting the local economy in LEDCs, providing jobs for the unemployed, developing the skills of employees and locals and the country's trading improves as well.
MNCs can be positive and negative. Sometimes when a company goes abroad it loses some control because of sub-contracting and that can lead to really bad conditions for the workers, low pay and sometimes even child labour. Primark claim to not know about the poor conditions for the people making their clothes, if that is true, then it is most likely sub-contracters who are doing it and making it hard for Primark to keep track of their workers. If it is not true however, and Primark knows all about it, but wants to keep prices as low as possible, then they are taking advantage of the people who work for them and that is another bad point about globalisation. There are good things about glabalisation though. For example, MNCs are very wealthy and can afford to pay their workers higher pay than the minimum wage in poorer countries (if they choose to). If they do pay a fairly high wage, then that encourages people to migrate to the area of the factory which is great for the economy of that area and for the country. It may also increase tourism as that area becomes nicer to live and to be in generally. The MNCs can also afford for the quality of life of their workers to be much higher than average of that country, for example in the Nike film, there is grass and flowers around the factory and the people working there have the option to play or watch sports during their lunch break. Also in the case of Nike, micro-loans are given to local businesses to help them get on their feet. By Steph Moreno
I think MNCs have both positive and negative affects. A positive is that it can provide jobs for people who need them and it provides many people with skills that can help them in many other jobs in the future but then a negative affect is that workers can be paid a low wage for long hours and it's not right. The people deserve a fair pay for the amount of hours they do.
I think that MNC’S are both negative and positive. As they do provide jobs for a lot of people and can help them with skills that they can use in many other jobs. A negative affect is that workers get paid a very low wage for the long hours they do, and it’s not very fair. The workers deserve a fair pay for the amount of effort they put into their work.
I think MNC's have a positive and negative effect on poorer countries because *They provide lots of jobs *because they a factory in that area skills are developed *Depending on which company you look at, some have higher wages than local factories *Building a factory in that country can sometimes develop the country as a whole, depending on how long the factory is there for
But there are some negative points to MNC's *Coca Cola once built a factory in one country, they were told they had to stay there for a minimum of 10 years, after they had stayed 10 years, the next day the factory was shut down. *Some other companies pay their workers minimum wage gaining maximum profits. *MNC's can close almost instantly, damaging the local economy. *MNC's can influence the governments decisions.
Even though there are positive and negative effects for MNC's building factories in poorer countries it depends on which company you look at James England
I feel that you cannot put all MNC's into a particular group which states whether they have a positive or negative effect on the country that they are based in, or, on the quality of life of the workers at the company; however, you can single out a company and assess what sort of impact the company has on the country. An example of where two MNC's have different effects involved the two giant sports equipment and apparel, Nike, and Addidas, which both have completely different techniques in how they are ran. An investigation was launched in a Nike factory (However this Nike factory had been labeled as one of the highest standard so conditions may vary in others) and this factory:
*Created job opportunities *No employees are under 18 who are making shoes and under 16 for apparel *Nike are very strict on their age limit which prevents child labour however if somebody under the age limit does get in Nike have claimed that they then pay for the rest of the child’s education which will improve the education of the country. *The workers are paid on average of $54 per month (this is the highest paying factory) but the lowest goes down to $18 a month *The job provides safe and clean working environment *Micro-loans can be given by the factory to help set up new businesses nearby And *Free lunch for the workers
However Addidas another giant in the sport equipment and apparel industry have a vast difference in the way they treat their workers some examples of these problems are: *Allegations being made that workers in the factory are subjected to sexual harassment and physical abuse *There are also reports of children as young as fourteen are working in the factory which is illegal *Workers are being paid below the national minimum wage *Many workers are even forced to do overtime in extremely poor working conditions These two examples prove that you cannot put all MNC's in a certain group but you can group the separate companies into positive, negative or neutral groups. By paying workers good rates you will speed up development in a LEDC because it means workers can send their children to school increasing the education rate which will hopefully then make the country a better place to live by improving the quality of life, locals will create more businesses which will help every civilian of the country. -Daniel Milverton
I think that MNC'S can be both positive and negative because it provides the people with a job who ever needs them, and from that job they earn skills and use them later on. A negative affects is that the workers don't earn that much wage and they work long hours. Which isn't fair, they should at least get paid more so they can live off of the money.
I'm in mixed emotions about MNC's as they provide so many jobs for people with no qualifications or education, however some MNC's can use this to their advantage by not paying them the substantial amount they should be payed, thus making the employee find it hard to pay rent or cater for their family. Although without MNC's providing jobs for these LEDC's, the citizens wouldn't be able to look after their families or themselves full stop. By Jess Lacey
I think that MNC's are both good and bad. Good becouse they provide jobs for the unemployed in LEDC's, they often build housing for their workers to rent, also it helps the economic situation of LEDC's because even if they are paying them the minimum wage it is still putting more money in to the community than if they were unemployed. But bad because they can minipulate workers into thinking they will have a good job but then rope them into a long term low payed job also by building factorys in LEDC's they are costing jobs in places like the UK where we need them. By Tyler Wiltshire
I think that MNC's are mostly a positive thing as they bring work to poorer countries and help them develop and improve. People working for MNC's normally get paid more money than the other people living in the same area but working somewhere else. If these employee's have enough money, they can afford to send their children to school. Money earned can also improve health, transport and other services.
i have mixed opinions on MNCs as there is both negatives and positive sides to it. The positive effects include it provides loads of jobs and the wage levels are usually higher than those paid by local companies and in general just develops a much wider range of skillsin the local population! But if you look at the disadvages of it are that countries become too dependent on MNC's and because so many people work in these factories, if it closes down or gets shut down it has a negative impact on the local economy as many people will be left without jobs. Ellie Chandler:)
I think that MNC's are generally good for a number of reasons: For one, the companies generally pay better wages than those that are smaller. Take Nike for example, the wages there are quite a lot above the minimum wage! Secondly, the opportunities for promotion are better than those in smaller businesses, again in Nike, if you are good enough at what you are doing, then you are likely to be offered a promotion. Thirdly, if an MNC makes a factory in a poor area of India (for example), then what is that going to be doing as a direct impact? Creating jobs and bringing money into a poor area of the world. That's surely going to be making a good impact on the economic climate of that country, is it not?
Now, I suppose that I'd better look into a few of the negatives of MNC's... Although Nike pays generally very good wages, there are some that don't pay so well and if you are unfortunate enough to have a factory built by one of these companies then you may find yourself paid quite badly, although it's probably better than having no job at all... Secondly, unfortunately some factories have very poor working conditions, for example it could be extremely hot inside, or very cramped. Again, this would be a very bad thing for the workers, but people will work in worse conditions than those to get paid, so is it as bad as the western documentaries make it out to be. Saying that, I am aware that I would not want to work in a factory...
After weighing up both sides of the argument, I think that I have decided that MNC's are not all too bad, as they are providing a very important stage in the industrialisation of the LEDC that they are based in, they are providing a service for the MEDC's of the world (the UK and USA) and are providing jobs for poorer people in the world. Ollie Wright 10D
I think that MNCs are generally positive because they help a countries economy, especially in developing countries. It gives more jobs to people and even though child labour is negative - it's not always the companies fault, but the subcontracters. It gives the local people in a poor country available jobs which are commonly better paid than people working in the same area but doing something else. If the local people have more money then they can afford to send their children to school which not only boosts the countries economy but also it's education rates. By Sophie Treneman :P
I have a mutual opinion on MNC’s because there are positives and negatives on both sides, which make it a strong argument.
The positives are that some companies like Nike have factories that pay well and give loads of jobs to people who live in LEDCs, these jobs give a wide range of skills to the workers too. Lastly MNCs used to be much worse than they are now and therefore might improve more and become better which means it would help make better jobs.
Negatives, not all MNC companies or factories are good pay and help local communities, some MNCs have influences of the governments of LEDCs, lastly countries can become to dependent on MNCs bring factories into there country and if the factory fails so does the economy in the country.
Over all I dislike the idea of MNCs but they do help develop a country. Gwilym Luckett 10E
Like most people i think mnc's are a mixture of good and bad..
Bad being that the factories can employ children if they hire a lot of people at the same time which effects the economy. The factories can close down without letting the workers know, which means if the country has become dependent on the mnc factory it can effect them in a bad way.
Good being that the mnc factories have been said to make other local businesses do better, wages tend to be higher than other businesses. It helps the countries develop and can boost the trading ability.
So i think mnc's are quite a positive thing but do have some big bad points. Josie Cameron 10C
Overall i think that MNC's have good and bad points.
MNC's are good because the workers wages are at a good pay than nearby business, people who are unemployed and arent educated are able to have jobs which will help and they will be earning money. The location of the factory can create lots of jobs for people in need of work. Also people who learn skills and improve will be offered better jobs and will earn more money and succed well.
However there is some bad points, for example in some factories the conditions are awful, and arent suitable for people to be working in. Another point is that factories can hire children to work, sometimes the children have fewer rights than what they should have. Also another bad point is that the factories can have quick closers, which means the people are left with no jobs. Usually a country gets to depent on MNC's which is bad.
So overall in my opinion, MNC's have some good points and some bad points.
I think MEDCs are positive and negative, the positive things are that people in LEDCs get jobs, the community learns new skills and other local buisness have more chance to grow. The negative things are that an LEDC can become dependent on the MEDC, the MEDC can move it's buisness without any notice and a LEDC can hire children to work. Sam Hunt 10W
I think MNC's have both a postitive and negative impact globally and especially on the community surrounding its factory.
Firstly, they usually provide stable jobs in LEDC's with reasonable pay, although wages will vary between different factories. Some businesses provide a range of different employment opportunities and promotions as well as training which gives the workers a chance to learn new skills. Furthermore, in aid of the area around the factory, MNC's lend new businesses a micro-loan which enables th local economy to develop faster.
However, an MNC can also cause a negative effect as well, for example, moving a factory to a LEDC can increase the amount of unemployed, unskilled people in a MEDC. Additionally some factories can be totally can be totally unreliable and can shut down without warning. If too many citizens are dependant on it to provide them with jobs and the main income for their families and the factory closes, this will cause a huge negative impact on the community and massively damage its economy.
I think MNC's are positive on the country as they make it a more developed place. They give them a low wage compared to the profit the company makes but a high wage compared to other local jobs. This increases tax's and give Money to the countries basic needs including health,education and infrastructure It also provides the workers with new skills that they could pass on to other local companies. MNC's also create a link with many other countries this is useful for trading. There are however negatives such as the culture they bring is westernised . The conditions are not good enough. Child labour can be used. It can become more powerful than the government.
I think MNC's are posotive because they help the country develop because they give the employees a higher wage than they would usually get, this means they can pay higher tax this will go towards Education, health and Infrastructure. They also give them new skills so when the factory closes the people will be okay.
I think MNC's are positive the the country becuase they can make the country more developed. some things get covered by tax payers such as education and health another advantage is that the MNC's can create further linkage between countries for trade and information. Altough they are happy to bring in MNC's, it will westernise the place and locals do not want that to happen, it will take all of the culture and reality from the place
MNC's have a positive & negative effect on a country. the negatives would be that they treat their workers unfairly by giving long hours of hard laubour. The positives include that the pay is a lot higher than other local jobs they also help to develope countrys. Overal i think that MNC's have more of a positive impact but MED countrys which the companys are set up in,should take more responsibility for things such as sweat shops and child laubour.
I think that MNC's are positive and negative as the positive side to it is that they provide alot more jobs for people in the community, they give employees a higher paying wage and the country it self will get developed with a MNC. But MNC's can can also be negative as it may create bad working conditions, low wage and in some cases child labour.
I think MNC's are bad and good because they can have both a positive or negitive impact on the local community for example: positive: Give loacal people money to start a company, Good wage, Jobs.
Negitive: Child labour, Bad working conditions, SOMETIMES a low wage
i think mnc's are good and bad because they can both have positive and negative it can have an impact on the commounity posotive is can help small bussinesses jobs for people
i think mncs are mixed good and bad because the negatives are child labour and some times poor pay the good points are a job at a young age and that will after a while help
In my opinion, I think that MNC's are positive as they can help certain countries develop. One way that they an help them develop is having a worldwide - known buisness which will convince other jobs/traders to set up buisnesses and make more jobs (The Multipliyer Effect). Another positive is the factor about the location of the buisness, if it is, for example: located in Sub Saharan locations, that certain place will become more developed ad will help the certain location turn into a more Economically Developed Country (MEDC) Thanks to a certain country developing, this can help boost the economy and help the people along in the process, This means: -People can learn new skills -Sets Up the Multipliyer Effect -Boost trading
But, There can be negatives to this process aswell, The speed of Development could force the buisness to close down and could cause the certain country/continent to become more independant, also, they can employ child labour resulting the certain buisness to get a bad name.
Finally, A new MNC buisness can again, create more jobs, create more emplyment and Higher Wage.
I think that MNC's can be both positive and negitive, heres why; Positive - the MNC normally offers better wages than the local factories due to the fact that they are a bigger company that has more money to spend. higher waages means that the employees can afford to send their children to school. Because these children will have had an education, they are more qualified for better, higher paid,more advanced jobs in the future, which will in turn boost the econemy in the form of taxes. -As well as education the money can be spent on healthcare, transport and other services which will increase the employees' quality of life. - If the MNC stays in an area long enough, it increses trade in the area. we saw an example of this in the DVD that we watched about Nike- in the area surrounding the factory many new buisnesses had set up to attract the crowds of employees that now come to the factory. -The MNC will also benefit the nearby factories because they can learn by example and it produces competition will motivates the company to do better. - Having an MNC in a country can also improve the links between those countries, making them more likely to do busness with them again Negitive -Because MNC factories are normally based in NICs, they can cause high levels of unemployment in their head country among the unskilled -The factories can close quickly, without warning and this causes problems for the workers because they suddenly lose thier jobs, and perhaps their only source of income. -Many MNCs work long hours in bad conditions for poor pay however this does not apply to all of them for example Nike - In many of the factories the workers have ilttle rights. -The profits made by the factory go back to the head country, an MEDC. I think that at least a small percentage of the proffits should go directly into the factory to improve the lifes of the workers who made the profit in the first place- it would be more fair this way. overall I think that MNCs can be good or bad and it just depends on which company you are looking at, we can't judge them all the same. Natalie Palmer
I think MNC's are positve as they bring lots of money and jobs to poorer countries like zambia and vietnam and can help people to pay for food and education for their children it can also teach the workers new skills. -Will Jenkins
I think that MNC'S are posative and negative beacause they can create lots of new jobs in deprived countries like vietnam but also has abd side beause child labour and poor pay can change your mind a bit but i think that overall MNC'S are pretty good by ryan butt
I think that MNC's are both positive and negative, my reasons for this are;
positive... -people under 16 are not employed -they earn more than the local minimum wage in their area - Links between the headquater country with the LEDC factories country -There are lots of oppurtunities for prommotion -Local businesses get competition and get advise on how to look after their workers -You can train to become a manager, by taking part in a course -Can boost the countries economy -Give local people money to start off businesses
Negative... -Factories can shut without notice -Workers have no rights -Poor pay, bad conditions and long hours -The profit of the company goes back to the headquaters country
Overall I think MNC's are mostly good, there are a lot more positives over negatives. Obviously, the amount of positives and negatives depend on the company.
I think that MNC's are both good and bad, good because they create work and a decent regular pay for employes. Although they can be bad as some to support child labour, and charge very little pay to workers; and not all the factories are listed so its hard to tell whats really going on. But overall I think MNC's are good in helping build up poorer countries.
MNC's are both good and bad for a variety of different reasons. It all depends on the particular MNC because some MNCs are very much beneficial not just for the local community in which they may be active but on the economy of the entire country, whereas some MNCs are quite the opposite. For example the MNC Nike has many of its factories in Vietnam. These factories are very important for the manafacture of a considerable amount of Nike's products. Since Nike moved its factories into that area, the local economy has seen a considerable boost, because the Nike factory has offered hundreds of jobs for the local people. The pay has been publicised as considerabley higher than that of the minimum wage. The factory also offers micro-loans to businesses starting up in the loacl area which has promoted the local community no end. People often complain that globalisation leads to factory workers with low health and safety standards and the workers are mistreated. In the Vietnam Nike factories however, the wirkers are provided with many facilities, like sports facilities to be used during the workers lunchbreaks. Large green park spaces also available. The worker satisfaction is something that the factory makes well known. But these benefits aren't just for the workers. There are education courses in IT available so that the locals are actually becoming managerial staff etc. Which aswell as being a higher paid job, is teaching vital skills. Since the factory moved in to Vietnam, absolute poverty has halved, and the government has become committed to completely abolishing child labour.
This Nike factory is almost certainly an exception rather the rule, but as companies like Gap and Peimark have been exposed to the public for failing to uphold their ethical work standards, the demand for ethically sourced clothing has grown. Whilst sub-contracting means that child labour still exists, and less than minimum wage is payed to many workers, who often don't even work io factories, it is important to remember that the media often exaggerates these cases. Every globalised company has a history, where at least one person has been exploited and abused, but I think as a general rule globalisation is a good thing.
I think that it depends entirely on the MNC as to whether it gives a positive or negative impact. For example, Nike, a very well known multi national company, are currently giving a good impact to its workers and the surrounding well-fair of the area. Mainly by giving jobs to all the local people, paying them a wage that is higher than the average and providing good working conditions. Instead of bringing in 'western' people to work in the higher jobs such as a manager, they provide courses and lesson that teach the workers new skills so as they can become managers and so on. These new skills could also be applied to other jobs and be taught to other people, helping with the economy. The MNC factories attract other businesses and some MNC's even give out micro-loans to people wanting to start up their own businesses, this really boosts the economy of the country.
Some companies, like Nike, don't allow child labour, and if a worker is found to be under-age then the company pays for their education. Nike are also involved with the government which is extremely good as helps it to stay uncorrupted and involved with the people of their country. Some governments, with MNC's help, have now successfully outlawed child labour. All this, and the fact that the workers are getting well paid means that more and more children a getting an education. This has a huge effect on the social side, and also the economic as more people are better educated, they can get better jobs.
The most important thing that companies like Nike do, is tell and show everyone what they are doing. They openly encourage people and other companies to visit their factories, this is very unusual for MNC's in developing countries.Showing other businesses good factories is very beneficial as it creates competition of higher standard and shows other people how they can improve their workers lives. In these cases, MNC's are really good, they are sustainable, particularly strong in social and economic and although they fall in the environmental factor, the benefit to the people almost makes up for it.
However, not all MNC's are like this. In many cases, the workers are paid barley liveable wages, almost certainly not enough to send their children to school and in many cases the children must also work so as the family can earn enough to survive. They have very poor working conditions with rarely any breaks and generally left wishing for a better life. In these cases, poverty is often very high as pollution also ruins their water and food suplys.
These two views are very extreme and most MNC's will probably be in the middle, with their factories varying. In some ways, I can see that a lot of pressure is put on MNC's to sell their products at the lowest prices, and in the quickest time. MNC's also often claim that they knew nothing of these poverty stricken factories but in my opinion they should know where their products are coming from and ensure that their workers well-being comes before the greed of their craving buyers. By Jo Shaw
ok this is annoying, i put this on here already but:) i think mnc's have disadvantages but there are far more advantages for an mnc making products in a ledc so overall mncs are good for development. there needs to be factories for the products sold by mncs to be made. making these factories in the poor countries will provide jobs. once the factory is built there will be further jobs being provided by the mnc. some jobs include designing the clohtes, making the clothes, maintaining or fixing the machines when they are broken, general maintinance in the factory and may othre jobs. the factories also provide a far better wage than some other jobs that are avalable in the ledc like farming. and although some critics state the wages that the people are recieving and it seems low, the price of living in a ledc is far less than in the uk. the factory will provide a lunch hour where the workers can eat thier lunch and have enjoy sports and other passtimes. some factories provide micro loans to help the surrounding area get a buisness up and running which means that the economy in the country will grow. this all seems good but there are some drawbacks to a mnc having factories in a ledc. the country can get dependent on the work provided by the factory and this means that if the company moves to a dfferant ledc then there will be thousnads of people without a job, also some factories do employ children and provide small wages which means that they might not be following the law withing the country. and somtimes the mnc can exploit an area because they know that in a particular counrty there might not even be another alternative like farming. so i think that mncs do improve development but only if the factories that they use in the ledcs have good a good working environment and obide by the law. Alex P :)
MNC's are a multi national corporation, mnc's are good for development in ledc's. they put factories in poor countries and provide jobs for the people.these factories provide a good wage for the worker's and also provide food for them at lunch breaks.by having mnc's in poor countires it will make them more developed. thats why mnc's are good. paige. b
I think mnc's are a mixture of both good and bad points, Mnc's have a lot of power in many countries, and as they are so big it is good when you do find a mnc that is proviiding good working conditions, but there are many mnc's that don't provide and thing for their workers, and force long labour and also employ children, so as you can see The question ' mnc's good or bad' all depends on what company it is and the well fair of their employees, the public around them and the environment.
MNC are a good thing because they give poorer countries the chance to bring more money into the country but they are not fully in control of what the business is doing and if the other country backs out there may be a lot of job losses but overall I think it’s a good idea . Sam lear
MNC are a good thing because they bring wealth into the country and the surrounding villagers also they help people get jobs and earn money for their familys furthermore they get more experience for futer jobs so they can go onto a better job like be a manager or a specilised subject Thor.b
mncs are good because they bring wealth and more jobs into the country. It makes the country more independent with itself and helps it be more confident with getting money.
mnc's are a good thing because they help people get more jobs and bring more money to the country . They can then expand there knowledge and even end up becoming managers . mnc's bring a lot more independence to a country and make the poorer countrys / l.e.d.c's a chance to make there counrty stand out and more up the development chain .
In my opinon MNC's although flawed are a necassary part of the world. They are flawed in many ways like in Primark for instance. They suport sweatshops and child labour, wage slavery, in some cases they can contaminate water supply's and make people homeless but as long as there are people that are less well of they will be taken advantage of even in a single city the rich will make money off of the poor, it is an unstopable part of human nature. I once read a quote that i think sums up man kinds greed nicely "man will do what man can" it is not MNC's that demand people are taken advantage of, is the men that lead them. MNC's bring a great amount of money into forign and local aconamies, without MNC's poor countries would not go through the stages of development and would not become an MEDC. At the moment we rely on MNC's, if we take them out of the equation it would be decades for the world econamy to get back in order and by them development would have gone down considerably.
The success of MNC's and it's investors are solely down to the investor countries own position and how they help the MNC's to thrive.
In some situations MNC's can bring in high amounts of profit and help the country to develop by funding educational and economic projects however for an MNC to succesfully help the country, the governing parties needs to aid them in areas such as tax and employment, overtaxing an MNC may cause it to have a global shift and eventually having constant high tax may end with the occurance of deindustrialisation in your country.
MNC's provide a lot of jobs and in countries where jobs are a rarity and unemployment rates reach massive highs, however in countries where employment rates are much higher the moving in of MNC's may cause vast immigration and may end in an overpopulated country, too many MNC's in a country is not always a good thing.
MNC's have been known to help the communities of heir residence by aiding social, economic and environmental projects and can massively increase the quality of life in a country by bringing in more money and giving the chance for people to earn money of which they can use to live. Despite this MNC's have also been known to bring disruption into communities with large industrial factories being operatational 24/7, people are complaining about noise pollution and lack of sleep which the factories provide.
MNC's are great at funding environmental projects and helping to keep countries clean, however the pollution their factories cause are huge. Modern factories need electricity to operate and therefore need a power station nearby to give them that power, this causes great pollution. Wastage from factories are also huge with waste products being created in masses, daily. This means that MNC's in fact cause much pollution to the environment and the community.
Multi-national companies are a great way to get leaders to help their country and get innvolved in some of it's projects. MNC's provide funding for the governing parties, so cost is no longer as much of an issue, this means they can get governments who arn't interested in their countries much more helpful in their societies. Despite this some corrupt leaders take the money meant for help to their country and therefore the country dosen't benefit from the MNC and poverty will still exist.
Overall I believe that MNC benfit depends on the location of it's residence. MNC's shouldn't be crowded in one area and shouldn't be placed in countries with corrupt leaders. MNC's with debt shouldn't seek countries with no development due to the fact that the country may become to dependant on that industry, if it becomes bankrupt the country will be in a lot oif trouble. The best place for MNC's to go are developing areas with relevant natural resources available, a caring governing party and a place with not much industry already there. This way not only does your business/company avoid too much competition, bad quality of life and no readily available resources, it also helps the countries which will best benefit from it's help.
Wow Brandon! What an answer. And packed with fantastic keywords. What rules should be put in place so that MNCs don't take advantage of the country in which they operate? Do they help or hinder local businesses in those countries? Well done guys, thought-provoking stuff. Miss A
I think that MNC's are both positive and negitive, I think they are postive because they often provide many jobs (with higher pay then what you would get in any other job in the local area) for people in the country that wouldn't have had a job otherwise, they also therefore provide a more substansial living perhaps as the more money the more food supply they may recieve? Also they create whats called the multipler affect where once an MNC is created local business' benifit and follow. This then also helps to create stronger bonds between companies and employees recieve more training and education to higher there workability. However i think that MNC's are bad because big companies can influence the goverment to much and this can lead to a huge impact on local people as there views wont be expressed and the goverment will feel more and more relient on the MNC. Also factorys can lead to closure very quickly and factorys can not have the respect for workers from different races and culture within the area. I belive in both aspects of the MNC's and i find that different companies interprate different regilations dependent on their own reputaion for example Nike. peter w
I think that it is worrying that people with such power in the world can live knowing that they are treating people so badly. Do they have a conscience?!?
ReplyDeleteWorkers of MNC's work in better conditions as compared to Government offices
DeleteI think that MNC's have a both positive & negative effect. They help provide jobs with higher pay than most local companies but they also treat their workers unfairly. I think that the big companies should take more responsability in finding out where there products are being made & face the fact that they are responsable for sweat shops & the poor conditions their workers work in.
ReplyDeleteOverall, i think that MNC's are positive because they help the country develop in lots of ways. There are always going to be richer countries and poorer countries. I just dont agree with teh child labour.
ReplyDeleteI think that MNC's are mainly positive because they boost the local and overall economy of countries, which helps them to develop and create links with other countries. Child labour might not always be the MNC's fault but the subcontracters.
ReplyDeleteI think that MNC's are mainly negative due to child labour and their workers can get treated unfairly, also because countries can become too dependent on MNC's and a closure of an MNC factory can have a big negative impact on the local economy.
ReplyDeleteI think that some MNC's, for example Nike are positive because they ensure that children are not working in their factories as well as providing their employees with a clean and safe environment. These MNC's also motivate smaller, local companies to develop which is a positive. However other MNC's like Primark are employing children who may be treated badly which is a negative. Overall there are more positives then negatives.
ReplyDeleteI think that MNC's are generaly a good idea because it brings humanity into a new stage of development,as well as giving the workers a decent wage, education and the MNC's that do this generaly make the comunity,that they have built in/on, richer which helps bring down poverty. But MNC's also have their bad sides. For example some MNC's employ subcontractors who make the product for them, this means that the MNC's can't garenty that the subcontractors don't use child labour, don't give workers a bad wage, or don't have a unsafe work place.
ReplyDeleteBut in conclusion i think that MNC's are generaly a good idea.
i think there is good and bad things about medc's the good things are that people in the ledcs get jobs but the bad thing is about the child labour and bad working conditions...
ReplyDeleteNice work so far people! keep posting before next lesson! Miss P
ReplyDeleteI think there are both positive and negative factors to MNC's. The positives include the fact that it is cheaper for the consumers, and the jobs they provide in the LEDC's, usually pay higher wages, like Nike. However there are no work condition guarantees and most profits go overseas. All in all, I believe that the positives outweigh the negatives.
ReplyDeleteThere are both advantageous and disadvantageous factors that come with MNCs .MNCs are good because not only do they provide the local community with more skills, money and experience which can be used to help develop the host countries through paying for education and through doing higher qualified jobs, but they also provide both the local and national economy in LEDCs and NICs with much needed capital which can be reinvested into the country .Also, MNCs help increase the rate at which globalisation happens because they create more links between countries. However, in order to make these advantages MNCs often use poorly paid adult/child labour and often put people in conditions which would be approved in MEDCs. Not only is this unfair on the employees but it also means that some MNCs have more control than governments, which causes social conflicts.I believe that MNCs are more beneficial to the host countries than they are non-beneficial, despite most profits being sent over sees and the pollution concerns with the transportation of goods, because they provide the country and local areas with finance which can be used to help stimulate development.
ReplyDeleteI think that MNC's are a good idea this is because the the workers can be paid up to three times the amount that they would if they where on minimum wage, and they also help to improve other MNC's in the local area.
