Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Justification for morality
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Justification for morality
Panta Anjila 12215143 Assignment 6-2 Opinion paper on “Is Price Gouging Morally Wrong “ Price gouging cannot be said morally wrong only by evaluating few situations .All of the vendors involved in the distribution of goods and services at the time of disaster do not intend to maximize their profit. Some of them sell goods in the time of crisis with good intention as well .Therefore, it is not justifiable to judge entire vendors morally wrong .The concept of getting profit is slowly and gradually fading out and people have started to help the victims in the crisis situation .For instance Tim Cole a “private sector liaison” assisted for the recovery of Texas and played very important role in recovery by feeding, hydrating the victimized people …show more content…
Several methods of distributing goods and services like triage, zero price rise and the auction etc. ensures distributive system such that making the goods and services available to the people who need it the most .It is not possible to distribute goods and services equally as the preferences and the basic needs varies from person to person. For instance , through triage method when the medicinal goods are distributed it is provided only to the people who need it the most and it is not available for those who least need it .It goes similar with that of auction and zero price system but varies in slight different way .As in the auction system of distribution the rich people who pay much gets benefited while in the Zero price system the one who comes first gets first such that if poor people come first then they will also be provided with the basic necessities .Therefore, in such a case one cannot say that poor people are not getting benefits in case of price gouging as somehow they are able to meet up with their basic needs directly or indirectly. Although, it is still not justified as equality in distribution, however, it ensures to help them meet up with their basic needs after the disaster
...t be in business very long. But, for instance, what if RGIS was offered the chance to perform one “test” inventory for a company that had many stores and the inventory went extremely well because of the customer service levels provided? RGIS would have the opportunity to service this customer’s other stores not because of the data, but because of the service they received. This human factor played huge role in garnering business for the RGIS and yet their employees have no chance in earning any more compensation than they would have for simply putting data into a machine. Let’s look at other ethics principles and see where an example like the one above would fit in.
and the companies’ profits. I don’t understand how a person can be so malicious and
After the Bhopal Disaster, Union Carbide made an ethical decision through their legal strategy to secure the best outcome for themselves and to keep their company from going bankrupt multiple times over. Union Carbide used the corruption of the Indian court system to their advantage to minimize the amount they would pay in damages to the victims. Their strategy wouldn’t be considered moral to the victims of this chemical explosion if the trial were kept in the American court system. What is ethical isn’t always considered moral to all the parties involved. With a company facing bankruptcy and losing everything they had, the only ethical decision was to use the court systems to their advantage. By doing so, they made the ethical decision strictly
The prices of products and services play a major role in determining how well they are going to sell. Ethical pricing strategies are adopted by the producers to earn profits without defrauding their consumers or competitors. Despite that, competitor's prices, availability, convenience and other factors tend to affect consumers’ impressions of fair prices. There are certain business laws, which protect consumers as well as competitors from the unethical pricing strategies that unscrupulous marketers attempt or wish to attempt. The businesses operating in today's competitive environment usually get tempted to try unethical pricing strategies to increase their profits as well as market share. But the companies with self-interest
When an environmental disaster occurs, like massive ocean oil leaks, it should be considered if the company and government employees responsible of taking the decisions acted correctly and therefore, the disaster could not have been avoided. “The Deepwater Horizon disaster is [has been] confirmed as the biggest ever accidental release of oil into the oceans” (Black, 2010, para. 1). This issue has been controversial and much disputed among the last few years; however, there has not been much discussion about the ethical values and behavior of the company. The Government should take action against BP and its executives because the company is acting unethically trying to evade its responsibilities and the consequences of the disaster. It is illicit to make as much money as one can in a business without a care for the environment. Moreover, BP has not accomplished the ethical values that has announced and its Chief executive has been acting unethically-
So, even though they were losing money on certain sales, they were still making a profit. This is where these sales people actually make their money. In my opinion, sales isn’t an ethical business. The point in sales is to sell as much as you can to your customers. Most sales people work for commission, which means they need to make many sales.
In conclusion, one could suppose that the major problem is the human imperfection of greed. These particular examples show that self-interest was perused in business, but not goodwill. The executives of these companies performed unethical behavior that deliberately harmed consumers. I believe the legal system should take into consideration deliberate ethics violations based on the Kantian model suggested previously. There are many more examples, including the KeySpan Energy Corporation, in which companies violate ethics, but the United States does not currently have exact laws to punish that behavior.
