The next logical step is to question the morality of the laws themselves and the morality of the government`s actions to enforce them. If a law wrongly deprives a person of his property or freedom, it is wrong. When the government enforces these laws, it commits unethical aggression against the people. 02. Keeping money that someone has dropped is legal, but again, many would find it unethical. Finally, we should look at the fact that government law enforcement officials regularly engage in behaviours that would land the rest of us in jail. There is no need to rehash stories of police brutality with impunity. These are legion. Abuses by tax collectors and supervisory authorities are less discussed.
That is another area where government ethics need to be cleaned up, although, given the nature of government, I am not sure that is possible. Think of Singapore, where it is illegal to sell chewing gum, not because it is immoral, but to promote public cleanliness. And until recently, it was illegal for women to drive in Saudi Arabia, in part because it was considered religiously immoral. This is in stark contrast to Western customs, where driving is commonplace, and in the United States, it is a rite of passage for all 16-year-olds, including women. Just because something is legal doesn`t make it ethical. You may think it`s obvious, but it`s not, as evidenced by the fact that a former student recently told me that his finance professor specifically told him that if something is legal, it`s ethical. Point. Of course, the student – my student – knew better and told me the story by rolling his eyes. Regulations are strict in any industry that has a direct impact on the environment, but compliance with the law is not always enough to satisfy people in affected areas. Think about it for a moment: would you really want all ethical obligations to be turned into laws? This would mean a large number of new laws, a huge enforcement problem and an extremely intrusive legal system. (Example: Imagine your friend asks, “What do you think of my new boyfriend?” Imagine lying and saying, “He`s awesome!” This lie is probably unethical. But do you think he should break the law? Should you be thrown in jail for that?) […] Tests on them, so maybe they could, legally, but it would still be a PR disaster.
“Legal” does not mean “ethical”. There`s more to running a business than just doing what lawyers say is […] It may be hard to believe that some of these ethically questionable business practices are alive and thriving, when in the eyes of legislators they are also legal and perhaps legitimate. However, if you are aware of these unscrupulous methods, you can avoid them as much as possible. The above examples are just a few cases where, despite the best intentions of regulators, the law does not necessarily provide the most appropriate protection. Examples of ethical standards. Legal and ethical considerations. Legal and ethical requirements. List of unethical behaviour in the workplace. What are the legal and ethical considerations? What does ethics mean? Imagine you`ve worked all your life and given your best years to a company.
However, a few years before you want to retire, the company freezes the pension plan. Then, the year you`re ready to go out, they cancel the plan completely and give you a capital check instead of a lifetime retirement check. The worst? It happens a lot and it`s completely legal. But if the finance professor mentioned above was right, there would be no way to find a moral justification for a new law. Finally, in his opinion, if a behavior is legal (now), then it is ethically acceptable (now). On what basis could new laws ever be passed? Certainly not for ethical reasons, because the hypothesis is that if something is currently legal, it must be ethically correct. What happens if a terrible new toxin is discovered that would pose significant risks to workers or consumers if used by industry? Should it be banned? According to the finance professor, this is not possible. After all, its use is legal, so it must be ethical; And if it`s ethical, you can`t make it illegal. We need you now that Trump uses it as a justification for not parting with himself as a businessman as president. It is extremely dangerous, so he can negotiate with American support, contracts, military, trade for the needs of his business.
He can go even further by using his companies to buy or buy ruling senators and congressmen. He can build his dictatorship. Hal Weitzman: Yes. I mean, it`s similar to what you`ve written over the years, because a lot of what you`ve written about, Bethany, one part is completely illegal and misleading, and another part is pretty gray, right? Even in the case of Enron, it is partly fraud, and others are not as clear. It`s funny when I was a financial journalist when someone said to me, “It`s completely legal,” my ears immediately listened because I knew there was a story there, because it`s a terrible justification. We saw this if you remember the Panama Papers, which were the first – since then we`ve had an even bigger leak, the Pandora Papers, which were oddly enough of a wet squid, maybe because everyone is bored and knows that people are hiding money everywhere – but the Panama Papers were a great success. So let`s argue explicitly and explain why legality does not determine ethics. I`m talking about a single person, almost a one-way LLC, that could be used for a transaction and no longer be in good condition, is not maintained.
You do not pay the annual fee. There are many, many, all these motivations are right, and they match the motivation, but it does not require much imagination. Since it is a very efficient system, it does not take much imagination to see that it can be used, these corporate structures can be used for nefarious purposes. And, of course, they have all the legal protection of the United States. The ultimate refutation lies in the hidden circularity of the finance professor`s argument, which we can illuminate by reflecting on the process by which something is made illegal. You are right about some things and you are wrong about others. Why choose what is considered bad instead of what is legal? There is also not enough logic. Morality is about desirability, not what is considered bad.
You can`t just pick the majority because there are too many different ideas about ethics. If people thought it was okay to kill or steal, would that be fair? Let`s say when the majority voted for people to murder or something because they were bored, because it was a psychopathic society? No, it would always be wrong, because it`s worse for that person. It`s worse to die than to be bored, so the psychopath can do without it. They are simply selfish, even if they are the majority. The majority can be selfish. Because everyone is important and everyone counts. Interracial marriages were considered bad, and it`s not immoral. Would you consider that immoral? What is your reasoning? Why do you think it is the majority? Just not thinking about it? Labour practices are often a hot topic from an ethical perspective, and labour laws tend to lag behind public opinion, leaving companies free to adopt legal practices that their clients and employees perceive as unethical. The payment of minimum wage to full-time employees is just one example. Although minimum wage is legal in an arbitrary employment contract, those working for minimum wage often cannot manage their daily expenses, leaving them in debt and bitter towards their employers.
Another common example is legal cooperation with foreign suppliers whose working practices do not meet the ethical expectations of local clients. “The language used by participants in my book was `legal but morally reprehensible,`” said Kimberly Kay Hoang, associate professor in the Department of Sociology and College and director of the Global Studies Program. She is also the author of the forthcoming book Spiderweb Capitalism: How Global Elites Exploit Frontier Markets (2022). Norman, in a way, you are making an even stronger point. As I understand it, Chris pointed out that when we learn new things about toxins, drugs and the like, we should also apply the new knowledge to legislation.