ReplyDeletei think that MNC's are mainly positive because most of the people that work in their factories are paid well, have breaks, are trained for free and there is no child labour.this helps the area develop. it is usually only a negetive thing when MNC's like primark pay people low wages, give people no breaks and employ children.
ReplyDeleteI think MNC's have both positive and negative factors, positives would be that it gives people in LEDC's jobs and most have quite a good pay, it also boosts the local economy. However the negatives are that some MNC's use child labour and have low pay.
ReplyDeleteI Think MNC's have positive and negative factors MNC's can be good because there are alot more jobs ledcs which can also improve education but its not always that good because it can be harmfull to the enviroment also some MNC's cannot guaratee their is child labour.
ReplyDeleteoverall i think MNCS are posotive because it gives different people the oportunity to work in a plesant enviroment and gives them a chance to have decent pay and a good time, also the managers do not employ persons under the age of 18 so this means no child labour is involved
ReplyDeleteI think MNCS have mainly positive factors as they provide well paid jobs for people in LEDC'S, they help to improve their workers skills and knowledge and also boost the local economy. However the working conditions are not guaranteed to be good like Nike's and child labour is still an issue in some factories.
ReplyDeleteI think that MNCs are positive because they boost local economy and provide jobs for people and develop the skills in that area, all contributing to industrialisation. However the working conditions and the issue about child labour is not always researched to see what the place is like.
ReplyDeleteMNC's are good for different areas in the short term, but if the company decides to move the factory from an MEDC to an NIC, it can be extremely detrimental for the local economy which was heavily realiant on the MNC for mass employment. Also, child labour and factory conditions aren't as regulated in NIC's and LEDC's as they are in MEDC's.
ReplyDeleteI think that MNC's are more positive than negative because MNC's boost the economy and provide jobs, but the workers conditions can be quite bad, for example when watching the Primark video it showed that some workers in sweat shops had the worst conditions possible to work it, and were paid next to no money, but the conditions in a Nike Factory are quite good and the workers are just earning less than minumin wage
ReplyDeleteI think that MNCs are a good thing because they can help all of the other business' in the are to improve how they work and this can help the country to develop. But I also think that the MNCs must be closely monitored otherwise the workers who expect great oppurtunities can get exploited (as in the case of Primark). Another benefit of MNCs is that some of the money that they make is put back into the local community in education and health and this helps the country to develop even more. So overall MNCs are great for the country but they should be monitored better.
ReplyDeletei think that MNC's are mostly positive because they can offer employment and development to local areas. However, they can have negative effects, for example: if an MNC has a factoy that moves because of cheaper laboutr else-where then the local area can become destabilised as most jobs would have been at the factoy.
ReplyDeleteI think that MNC's are good because in most cases they boost the local economy by providing jobs for people and providing a good, clean, friendly place to work in. However in poorer countries where MNC's are, they can have a more of a negetive effect by bringing in 'western' culture to the local area. They also often have an enviomental effect on the surrounding areas by polluting the water sources and atmosphere by the waste products created by the factories. Many of the MNC's have sub-contractors which provide the same goods but at a lower price, this normally means that either children are being made to work or adults are earning very little, and working long hours.
ReplyDeletei think that MNCS are positive because they boost an economy and hekp to provide jobs.It can help with children for education.. but one negative effect is that it can be harmful to the enviroment.
ReplyDeletei think MNC's are more positive then negative because MNC's employ local people and few companies like Nike - give employees lunch breaks - holiday pay , but they can be negative as well by a local town/cities becoming dependant on a factory for employment local shop delivery and then the factories have to be De-industrialised
ReplyDeleteMNC's are greatly benificial for LEDC because they start the process of industrialisation which is a nessecary stage in the development of a nation. Having a multinational corporation in a community will stimulate the economy and help other local companies grow. Although I believe MNCs should operate in LEDCs I don't think their presence in NICs is good. After a while they stunt the grow of local businesses because they're inable to compete with international corporations. Companies such as Nike which have good ethical policies should be given TAX breaks in LEDC to intice them to set up factories in that country.
ReplyDeleteI think that MNC's are a great way for LEDC's to develop and can also develop a wider range of skills which will benefit the country greatly. MNC's also provide a number or jobs and those who are employed receive a higher wage than most local companies. However, despite the advantages of MNC's there are a few negatives. One being the speed of which MEDC's can close factories in one country and reopen in another. The closure of that company will mean that the employees will lose their jobs and then results in a negative impact on the local economy. Other disadvantages are the danger of countries becoming too dependant on MNC's, the fact that MNC's can influence government decisions and the concern that a company will bring aspects of 'Western' culture to poorer countries.
ReplyDeleteThere are both positive and negative factors about MNC's. An advantage is that they can provide jobs for the local economy, bringing in more income, and as Nike showed, the jobs are sustainable and not just a short term thing. They are provided a lunch and work in a clean and safe environment. Although Primark showed us something different, for example child labour, and recieving less than half of the minimum wage. It all depends which MNC you work for, and where in the country you are working.
ReplyDeletei have a mixed opinion about MNCs. bigger buildings have better conditions; the factories are clean, the workers get good meals, there's reasonable pay and the workers get game courts for breaks. some MNCs do not supervise their workers, for these unfortunate people the conditions are almost opposite to the big buildings. they earn about 52p a day and people work from as young as 9-10 years old.
ReplyDeleteAlthough i do think our daily lives would be allot different without MNCs.
I have mixed views on MNC's working in LEDC's. There are some very reasonable positive effects, yet there are some negative effects that contrast.
ReplyDeleteHere are some positive factors:
- They provide jobs for LEDC's, it gives them something to do
- Provides money so families can be looked after (education, food etc.)
- Some companies like Nike for example provide loans to help people set up their own smaller businesses and give a fraction of their profit back
- Most companies have clean and stable environments, have lunch breaks with food provided, and have sport and social events
Some negative factors:
- Companies like Primark claim to not employ children under 16, but when deeper research was done, children as young as 9 was found making clothing
- People are paid under half the minimum wage
- A majority of people working for MNC's are working in humid, unstable conditions with no breaks and under strict observation.
I think that MNC's have a bad impact on LEDCs rather than good. This is because of several reasons listed below:
ReplyDelete-The countires that they are in can become dependant on a MNC's.
-People, in some cases, are being paid as little as half the minimum wage for that country or loccal area.
- Although some of the workers have good suitable conditions to work in, there are the sides you do not see where, lots of people are working in a confined space with no breaks and also there are to many people in one area (crampt and over crowded).
But, there are some positive aspects(which in my opinoin do not balance out the negatives):
-They provide jobs for people in LEDcs and give them a good reliable and stable source of income for them and their families.
-Some companies also try to help out the places that they are in and give out micro loans to other businesses because it helps boost the local economy.
Overall i generally think that MNC's are not a good thing but it is up to your own dygression.
That one that was posted at 11:39 was will merrick
ReplyDeleteMNC's have both positive and negative effects on the economy; they provide jobs for thousands of people and bring a much wider range of skills to the local community! However, long term they have a very negative effect on the economy, there is a high speed at which the factories are closing, causing thousands of people to loose their jobs!
ReplyDeleteMNC's have a positive effect on the country that they're in if they take care of there workers very well then the workers will enjoy it for example Nike they help boost the economy of the country that they are in they encourage the workers to work and help the local communities expand for example the work may barrow a small loan like Nike was lending people set up a small business and boost the economy even more on the other hand if the workers were in sweat shops and not getting paid much, it might seem mean but they're still boosting the economy
ReplyDeleteBradley Comerford
MNC's have advantages and disadvantages;
ReplyDeleteHowever I believe that they have an positive effect on the local economy by offering employment this gives great opportunities for LEDC's so they have a chance to earn a decent wage and work in a safe and clean environment!
community- Brings the community together as one to enhance the opportunity to boost the local economy.
Mirco loans- Helps small local business's to expand by giving them loans.
I think that the Nike factories show this well by not employing anyone under the age of 18 and earning just less than the minimum wage.
Nehanna Probert
I think MNC's are posititve and negative. They are positive because they provide a job for people in LEDC's and can help communities grow. However some MNC's are negative because some can abuse their authority with low wages and long working hours. Overall I think it depends on the company whether the company is positive or negative.
ReplyDeleteI think that mncs are both posotive and negative. The good reason being that they provide jobs for people that wouldn't normally have jobs, its better to be paid something rather than nothing. The bad reasons are that some don't give their workers a good working condition and they can suddenly move to a cheaper country, this is bad when the country has become dependant on this MNC. But if they're giving them a good working life, like Nike showed in the video. Then they are good for the countries that they're in
ReplyDeleteNatalie Elias
I think that MNC's are both positive and negative. The negative points are the fact that some of the working conditions can be dreadful, the pay is sometimes low, and the hours are long. Also some countries can get dependent on a MNC and when they leave, it can cause a lot of trouble. MNCs so also provide jobs for people who usually wouldn't have one, and usually the pay is okay, if all MNCs were like nike, maybe all MNCs would be positive.
ReplyDeleteWell done, great comments, keep them coming
ReplyDeleteMiss Parry
I think that MNC's are both positive and negitive, I think they are postive because they often provide many jobs (with higher pay then what you would get in any other job in the local area) for people in the country that wouldn't have had a job otherwise, they also therefore provide a more substansial living perhaps as the more money the more food supply they may recieve? Also they create whats called the multipler affect where once an MNC is created local business' benifit and follow. This then also helps to create stronger bonds between companies and employees recieve more training and education to higher there workability. However i think that MNC's are
ReplyDeletebad because big companies can influence the goverment to much and this can lead to a huge impact on local people as there views wont be expressed and the goverment will feel more and more relient on the MNC. Also factorys can lead to closure very quickly and factorys can not have the respect for workers from different races and culture within the area.
