Description: PART 1. Capitalism and the Corporation ISSUE 1. The Classic Dialogue: Is Capitalism the Best Route to Human Happiness? YES: Adam Smith, from An Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, vols. 1 and 2 (1869) NO: Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, from The Communist Manifesto (1848) Free-market economist Adam Smith (17231790) states that if self-interested people are left alone to seek their own economic advantage, the result, unintended by any one of them, will be greater advantage for all. He maintains that government interference is not necessary to protect the general welfare. German philosopher Karl Marx (18181883) and German sociologist Friedrich Engels (18201895) argue that if people are left to their own self-interested devices, those who own the means of production will rapidly reduce everyone else to virtual slaves. Although the few may be fabulously happy, all others would live in misery. ISSUE 2. Can Individual Virtue Survive Corporate Pressure? YES: Robert C. Solomon, from "Victims of Circumstances? A Defense of Virtue Ethics in Business," Business Ethics Quarterly (January 2003) NO: Gilbert Harman, from "No Character or Personality," Business Ethics Quarterly (January 2003) Joining the long-standing debate on the possibility of free choice and moral agency in the business world, Quincy Lee Centennial Professor of Business and Philosophy at the University of Texas in Austin Robert C. Solomon argues that whatever the structures, the individual's choice is free, and therefore his character or virtue is of the utmost importance in creating a good moral tone in the life of a business. Stuart Professor of Philosophy at Princeton University Gilbert Harman employs determinist arguments to conclude that no individual can of his own free choice make a difference in a group enterprise. ISSUE 3. Can Restructuring a Corporation's Rules Make a Moral Difference? YES: Josef Wieland, from "The Ethics of Governance," Business Ethics Quarterly (January 2001) NO: Ian Maitland, from "Distributive Justice in Firms: Do the Rules of Corporate Governance Matter?" Business Ethics Quarterly (January 2001) Josef Wieland, director of the German Business Ethics Network's Centre for Business Ethics, argues that moral issues can be attributed toorganizations (as well as to individual persons). After developing a concept of governance ethics for corporations, he asserts that the incorporationof moral conditions and requirements in the structures of the firm is the precondition for lasting beneficial effects of the virtues of theindividuals within it. Wieland concludes that one can only be a moral person at work when the workplace, too, is moral. Ian Maitland, professor of business, government, and society at the University of Minnesota's Carlson School of Management, counters thatchanging the rules will only succeed in impairing the corporation's efficiency. ISSUE 4. Should Corporations Adopt Policies of Corporate Social Responsibility? YES: Robert D. Hay and Edmund R. Gray, from "Introduction to Social Responsibility," in David Keller, man. ed., Ethics and Values: Basic Readings in Theory and Practice (Pearson Custom Publishing, 2002) NO: Milton Friedman, from "The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits," in Thomas Donaldson and Patricia H. Werhane, eds., Ethical Issues in Business: A Philosophical Approach, 4th ed. (Prentice Hall, 1993) Robert D. Hay, professor of management at the University of Arkansas, and Edmund R. Gray, professor and chair of the Department of Management at Loyola Marymount University, argue that in the long run, businesses will only be successful if they are directed to the needs of the society. If they choose to ignore that advice, government regulation is likely to fill the gap between business operations and the welfare of the people the government is sworn to protect. In this classic defense of laissez-faire, Paul Snowden Russell Distinguished Service Professor Emeritus of Economics at the University of Chicago Milton Friedman states that businesses have neither the right, in law or morals, nor the ability to meddle with "social responsibility." Customers, employees, and the general public, he concludes, are best served when the company simply does its job with maximum efficiency. PART 2. Current Issues in Business ISSUE 5. Are Pharmaceutical Firms Obliged to Cut Their Prices for Poor AIDS Victims? YES: Debra Watson, from "U.S. Pharmaceutical Companies Reap Huge Profits From AIDS Drugs," World Socialist Web Site, (June 5, 1999) NO: Robert Goldberg, from "Wrong Prescription: Don't Rush to Embrace the Bush AIDS Plan," National Review Online, (February 7, 2003) Writer Debra Watson argues that the greed of AIDS profiteers is killing impoverished people with AIDS all over the world-including in the United States. She concludes that only drastic price reductions will make necessary drugs available to the victims. Senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute Robert Goldberg doubts that reducing pharmaceutical prices will make much of a difference to AIDS sufferers, since the education and health infrastructures remain inadequate to reach and teach the victims. ISSUE 6. Should Casino Gambling Be Prohibited? YES: William A. Galston and David Wasserman, from "Gambling Away Our Moral Capital," The Public Interest (Spring 1996) NO: William R. Eadington, from "The Proliferation of Commercial Gaming in America," The Sovereign Citizen (Fall 1994) Political theorist William A. Galston and research scholar David Wasserman argue that there are significant moral objections to widespreadcasino gambling: gambling is deleterious to family and social life, and gambling losses fall on the most vulnerable members of society. Worse,legalizing gambling masks the need for adequate taxing to meet social responsibilities. Professor of economics William R. Eadington counters that gambling is a normal extension of commercial activity and it can safely promotethe welfare of the host areas. He is less concerned about the reported downside of the gaming enterprise. ISSUE 7. Should Prudent Managers Avoid Purchasing Derivative Instruments? YES: Frank Partnoy, from F.I.A.S.C.O.: The Inside Story of a Wall Street Trader (Penguin Books, 1999) NO: Merton H. Miller, from Merton H. Miller on Derivatives (John Wiley & Sons, 1997) Frank Partnoy, former trader and salesman at Morgan Stanley, makes a case that the financial instruments known as "derivatives" arewildly risky and generally good only for making large commissions for the salesmen who push them on unwary insurance companies and pensionfunds. Merton H. Miller, a Nobel Prizewinning economist, contends that derivatives allow financial players to hedge their bets moreefficiently, and in doing so they make the world a safer place. ISSUE 8. Does the Enron Collapse Show That We Need More Regulation of the Energy Industry? YES: Richard Rosen, from "Regulating Power: An Idea Whose Time Is Back," The American Prospect (March 25, 2002) NO: Christopher L. Culp and Steve H. Hanke, from "Empire of the Sun: An Economic Interpretation of Enron's Energy Business," Policy Analysis (February 20, 2003)

Please Wait