The Root of All Evil?
Mar 29, 2009Money makes the world go around. But what sort of thing is money? Bits of paper and metal?
Does our system of credit and money make upward social mobility possible for anyone willing to work hard? Or is it just a big Ponzi scheme? Are corporations the essential structures necessary to harness the capital, energy, intelligence, and leadership on a scale large enough to make and market the inventions that define modern life? Or are they just devices for evading responsibility and rewarding greed? Ken and John put these questions and more to Neil Malhotra from the Stanford Graduate School of Business, in a program recorded in front of a live audience at the Classic Residence by Hyatt in Palo Alto, California.
What do money and morality have to do with each other? What are the ethics of business? What obligations do corporations have to society as a whole? Was the recent financial meltdown a result of immoral behavior? In this edition of Philosophy Talk, John and Ken delve into these questions with the help of a live audience and guest Neil Malhotra, Assistant Professor of Political Economy at the Stanford Graduate School of Business.
The show begins with a discussion of corporations as moral agents. Should corporations be treated as people, as full moral agents held responsible for their actions? John argues that corporations are not people but rather devices to insulate people from the effects of their own decisions. Ken, in the spirit of Locke, argues that people are defined as intelligent beings, capable of reason and reflection, with the ability of self recognition at different times and places. Thus, he argues, it is metaphysically bizarre to call corporations people. John agrees, but shifts the conversation from metaphysics to morals, questioning whether corporations should be responsible to just their shareholders or to the entire community.
Professor Neil Malhotra joins the discussion concerning moral and economic incentives for corporations, grounded in the case of the subprime mortgage crisis. Under law, corporations are beholden only to their shareholders, instead of the larger pool of stakeholders, such as consumers, taxpayers, and third parties. The shareholder model, Malhotra says, encourages short-term thinking, as the price of a stock share is reported every quarter. Other countries, notably those with stronger traditions of family owned businesses, have adopted the stakeholder model.
The show concludes with a comparison of the European and American economic systems, noting the tradeoff between social welfare and social goods. While the European economy would seem to stand on higher moral ground by providing social services, the U.S. economy is much more dynamic, with more growth and innovation. John poses the questions, what if a firm decided to operate on a purely moral basis? Would profits noticeably differ? How can a corporation balance moral and economic incentives, so its actions have the most benefit and the least harm?
Comments (2)
DimaRosins
Monday, November 18, 2024 -- 11:49 AM
The system of credit andThe system of credit and money certainly opens up opportunities for advancement, but not always for everyone. If you are willing to work hard, a loan can help you start a business or improve your living conditions. However, there are many factors: credit history, income level, economic situation. The most important is financial literacy and the ability to manage money. But unfortunately, not everyone has equal access to these opportunities, which makes advancement more difficult for some. In this case, many people turn to radiant credit union customer service to get detailed advice on investments or the correct distribution of their finances.
AndrewGreen
Sunday, November 24, 2024 -- 5:23 PM
The relationship betweenThe relationship between money and morality becomes complex when dealing with independent bookies. While they offer a more personal and flexible gambling experience, questions of ethical responsibility often arise. Independent bookies operate in a space where regulations may be less stringent, potentially enabling unfair practices or exploitation of vulnerable individuals.
From a moral perspective, bookies have a responsibility to promote responsible gambling and discourage addictive behaviors. However, the drive for profit can sometimes overshadow ethical considerations, leading to practices that prioritize revenue over the well-being of bettors.
Ultimately, the balance between money and morality for independent bookies depends on their commitment to fairness, transparency, and the broader social impact of their operations, ensuring financial success doesn’t come at the cost of ethical integrity.