There is little difference in the shops now operating in various nations. Some people think this is positive development,while other believe it is negative. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Many people believe that increasing ubiquity in terms of the selection of products in shops is a positive trend. In my opinion, this is a advantageous for convenience, however its wider implications make it a negative overall. On the positive side, this development guarantees a consistent customer experience. An individual who is traveling abroad, for example, can go into most major convenience stores and find the same basic necessities they would expect in their home country. The products themselves are also more consistent. Since they are manufactured and distributed globally, food products have the same safety standards and tastes and household items are similarly likely to be safe and effective. In contrast, a shop with completely different products, many of which may have been produced locally, complicates the decision-making process for shoppers. Nonetheless, there is also the risk that corporations will become powerful monopolies. The first implication of this would be that many local shops are likely to go out of business. The local owners of such shops will then be forced to find less desirable work. Replicated globally, this means that profits that were previously directed towards millions of local shop owners are now being funneled to a select number of companies and their shareholders. As these companies become larger and more powerful, it is easier for them to enter new markets, lower prices to dominate the competition, and then establish an unhealthy monopoly. In conclusion, despite the wide range of consistent options available for consumers, the rise of corporate power is damaging generally. It is therefore important for individual nations to curb this trend when possible.