I belive in both aspects of the MNC's and i find that different companies interprate different regilations dependent on their own reputaion for example Nike.
Megan Bendall
I think that MNC's are positive and Negative because they do provide a lot of jobs for people. I know the pay is better in some places compared to others but the money it brings in, helps the country to economically develop. But the people and country may start to depend on it and be in real crisis when it leaves. The negatives are that some of the sweat shops have a terrible working conditions, low pay and really long working hours. But on the video, it showed that Nike's working area is really good, but that isn't true for every MNC.
ReplyDeleteAlicia Showering said….
ReplyDeleteI think MNC’s can have either a positive or negative impact on the host country entirely depending upon the particular company. They are positive because:
• Provide jobs for local people
• Higher average wage
• Taxes paid to government
• Government can afford to improve infrastructure
• Help in development of country
• Micro loans-help small business to begin
• Boost economy
• Training in new skills
The negative impacts include:
• Working conditions can be dreadful
• Child labour can take place
• Long hours
• Host country can become dependent on MNC
• Government decisions can be influenced
• Dependence on MNC
• Sudden closure
If all MNC’s were like Nike and provided great facilities for the workers and never employed anyone under the age of 18 then it would be great for the host country to develop. If a country became dependent on a MNC it would be difficult to become independent again if the MNC chose to leave the country.
I think MNCs can have positive and negative effects.
ReplyDeletePositive effects include:
*Good wage
*Nice working conditions and places to stay
*More technology so more cures for illnesses
*People become more educated, they have the money to afford to go to school
*Communication with other countries
*Better transport
Negative effects include:
*Bad working conditions
*Very long working hours
*Causes pollution
*Not paying wages on time
*Local businesses suffer
MNCs like Nike for example take a lot of care over their employees. Other businesses are allowed to look around the factories to take tips on how to look after their employees and how to make sure they provide the right facilities for them. They are inspected regularly and have help to industrialise many countries.
Primark is a bad example of an MNC they employ child labour, the factories never get inspected and employees are force to work in slums and alleyways of high streets just so they get their piece of clothing made before the dead line. They get paid a very low wage, only getting paid 7p an hour. They would move to another more well looked after factory is there was one near by who would take them on straight away, but there isn't so they have to stay working there just to earn the money to keep their alive. They say that it is too much hard work for so little money.
I think that MNC's are positive and negative. They are positive because they bring better jobs to the country and make it more developed, people can earn more money and there is less poverty. They can also have negative effects on a country such as the factories can be in bad condition, the workers have extremely long working hours, low wage pay and sometimes even young children can be found working for the company. Also small local buissinesses such as farming and agriculture can suffer because more people are working in the factories and less in the feilds. Primark is a good example of a negative effect on MNC's, their factories are in poor condition, the workers dont get payed on time and get payed as little as 7p an hour! people are found working in back allies and in their own homes overtime and their has also been some cases where children have been found working for them. But however Nike is an example of some good effects of an MNC's,they have really good working conditions for their workers, they also provide regualr breaks for them and brilliant facilities for them to use. Their workers are also well payed on time and the company will also pay for their children to go into education and for them to be educated so they can be promoted to higher managment status. MNC's have both good and bad effects to a company so globalisation is neither a good thing or a bad thing.
ReplyDeletei think mnc is a positive thing because they take materials and profitable thing and give back something to help the less econimicaly developed countrys.
ReplyDeleteby dan baxter
I think MNC is a positive thing. This is because the workers usually get paid more than minimum wage, it creates lots of new jobs, the taxes paid by workers make the country better (health care, education etc.), if built in LEDC's or NIC's the workers learn new skills, company exports goods so they have better links with other ountries or MNC's and globalisation encourages some other similar companies to do well.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand there are disadvanteges.This is why; Some factories close down unexpectadly, some countries rely on MNC's, brings western culture which is bad for some islamic countries and some have child labour.
Altogether though, I think the advantages are better and there are more.
Tim Terrell
Im going to agree with most people on this, as i think that MNC's are both positive and negative. Having MNC's in a coutnry means that the country can develop and progress. The MNC's also give the country jobs, which means that poverty levels decrease.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, MNC's aren't always great as some of the factories are in a very bad condition, The work hours can be long and the pay can be very low. Local businesses can also suffer as more of the workers work in the factory rather than the other smaller businesses.
Some other big MNC's do have a positive effect. Nike for example provide good conditions for the workers, give them free lunches and also give the workers regular breaks. This means that they work harder and produce more items.
Overall i think that MNC's in a different country are a good thing!
Chris Palmer
I think that to say that M.N.C.'s as a whole are good or bad is a massive generalisation. Especially as there are so many variables which change with each individual company, a decrease in scale is in order when talking about them.
ReplyDeleteWhat I mean is that because one company is usually is so different to another it is unfair to even group similar companies together, as it is the way in which they are run which is the main factor.
Also, it depends a lot on where the specific company is based both categorically (M.E.D.C.'s, L.E.D.C.'s or N.I.C.'s) and more definitively (individual countries/regions). This is because governmental restrictions can have a significant effect which even if desired may be difficult to counter balance in the world of business. The population which the company will have the biggest impact on should also be given a bigger chance to say whether it is benifiting the local comunity or not.
The avaliability of suitable areas in which to set up and expand might force companies to take disputable measure in order to maintain pocession of their market. Unfortunately the people who find out about these atrocious methods do not distinguish between any sort of varying levels building up to an extremity.
This results in a company either being seen as extrodinarily good or unacceptably bad, with very few companies even coming in to a mid-/half way point. A better way to seperate companies that promote the continued existence of M.N.C.'s and those that disgrace it, would be to give detailed comparisons across the whole spectrum.
Doing this might also make it easier for other people who are still debating to make their minds up. However the complexity of this topic could, in itself, deem our original question unanswerable, unless altered...
-Matthew Uppington
I think that MNC's are negative. This is because they control so many countrys and are so large and important in these countries that smaller buisnesses and jobs that people are used to start to become less common and even stop altogether. In LEDC's, where many MNC's have companies like coca cola, the people that live there are more used to jobs like farming and working on the land. So when MNC's arrive, many people choose to have jobs in thse MNC factorys. This lowers the amount of people working on the land and then unbalances the whole economy of what people are used to in these ountrys. There are of course many positive things that come with MNC companys having factorys in places like africa and asia, but whether those positives out weigh the negatives long term is still hard to see. Also, if the factory that is there treats workers badly, then there is not much these workers can do, because they are now reliant on the wage they recieve from this job. I am not saying thatb MNCs are all negative because some are very nice to their workers, but long term, more people i think may suffer because there will be a lack of farming and important basics like water because the MNC may have absorbed all of these resources through the factory. For example, Coca cola wants the cheapest water it can find so it has many large factorys in africa. Obviousely, Africa does not have much water so the overall result is many people go without water over their job.
ReplyDeleteThis is just my personal opinion, thought i would do a different veiw to many other people.
By Imogen Turner
I think that MNCs are negative because they are controling countries but having MNC's in a coutnry means that the country can develop and progress. The MNC's also give the country jobs, which means that poverty goes down. But nike has a possitive effect on workers and they get free lunch.
ReplyDeleteI think MNC's are a good thing because they provide much needed jobs in poorer countries. The pay is good for the people who get jobs and the conditions are often better that other local companies.The MNC's also provide good career opportunities by offering courses to help staff to move forward in there careers and learn new skills. the MNC's also treat there workers well by offering them free lunch and leisure activities.
ReplyDeleteMNC's also have a positive impact on the community helping it to expand and become more wealthy by helping businesses start and leading the way for existing businesses.
by Nick Manville
James Dunlop agrees with many of the above comments as MNC's have both positive and negative influences on the global community.
ReplyDeleteOn a positive note MNC's do provide jobs and money through taxes in poor countries.
On the other hand the main aim of all MNC's is to make big profits and keep costs low, which is why they get cheap labour abroad-such as the Primark child labour scandal a few years ago. The profits they make are taken out of the countries where they can make more profit. I is imperative that MNC's are regulated carefully to ensure local people in poor countries are not taken advantage of.
I agree with J-man.
ReplyDeleteI think thst MNC's would be a very positive thing if they treated there workers fairly. If workers were given a higher wage (over minimum), a clean working place and a safe working environment, then MNC's would be great. This could be possible if a big company, like nike, made all there factories like this, then other competition would follow suit. This would eventually lead to all companies having great factories. Then everyone would be happy :)
This was Elliot Joyner btw if it doesnt say my name
I think MNC's are both positive and negative. As they do provide jobs for the community, which is normally above the average pay other surrounding companies offer, leading the country into development. However, most tend to treat their workers badly - low pay, bad working area, long hours. Overall, I agree with both Elliot and J-man, if the country was to treat their workers more fairly, the development of the country will speed up, causing globalisation to effect the counrty in a more positive way. This may lead into more companies expanding worldwide which could create more jobs, at a better life for the community.
ReplyDeleteI think that MNC's are positive and negative.Different companies treat their workers differently so it would depend on the company.
ReplyDeleteThe positives are :
*Creates a large number of jobs in that area
*Wages are higher than local companies
*Helps the countires trading
*The taxes paid by the MNC'S to the host country can be invested in health,education and infustructure
*Develops skills in that area
The negatives of MNC's are:
*Country's can become dependant on MNC'S
*Closure of a cmopany has a bad effect on the local economy
*It can change the countries culture so its more like the western world
*MNC's can influence government decisions and antidemocratic
I think that if the workers are treated fairly ,paid well and have good working conditions it is positive.But if they don't it is negavtive.So it depends on how well they treat there workers.
Daisy Matthews
MNC's have positive and negative effects. They create more jobs, skills can be developed and the comptetive rates of other companies can result in a higher wage. However the workers are not always treated well and working conditions can be quite poor. I think that if the workers were treated with more respect and better pay then the devlopment of the country would increase.
ReplyDeleteLauren Weaver
I think MNCs have both positive and negative effects however i personally think that there are more positives outcomes than negatives. Such as boosting the local economy in LEDCs, providing jobs for the unemployed, developing the skills of employees and locals and the country's trading improves as well.
ReplyDeleteMNCs can be positive and negative. Sometimes when a company goes abroad it loses some control because of sub-contracting and that can lead to really bad conditions for the workers, low pay and sometimes even child labour. Primark claim to not know about the poor conditions for the people making their clothes, if that is true, then it is most likely sub-contracters who are doing it and making it hard for Primark to keep track of their workers. If it is not true however, and Primark knows all about it, but wants to keep prices as low as possible, then they are taking advantage of the people who work for them and that is another bad point about globalisation. There are good things about glabalisation though. For example, MNCs are very wealthy and can afford to pay their workers higher pay than the minimum wage in poorer countries (if they choose to). If they do pay a fairly high wage, then that encourages people to migrate to the area of the factory which is great for the economy of that area and for the country. It may also increase tourism as that area becomes nicer to live and to be in generally. The MNCs can also afford for the quality of life of their workers to be much higher than average of that country, for example in the Nike film, there is grass and flowers around the factory and the people working there have the option to play or watch sports during their lunch break. Also in the case of Nike, micro-loans are given to local businesses to help them get on their feet.
ReplyDeleteBy Steph Moreno
I think MNCs have both positive and negative affects. A positive is that it can provide jobs for people who need them and it provides many people with skills that can help them in many other jobs in the future but then a negative affect is that workers can be paid a low wage for long hours and it's not right. The people deserve a fair pay for the amount of hours they do.
ReplyDeleteBy Shelley Baker
I think that MNC’S are both negative and positive. As they do provide jobs for a lot of people and can help them with skills that they can use in many other jobs. A negative affect is that workers get paid a very low wage for the long hours they do, and it’s not very fair. The workers deserve a fair pay for the amount of effort they put into their work.
ReplyDeleteI think MNC's have a positive and negative effect on poorer countries because
ReplyDelete*They provide lots of jobs
*because they a factory in that area skills are developed
*Depending on which company you look at, some have higher wages than local factories
*Building a factory in that country can sometimes develop the country as a whole, depending on how long the factory is there for
But there are some negative points to MNC's
*Coca Cola once built a factory in one country, they were told they had to stay there for a minimum of 10 years, after they had stayed 10 years, the next day the factory was shut down.
*Some other companies pay their workers minimum wage gaining maximum profits.
*MNC's can close almost instantly, damaging the local economy.
*MNC's can influence the governments decisions.
Even though there are positive and negative effects for MNC's building factories in poorer countries it depends on which company you look at
James England
I feel that you cannot put all MNC's into a particular group which states whether they have a positive or negative effect on the country that they are based in, or, on the quality of life of the workers at the company; however, you can single out a company and assess what sort of impact the company has on the country.
ReplyDeleteAn example of where two MNC's have different effects involved the two giant sports equipment and apparel, Nike, and Addidas, which both have completely different techniques in how they are ran.
An investigation was launched in a Nike factory (However this Nike factory had been labeled as one of the highest standard so conditions may vary in others) and this factory:
*Created job opportunities
*No employees are under 18 who are making shoes and under 16 for apparel
*Nike are very strict on their age limit which prevents child labour however if somebody under the age limit does get in Nike have claimed that they then pay for the rest of the child’s education which will improve the education of the country.
*The workers are paid on average of $54 per month (this is the highest paying factory) but the lowest goes down to $18 a month
*The job provides safe and clean working environment
*Micro-loans can be given by the factory to help set up new businesses nearby
And
*Free lunch for the workers
However Addidas another giant in the sport equipment and apparel industry have a vast difference in the way they treat their workers some examples of these problems are:
*Allegations being made that workers in the factory are subjected to sexual harassment and physical abuse
*There are also reports of children as young as fourteen are working in the factory which is illegal
*Workers are being paid below the national minimum wage
*Many workers are even forced to do overtime in extremely poor working conditions
These two examples prove that you cannot put all MNC's in a certain group but you can group the separate companies into positive, negative or neutral groups. By paying workers good rates you will speed up development in a LEDC because it means workers can send their children to school increasing the education rate which will hopefully then make the country a better place to live by improving the quality of life, locals will create more businesses which will help every civilian of the country.
-Daniel Milverton
I think that MNC'S can be both positive and negative because it provides the people with a job who ever needs them, and from that job they earn skills and use them later on. A negative affects is that the workers don't earn that much wage and they work long hours. Which isn't fair, they should at least get paid more so they can live off of the money.
ReplyDeleteI think there are a varity of positive and negative factors that comes with Globalization (MNCS)in LEDC countries.
ReplyDeleteSome of the positive include:
*Provide local people with new working skills e.g computer skills, that they can use in the new jobs provided.
*Increase in employment.
*Pay wages that are often substantially higher than those earned from other jobs.
*Helps to develop the local community e.g more people getting good education in the area due to people having new skills for new jobs.
*Economically Develop the LEDC country so there is less poverty.
*Free lunches for the workers.
*Meet new people.
This seems very benefical for the country.
Here are some of the negatives:
*The culture is westernised.
*In some factories that people are working in are in very humid and uncomfortable condictions.
*Can be paid low wages.
*Local busniesses can be put out of jobs as people are working in the factories rather than working the local busniesses.
*Long hours in terrible working condictions.
In the video's it shows different sides to the arguement but their are other factories about so you cannot make a complete biased descion on it.
By Rosie Holloway
I'm in mixed emotions about MNC's as they provide so many jobs for people with no qualifications or education, however some MNC's can use this to their advantage by not paying them the substantial amount they should be payed, thus making the employee find it hard to pay rent or cater for their family. Although without MNC's providing jobs for these LEDC's, the citizens wouldn't be able to look after their families or themselves full stop.
ReplyDeleteBy Jess Lacey
I think that MNC's are both good and bad.
ReplyDeleteGood becouse they provide jobs for the unemployed in LEDC's, they often build housing for their workers to rent, also it helps the economic situation of LEDC's because even if they are paying them the minimum wage it is still putting more money in to the community than if they were unemployed.
But bad because they can minipulate workers into thinking they will have a good job but then rope them into a long term low payed job also by building factorys in LEDC's they are costing jobs in places like the UK where we need them.
By Tyler Wiltshire
I think that MNC's are mostly a positive thing as they bring work to poorer countries and help them develop and improve. People working for MNC's normally get paid more money than the other people living in the same area but working somewhere else. If these employee's have enough money, they can afford to send their children to school. Money earned can also improve health, transport and other services.
ReplyDeleteBy Katie Dunphy :)
i have mixed opinions on MNCs as there is both negatives and positive sides to it. The positive effects include it provides loads of jobs and the wage levels are usually higher than those paid by local companies and in general just develops a much wider range of skillsin the local population! But if you look at the disadvages of it are that countries become too dependent on MNC's and because so many people work in these factories, if it closes down or gets shut down it has a negative impact on the local economy as many people will be left without jobs. Ellie Chandler:)
ReplyDeleteI think that MNC's are generally good for a number of reasons:
ReplyDeleteFor one, the companies generally pay better wages than those that are smaller. Take Nike for example, the wages there are quite a lot above the minimum wage!
Secondly, the opportunities for promotion are better than those in smaller businesses, again in Nike, if you are good enough at what you are doing, then you are likely to be offered a promotion.
Thirdly, if an MNC makes a factory in a poor area of India (for example), then what is that going to be doing as a direct impact? Creating jobs and bringing money into a poor area of the world. That's surely going to be making a good impact on the economic climate of that country, is it not?
Now, I suppose that I'd better look into a few of the negatives of MNC's...
Although Nike pays generally very good wages, there are some that don't pay so well and if you are unfortunate enough to have a factory built by one of these companies then you may find yourself paid quite badly, although it's probably better than having no job at all...
Secondly, unfortunately some factories have very poor working conditions, for example it could be extremely hot inside, or very cramped. Again, this would be a very bad thing for the workers, but people will work in worse conditions than those to get paid, so is it as bad as the western documentaries make it out to be. Saying that, I am aware that I would not want to work in a factory...
After weighing up both sides of the argument, I think that I have decided that MNC's are not all too bad, as they are providing a very important stage in the industrialisation of the LEDC that they are based in, they are providing a service for the MEDC's of the world (the UK and USA) and are providing jobs for poorer people in the world.
Ollie Wright 10D
I think that MNCs are generally positive because they help a countries economy, especially in developing countries. It gives more jobs to people and even though child labour is negative - it's not always the companies fault, but the subcontracters. It gives the local people in a poor country available jobs which are commonly better paid than people working in the same area but doing something else. If the local people have more money then they can afford to send their children to school which not only boosts the countries economy but also it's education rates. By Sophie Treneman :P
ReplyDeleteI have a mutual opinion on MNC’s because there are positives and negatives on both sides, which make it a strong argument.
ReplyDeleteThe positives are that some companies like Nike have factories that pay well and give loads of jobs to people who live in LEDCs, these jobs give a wide range of skills to the workers too. Lastly MNCs used to be much worse than they are now and therefore might improve more and become better which means it would help make better jobs.
Negatives, not all MNC companies or factories are good pay and help local communities, some MNCs have influences of the governments of LEDCs, lastly countries can become to dependent on MNCs bring factories into there country and if the factory fails so does the economy in the country.
Over all I dislike the idea of MNCs but they do help develop a country.
Gwilym Luckett 10E
Like most people i think mnc's are a mixture of good and bad..
