Chomsky vs. Friedman

Chompsky focuses more on the fact that positive effects of Globalization only get to the wealthy population. He talks a lot about the negative effects of Globalization and how the poor don't really get a say in what they need, whereas the rich do. He talks about how the richer population are listened to more and influence what happens, and the poor don't benefit anything out of it.

Friedman talks about his three era's of Globalization and talks about how the world has changed because of it. He describes the three era's and how each of them have impacted the world. He states that we have "gone from a Globalization built around countries, to one built around companies, to one built around individuals."

I agree with Friedman because his eras of Globalization are pretty clear and accurate. Chomsky gives valid points as well, talking about how the poor get less say in things. Friedman's point about what Globalization is built around really made me think about what the world is like right now, and I agree with his statement.