Comment on Discussion 3

The majority of you seem to be sympathetic to Gillespie’s view of the poker analogy. It seems that there really is more at stake in business than there is in a poker game. Businesses that “play the game” seem to miss the fact that their actions have much broader consequences than those of the bottom line. For example, the recent 60 Minutes program notes how many U.S. companies incorporate in other countries in order to pay as little as 5% in U.S. taxes. While the practice is not illegal, it has the consequence of denying the U.S. government much needed tax revenues for things such as the military that keeps these companies safe; interstate highways that allow many companies to transport their goods; police and fire protection that keep companies safe; an education system that subsidizes the true cost of training new workers, and a welfare program that bears the brunt of corporate decisions to outsource and off-shore production. As I mentioned earlier in the course, the fact that something is not illegal in no way entails that it is moral. While we can always point out how things are in fact done, we can also ask the further question as to whether that is the way they _ought_ to be done.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: