Date: October 19, 2010
Export Capital for Production Abroad
The export of goods and services is a common business which takes place all over the world, and at the same time it raises many ethical and moral issues. Exporting capital for production abroad raises many ethical issues and moral dilemma that would dictate whether limitations or constraints should be placed on this freedom business. In answering the question on should any constrains be placed on the freedom to export capital for production abroad, I personally will answer that there should not be. As an example I would take the case of an individual or corporation exporting capital for the purpose of increasing return on investment by seeking lower labor cost abroad or other beneficial skills. Based on utilitarian theory, there would be no ethical objection to capital export. Based on what we have studied on the book utilitarianism is the idea that the moral worth of an action is determined by the total outcome it produces in the society or in the business environment it is applied. It is also seen as a theory that produces the greatest overall utility for everyone that is directly or indirectly affected by the action. In the case of capital export for production abroad the greatest degree of happiness would be gained by a cheaper product, resulting in more sales and a more beneficial company as well as more jobs available for workers in the production country which would meet utilitarian criteria. But the other side of the coin of this discussion is that there would also be unhappiness for the people who lose their jobs in the home country. The capital export would develop new trading partners, and will increase a country’s standing in the world’s economy. And I can say that these two considerations are in the best interest of the receiving country, which would fall under egoism theory. As a conclusion I can say that the greater degree of happiness would be achieved by the whole society, as the unrestricted flow of investments would increase the overall economy for both countries.
Export Commodities which have been banned from Sales in the US I think that this topic should be analyzed based on different case studies. Just because a commodity has been banned in the US does not mean that it is necessarily unsafe, and on the other hand because the product is approved for use in the US does not mean that it is safe. Let’s take in consideration the use of tobacco, everyone knows that its use will damage our health and in the long term it can also kill people. Tobacco is legal in US, and also tobacco industry is trying to create new tobacco laws that favor their business without considering the health of people. My point is that each country should make its own decision based on what products best serve their interest. In the tobacco example the utilitarian would probably feel that the export of American cigarettes would bring the most total happiness because cigarette manufacturers would benefit from international trade as would American economy as a whole. In the same way international consumers would benefit from the higher quality of cigarettes and also they will have more tobacco products available to choose. So, in this case the export of cigarettes would bring more happiness as compared to the unhappiness that the health effects would bring. So, act utilitarian would be in favor of exporting this product, while rule utilitarian would consider the export of cigarettes as a wrong action. Rule Utilitarianism considers the law and the moral codes as being the only one to promote the greatest happiness and pleasure to people. They would take in consideration the effects of the society as a whole and the health risk tobacco has. For them, based on the rules, tobacco could actually hurt more people than they help. I believe that this type of argument could be made for all other products...