In this article about so called “price gouging”, Paul Stossel argues that increasing/“gouging” prices during an emergency actually is beneficial to proper market functioning. The main argument Stossel makes opposes that of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who set severe punishments for those guilty of price gouging. Stossel examines why this is illogical, backing his thesis with evidence including supply and demand, black markets, and more. Firstly, the punishments for increased prices on essential goods seen in Texas during the threat of Hurricane Harvey displayed a lack of understanding in economics, specifically supply and demand.
Stores during natural disasters have to raise the price of goods, so they can keep supplies coming in for the people who need it. But when stores get their prices way up there it sometimes gets hard for people with less money to buy the necessities. Some people have good reasons to charge the crazy prices that are of price gouging. For starters, they could only have enough to get them by, and so they decided that they would buy something that someone needed and take it to the people for more money than they paid for it. It’s one thing to price gouge because you actually need the money, but it is a complete other to price gouge just because you want some extra money.
Customers are the life blood of a company, without someone buying the product, a company won’t survive. As such, customers exhibit pressure on the company to have the lowest prices and the highest quality. Management must seek a delicate balance between what it takes to produce the products, what they charge for their products, while also monitoring what is being charged by their competition and meeting profitability goals set forth by owners or shareholders. Having high ethical standards in regards to customers fosters trust, satisfaction, and adds value to the product being sold.
Predatory pricing “is alleged to occur when a firm sets a price for its product that is below some measure of cost and forfeits revenues in the short run to put competitors out of business” (Sheffet p.163-164). The reason firms take the short term loss is because they hope to drive out competitors and raise prices to monopolistic levels. By doing this, they covered their short term loss to make even greater profits in the long term than they would have by not using predatory tactics (Sheffert). Predatory pricing became illegal under Section 2 of the Sherman Act. It has remained one of the more difficult allegations for prosecutors to prove, due to the complexity of determining the company’s actual intent and whether or not it the strategy is competitive pricing. According to Areeda and Turner, there are three ways to determine if a firm is implementing predatory pricing. First, a price above marginal cost is presumed lawful; second, a price below marginal cost is considered unlawful, except when there is strong demand; and third, average variable cost is considered a good proxy for marginal cost. This is a reason predatory pricing is still important today. The courts must decide whether or not companies are engaging in competitive prices for the good of the consumers or are using predatory tactics for the good of their own company. The purpose of this paper is to focus on the current legislation regarding predatory pricing, determining when there is predation in an industry and the cause and effect relationship it has on an industry.
Ethical and illegal corporate misconduct is nothing new and the same issues surrounded Solyndra, the California based solar panel manufacturer in 2011. The legal, ethical, ramifications will be researched in detail through specific laws, general legal concepts, Milton Friedman’s philosophy, and Consequentialist framework. While DOE's main interest with the loan program was pushing nuclear power technology and improvements to the electricity grid the creditors did not evaluate the ethics of lending money, and debtors should not evaluate the ethics of filing bankruptcy. It is a business decision, white house ignored own experts warnings Solyndra rushed approval was for previously scheduled press event the DOE failed to monitor Solyndra’s financial
...ollow them either. It is clear that there are many ethical violations and if a company were to act in a manner that this today they would strongly be looked down upon.
In most countries such as in Texas, the government has termed price gouging as illegal, and the office of the attorney general has the power to act against anyone engaging in the action after the government has declared a disaster (Paxton). The law, for instance, states that after the governor declares a disaster, anyone who performs a misleading or dishonest act to take advantage of the situation, by selling or leasing medicine, food fuel or any other necessity at a price higher than the market value shall be prosecuted. The purpose of this discussion is to explore the philosophical matters regarding price gouging and to show that the act is not immoral and should not be condemned. The argument will be done by rebutting the held beliefs of the ethics of price
The term “Marketing ethics” has been defined as how moral standards of right and fair practices are implemented into organization and strategy (Murphy et al., 2005). In fact, marketing and ethics are usually seemed as a contradiction, because the purpose of marketing is monetary-oriented. The ultimate goal for business is making profit or generating sales, while ethics is moral and societal, such as contributing to the society. Introcaso et al (1998) quotes Michael Novak’s (1998) words that business might fail in the short term if introducing ethical model in competition, because high moral standards increase costs. Consequently, numerous companies launch misleading advertising, manufacture unsafe products, exploit labour right and waste natural resource for self-interest. They have indirectly deceived vulnerable consumers and sacrificed minority group.