ReplyDeleteBad being that the factories can employ children if they hire a lot of people at the same time which effects the economy. The factories can close down without letting the workers know, which means if the country has become dependent on the mnc factory it can effect them in a bad way.
Good being that the mnc factories have been said to make other local businesses do better, wages tend to be higher than other businesses. It helps the countries develop and can boost the trading ability.
So i think mnc's are quite a positive thing but do have some big bad points.
Josie Cameron 10C
Overall i think that MNC's have good and bad points.
ReplyDeleteMNC's are good because the workers wages are at a good pay than nearby business, people who are unemployed and arent educated are able to have jobs which will help and they will be earning money. The location of the factory can create lots of jobs for people in need of work. Also people who learn skills and improve will be offered better jobs and will earn more money and succed well.
However there is some bad points, for example in some factories the conditions are awful, and arent suitable for people to be working in. Another point is that factories can hire children to work, sometimes the children have fewer rights than what they should have. Also another bad point is that the factories can have quick closers, which means the people are left with no jobs. Usually a country gets to depent on MNC's which is bad.
So overall in my opinion, MNC's have some good points and some bad points.
Ryan McCann 10L
I think MEDCs are positive and negative, the positive things are that people in LEDCs get jobs, the community learns new skills and other local buisness have more chance to grow. The negative things are that an LEDC can become dependent on the MEDC, the MEDC can move it's buisness without any notice and a LEDC can hire children to work.
ReplyDeleteSam Hunt 10W
I think MNC's have both a postitive and negative impact globally and especially on the community surrounding its factory.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, they usually provide stable jobs in LEDC's with reasonable pay, although wages will vary between different factories. Some businesses provide a range of different employment opportunities and promotions as well as training which gives the workers a chance to learn new skills. Furthermore, in aid of the area around the factory, MNC's lend new businesses a micro-loan which enables th local economy to develop faster.
However, an MNC can also cause a negative effect as well, for example, moving a factory to a LEDC can increase the amount of unemployed, unskilled people in a MEDC. Additionally some factories can be totally can be totally unreliable and can shut down without warning. If too many citizens are dependant on it to provide them with jobs and the main income for their families and the factory closes, this will cause a huge negative impact on the community and massively damage its economy.
Imogen Kuseri 10C
I think MNC's are positive on the country as they make it a more developed place. They give them a low wage compared to the profit the company makes but a high wage compared to other local jobs. This increases tax's and give Money to the countries basic needs including health,education and infrastructure It also provides the workers with new skills that they could pass on to other local companies.
ReplyDeleteMNC's also create a link with many other countries this is useful for trading.
There are however negatives such as the culture they bring is westernised .
The conditions are not good enough.
Child labour can be used.
It can become more powerful than the government.
Katie O'Brien
I think MNC's are posotive because they help the country develop because they give the employees a higher wage than they would usually get, this means they can pay higher tax this will go towards Education, health and Infrastructure. They also give them new skills so when the factory closes the people will be okay.
ReplyDeleteI think MNC's are positive the the country becuase they can make the country more developed. some things get covered by tax payers such as education and health
ReplyDeleteanother advantage is that the MNC's can create further linkage between countries for trade and information.
Altough they are happy to bring in MNC's, it will westernise the place and locals do not want that to happen, it will take all of the culture and reality from the place
Phoenix Holvey
MNC's have a positive & negative effect on a country. the negatives would be that they treat their workers unfairly by giving long hours of hard laubour. The positives include that the pay is a lot higher than other local jobs they also help to develope countrys. Overal i think that MNC's have more of a positive impact but MED countrys which the companys are set up in,should take more responsibility for things such as sweat shops and child laubour.
ReplyDeleteLeah :)
labour*
ReplyDeleteleah :)
I think that MNC's are positive and negative as the positive side to it is that they provide alot more jobs for people in the community, they give employees a higher paying wage and the country it self will get developed with a MNC. But MNC's can can also be negative as it may create bad working conditions, low wage and in some cases child labour.
ReplyDeleteHarriet Gardiner :)
I think MNC's are bad and good because they can have both a positive or negitive impact on the local community
ReplyDeletefor example:
positive:
Give loacal people money to start a company,
Good wage,
Jobs.
Negitive:
Child labour,
Bad working conditions,
SOMETIMES a low wage
Healey Loader
i think mnc's are good and bad because they can both have positive and negative it can have an impact on the commounity
ReplyDeleteposotive is can help small bussinesses
jobs for people
negative
child labour
joe baker
i think mncs are mixed good and bad because the negatives are child labour and some times poor pay the good points are a job at a young age and that will after a while help
ReplyDeletejordan bishop
In my opinion, I think that MNC's are positive as they can help certain countries develop. One way that they an help them develop is having a worldwide - known buisness which will convince other jobs/traders to set up buisnesses and make more jobs (The Multipliyer Effect).
ReplyDeleteAnother positive is the factor about the location of the buisness, if it is, for example: located in Sub Saharan locations, that certain place will become more developed ad will help the certain location turn into a more Economically Developed Country (MEDC)
Thanks to a certain country developing, this can help boost the economy and help the people along in the process, This means:
-People can learn new skills
-Sets Up the Multipliyer Effect
-Boost trading
But, There can be negatives to this process aswell,
The speed of Development could force the buisness to close down and could cause the certain country/continent to become more independant, also, they can employ child labour resulting the certain buisness to get a bad name.
Finally, A new MNC buisness can again, create more jobs, create more emplyment and Higher Wage.
Josh D
I think that MNC's can be both positive and negitive, heres why;
ReplyDeletePositive
- the MNC normally offers better wages than the local factories due to the fact that they are a bigger company that has more money to spend. higher waages means that the employees can afford to send their children to school. Because these children will have had an education, they are more qualified for better, higher paid,more advanced jobs in the future, which will in turn boost the econemy in the form of taxes.
-As well as education the money can be spent on healthcare, transport and other services which will increase the employees' quality of life.
- If the MNC stays in an area long enough, it increses trade in the area. we saw an example of this in the DVD that we watched about Nike- in the area surrounding the factory many new buisnesses had set up to attract the crowds of employees that now come to the factory.
-The MNC will also benefit the nearby factories because they can learn by example and it produces competition will motivates the company to do better.
- Having an MNC in a country can also improve the links between those countries, making them more likely to do busness with them again
Negitive
-Because MNC factories are normally based in NICs, they can cause high levels of unemployment in their head country among the unskilled
-The factories can close quickly, without warning and this causes problems for the workers because they suddenly lose thier jobs, and perhaps their only source of income.
-Many MNCs work long hours in bad conditions for poor pay however this does not apply to all of them for example Nike
- In many of the factories the workers have ilttle rights.
-The profits made by the factory go back to the head country, an MEDC. I think that at least a small percentage of the proffits should go directly into the factory to improve the lifes of the workers who made the profit in the first place- it would be more fair this way.
overall I think that MNCs can be good or bad and it just depends on which company you are looking at, we can't judge them all the same.
Natalie Palmer
I think MNC's are positve as they bring lots of money and jobs to poorer countries like zambia and vietnam and can help people to pay for food and education for their children it can also teach the workers new skills.
ReplyDelete-Will Jenkins
I think that MNC'S are posative and negative beacause they can create lots of new jobs in deprived countries like vietnam but also has abd side beause child labour and poor pay can change your mind a bit but i think that overall MNC'S are pretty good
ReplyDeleteby ryan butt
I think that MNC's are both positive and negative, my reasons for this are;
ReplyDeletepositive...
-people under 16 are not employed
-they earn more than the local minimum wage in their area
- Links between the headquater country with the LEDC factories country
-There are lots of oppurtunities for prommotion
-Local businesses get competition and get advise on how to look after their workers
-You can train to become a manager, by taking part in a course
-Can boost the countries economy
-Give local people money to start off businesses
Negative...
-Factories can shut without notice
-Workers have no rights
-Poor pay, bad conditions and long hours
-The profit of the company goes back to the headquaters country
Overall I think MNC's are mostly good, there are a lot more positives over negatives. Obviously, the amount of positives and negatives depend on the company.
By Jemima Gregson
I think that MNC's are both good and bad, good because they create work and a decent regular pay for employes. Although they can be bad as some to support child labour, and charge very little pay to workers; and not all the factories are listed so its hard to tell whats really going on. But overall I think MNC's are good in helping build up poorer countries.
ReplyDeleteMNC's are both good and bad for a variety of different reasons.
ReplyDeleteIt all depends on the particular MNC because some MNCs are very much beneficial not just for the local community in which they may be active but on the economy of the entire country, whereas some MNCs are quite the opposite.
For example the MNC Nike has many of its factories in Vietnam. These factories are very important for the manafacture of a considerable amount of Nike's products. Since Nike moved its factories into that area, the local economy has seen a considerable boost, because the Nike factory has offered hundreds of jobs for the local people. The pay has been publicised as considerabley higher than that of the minimum wage. The factory also offers micro-loans to businesses starting up in the loacl area which has promoted the local community no end. People often complain that globalisation leads to factory workers with low health and safety standards and the workers are mistreated. In the Vietnam Nike factories however, the wirkers are provided with many facilities, like sports facilities to be used during the workers lunchbreaks. Large green park spaces also available. The worker satisfaction is something that the factory makes well known.
But these benefits aren't just for the workers. There are education courses in IT available so that the locals are actually becoming managerial staff etc. Which aswell as being a higher paid job, is teaching vital skills. Since the factory moved in to Vietnam, absolute poverty has halved, and the government has become committed to completely abolishing child labour.
This Nike factory is almost certainly an exception rather the rule, but as companies like Gap and Peimark have been exposed to the public for failing to uphold their ethical work standards, the demand for ethically sourced clothing has grown. Whilst sub-contracting means that child labour still exists, and less than minimum wage is payed to many workers, who often don't even work io factories, it is important to remember that the media often exaggerates these cases.
Every globalised company has a history, where at least one person has been exploited and abused, but I think as a general rule globalisation is a good thing.
Becky Fenn 10V
I think that it depends entirely on the MNC as to whether it gives a positive or negative impact. For example, Nike, a very well known multi national company, are currently giving a good impact to its workers and the surrounding well-fair of the area. Mainly by giving jobs to all the local people, paying them a wage that is higher than the average and providing good working conditions. Instead of bringing in 'western' people to work in the higher jobs such as a manager, they provide courses and lesson that teach the workers new skills so as they can become managers and so on. These new skills could also be applied to other jobs and be taught to other people, helping with the economy. The MNC factories attract other businesses and some MNC's even give out micro-loans to people wanting to start up their own businesses, this really boosts the economy of the country.
ReplyDeleteSome companies, like Nike, don't allow child labour, and if a worker is found to be under-age then the company pays for their education. Nike are also involved with the government which is extremely good as helps it to stay uncorrupted and involved with the people of their country. Some governments, with MNC's help, have now successfully outlawed child labour. All this, and the fact that the workers are getting well paid means that more and more children a getting an education. This has a huge effect on the social side, and also the economic as more people are better educated, they can get better jobs.
The most important thing that companies like Nike do, is tell and show everyone what they are doing. They openly encourage people and other companies to visit their factories, this is very unusual for MNC's in developing countries.Showing other businesses good factories is very beneficial as it creates competition of higher standard and shows other people how they can improve their workers lives. In these cases, MNC's are really good, they are sustainable, particularly strong in social and economic and although they fall in the environmental factor, the benefit to the people almost makes up for it.
However, not all MNC's are like this. In many cases, the workers are paid barley liveable wages, almost certainly not enough to send their children to school and in many cases the children must also work so as the family can earn enough to survive. They have very poor working conditions with rarely any breaks and generally left wishing for a better life. In these cases, poverty is often very high as pollution also ruins their water and food suplys.
These two views are very extreme and most MNC's will probably be in the middle, with their factories varying. In some ways, I can see that a lot of pressure is put on MNC's to sell their products at the lowest prices, and in the quickest time. MNC's also often claim that they knew nothing of these poverty stricken factories but in my opinion they should know where their products are coming from and ensure that their workers well-being comes before the greed of their craving buyers. By Jo Shaw
ok this is annoying, i put this on here already but:)
ReplyDeletei think mnc's have disadvantages but there are far more advantages for an mnc making products in a ledc so overall mncs are good for development.
there needs to be factories for the products sold by mncs to be made. making these factories in the poor countries will provide jobs. once the factory is built there will be further jobs being provided by the mnc. some jobs include designing the clohtes, making the clothes, maintaining or fixing the machines when they are broken, general maintinance in the factory and may othre jobs.
the factories also provide a far better wage than some other jobs that are avalable in the ledc like farming. and although some critics state the wages that the people are recieving and it seems low, the price of living in a ledc is far less than in the uk.
the factory will provide a lunch hour where the workers can eat thier lunch and have enjoy sports and other passtimes.
some factories provide micro loans to help the surrounding area get a buisness up and running which means that the economy in the country will grow.
this all seems good but there are some drawbacks to a mnc having factories in a ledc. the country can get dependent on the work provided by the factory and this means that if the company moves to a dfferant ledc then there will be thousnads of people without a job, also some factories do employ children and provide small wages which means that they might not be following the law withing the country. and somtimes the mnc can exploit an area because they know that in a particular counrty there might not even be another alternative like farming.
so i think that mncs do improve development but only if the factories that they use in the ledcs have good a good working environment and obide by the law.
Alex P :)
MNC's are a multi national corporation, mnc's are good for development in ledc's. they put factories in poor countries and provide jobs for the people.these factories provide a good wage for the worker's and also provide food for them at lunch breaks.by having mnc's in poor countires it will make them more developed. thats why mnc's are good.
ReplyDeletepaige. b
Some globalisation is postive as in poorer counties it helps increase the money they recive. In some LCD it has changed them for the better! :D
ReplyDeleteI think mnc's are a mixture of both good and bad points,
ReplyDeleteMnc's have a lot of power in many countries, and as they are so big it is good when you do find a mnc that is proviiding good working conditions, but there are many mnc's that don't provide and thing for their workers, and force long labour and also employ children, so as you can see The question ' mnc's good or bad' all depends on what company it is and the well fair of their employees, the public around them and the environment.
BECCA FRICKER :D!!!
MNC are a good thing because they give poorer countries the chance to bring more money into the country but they are not fully in control of what the business is doing and if the other country backs out there may be a lot of job losses but overall I think it’s a good idea .
ReplyDeleteSam lear
MNC are a good thing because they bring wealth into the country and the surrounding villagers also they help people get jobs and earn money for their familys furthermore they get more experience for futer jobs so they can go onto a better job like be a manager or a specilised subject
ReplyDeleteThor.b
mncs are good because they bring wealth and more jobs into the country. It makes the country more independent with itself and helps it be more confident with getting money.
ReplyDeleteAshleigh sweet
mnc's are a good thing because they help people get more jobs and bring more money to the country . They can then expand there knowledge and even end up becoming managers . mnc's bring a lot more independence to a country and make the poorer countrys / l.e.d.c's a chance to make there counrty stand out and more up the development chain .
ReplyDeleteGeorgia Elson
In my opinon MNC's although flawed are a necassary part of the world.
ReplyDeleteThey are flawed in many ways like in Primark for instance. They suport sweatshops and child labour, wage slavery, in some cases they can contaminate water supply's and make people homeless but as long as there are people that are less well of they will be taken advantage of even in a single city the rich will make money off of the poor, it is an unstopable part of human nature. I once read a quote that i think sums up man kinds greed nicely "man will do what man can" it is not MNC's that demand people are taken advantage of, is the men that lead them.
MNC's bring a great amount of money into forign and local aconamies, without MNC's poor countries would not go through the stages of development and would not become an MEDC. At the moment we rely on MNC's, if we take them out of the equation it would be decades for the world econamy to get back in order and by them development would have gone down considerably.
The success of MNC's and it's investors are solely down to the investor countries own position and how they help the MNC's to thrive.
ReplyDeleteIn some situations MNC's can bring in high amounts of profit and help the country to develop by funding educational and economic projects however for an MNC to succesfully help the country, the governing parties needs to aid them in areas such as tax and employment, overtaxing an MNC may cause it to have a global shift and eventually having constant high tax may end with the occurance of deindustrialisation in your country.
MNC's provide a lot of jobs and in countries where jobs are a rarity and unemployment rates reach massive highs, however in countries where employment rates are much higher the moving in of MNC's may cause vast immigration and may end in an overpopulated country, too many MNC's in a country is not always a good thing.
MNC's have been known to help the communities of heir residence by aiding social, economic and environmental projects and can massively increase the quality of life in a country by bringing in more money and giving the chance for people to earn money of which they can use to live. Despite this MNC's have also been known to bring disruption into communities with large industrial factories being operatational 24/7, people are complaining about noise pollution and lack of sleep which the factories provide.
MNC's are great at funding environmental projects and helping to keep countries clean, however the pollution their factories cause are huge. Modern factories need electricity to operate and therefore need a power station nearby to give them that power, this causes great pollution. Wastage from factories are also huge with waste products being created in masses, daily. This means that MNC's in fact cause much pollution to the environment and the community.
Multi-national companies are a great way to get leaders to help their country and get innvolved in some of it's projects. MNC's provide funding for the governing parties, so cost is no longer as much of an issue, this means they can get governments who arn't interested in their countries much more helpful in their societies. Despite this some corrupt leaders take the money meant for help to their country and therefore the country dosen't benefit from the MNC and poverty will still exist.
Overall I believe that MNC benfit depends on the location of it's residence. MNC's shouldn't be crowded in one area and shouldn't be placed in countries with corrupt leaders. MNC's with debt shouldn't seek countries with no development due to the fact that the country may become to dependant on that industry, if it becomes bankrupt the country will be in a lot oif trouble. The best place for MNC's to go are developing areas with relevant natural resources available, a caring governing party and a place with not much industry already there. This way not only does your business/company avoid too much competition, bad quality of life and no readily available resources, it also helps the countries which will best benefit from it's help.
Wow Brandon! What an answer. And packed with fantastic keywords.
ReplyDeleteWhat rules should be put in place so that MNCs don't take advantage of the country in which they operate?
Do they help or hinder local businesses in those countries?
Well done guys, thought-provoking stuff.
Miss A
I think that MNC's are both positive and negitive, I think they are postive because they often provide many jobs (with higher pay then what you would get in any other job in the local area) for people in the country that wouldn't have had a job otherwise, they also therefore provide a more substansial living perhaps as the more money the more food supply they may recieve? Also they create whats called the multipler affect where once an MNC is created local business' benifit and follow. This then also helps to create stronger bonds between companies and employees recieve more training and education to higher there workability.
ReplyDeleteHowever i think that MNC's are bad because big companies can influence the goverment to much and this can lead to a huge impact on local people as there views wont be expressed and the goverment will feel more and more relient on the MNC. Also factorys can lead to closure very quickly and factorys can not have the respect for workers from different races and culture within the area. I belive in both aspects of the MNC's and i find that different companies interprate different regilations dependent on their own reputaion for example Nike.
peter w
betmatik
ReplyDeletekralbet
betpark
tipobet
slot siteleri
kibris bahis siteleri
poker siteleri
bonus veren siteler
mobil ödeme bahis
G8BF
dijital kartvizit
ReplyDeletereferans kimliği nedir
binance referans kodu
referans kimliği nedir
bitcoin nasıl alınır
resimli magnet
KF5
ataşehir
ReplyDeleteistanbul
çeşme
uşak
samsun
Q5MOFH