August 15, 2011 at 11:15 am
I've been on the other side of the donation picture too. Some of my friends will not take a donation from Wal-Mart for example. They don't want to put "Our goody-goody project partially funded by Wal-Mart" at the bottom of their flyer. It promotes their image and uses what they consider ill gotten gains.
I usually say to take the cash. I'll let others decide about their image, and I hope that bringing their company into contact with my project will have some long term effect on their ethics.
Or I'm just serving up Jell-O.
August 15, 2011 at 11:25 am
WolforthJ (8/15/2011)
I usually say to take the cash. I'll let others decide about their image, and I hope that bringing their company into contact with my project will have some long term effect on their ethics.Or I'm just serving up Jell-O.
I agree that in most cases, take the cash, but within limits. At my core, I'm a Capitalist, but I do have a conscience. There are organizations that I simply will not accept work from, and as a Director of Operations for a security technology company, I turned away business from certain sectors of the market strictly because I didn't like what our tech would be used for, and I was able to make my stand against the board of directors when questioned on it. My position was that we were not being "good corporate world citizens" if we made the sale.
And yes, that is my Moral Jell-o. We all serve it, just some of us are unwilling to accept the character flaw in ourselves.
August 15, 2011 at 11:42 am
Evil or error or lack of ethics is never ultimately justified because of the popularity of the action.
The absolute end of a true capitalist is totality, likewise, that is the same end of a communist. They just use different means to get there.
August 15, 2011 at 11:44 am
stephenb 73226 (8/15/2011)
The absolute end of a true capitalist is totality, likewise, that is the same end of a communist. They just use different means to get there.
Brilliant.
August 15, 2011 at 12:31 pm
SanDroid (8/15/2011)
jgoeson (8/15/2011)
Are you working for an oil company, but you're an Obama voter? Compromise.How is this a compromise or contradiction when the Oil and Gas companies (aka: Energy Lobbists) helped elect Obama?
People tend to ignore facts when it comes to politics. Personally I believe both republicans and democrats are lying cheats and should ALL be removed from office. So when I say the current president is one of the most dishonest people I have ever had the unfortunate experience of listening to, don't assume there are not republicans that I feel are just as bad. He is the current so-called-leader however.
Doesn't like drilling for oil, it is bad for the environment, so he stops ALL OFF SHORE drilling in the US while he gives $3 BILLION dollars to Brazil, an oil rich nation, and then asks them to increase off shore drilling to sell to us.
Talk about unethical!
Hopefully nobody who visits SQLServerCentral is a politician. That would destroy what this site has to offer! 🙂
Dave
August 15, 2011 at 12:36 pm
jgoeson (8/15/2011)
stephenb 73226 (8/15/2011)
The absolute end of a true capitalist is totality, likewise, that is the same end of a communist. They just use different means to get there.Brilliant.
It might be if it was accurate.
Communism and Socialism are for the people, not the communists or socialists.
Capitalism (which by the way is NOT a political term at all) works by individuals striving to improve their own lot in life by working hard.
Communists and Socialists believe they are not held to the standards they hold everyone else to, and believe nobody but they should have wealth of any kind, and everyone else should work hard for nothing more than "I told you to".
Dave
August 15, 2011 at 1:08 pm
djackson 22568 (8/15/2011)
Capitalism (which by the way is NOT a political term at all) works by individuals striving to improve their own lot in life by working hard.
dictionary.comcap·i·tal·ism /'kæp?tl??z?m/ [kap-i-tl-iz-uhm] an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.
I'm not going to argue about which is better, or what the ethics of those private corporations are BUT, I don't see anything in this defintion about hard work. If you remember the horse in Animal Farm, he thought hard work was the right thing to do for the communist system too.
August 15, 2011 at 3:06 pm
djackson 22568 (8/15/2011)
Communism and Socialism are for the people, not the communists or socialists.
In their purest forms, maybe you're right, but neither Communism nor Socialism can prosper because of the Human element. Humans are flawed, petty, greedy little liars. In the purest version of Communism, where every hippie gives "...From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs..." (as Marx fantasized it), at some point, one of those hippies is going to evolve into a leader, cut his hair or take down her braids, shave, take a shower, put on some deodorant, shoes, and a tie, and take command. Why? Because his or her ability is leadership and her or his need is power. The leader will cloak himself or herself in the mantle of "helping us all become more efficient so we can live better", and at first, (s)he may fully believe that (s)he is doing what is best, but eventually, the Leader will like being in charge, and will surround himself or herself with militant, like-minded yes-folk.
On Human-populated Earth, Communism and Socialism can not exist "for the people" because people are inherently flawed.
(Apologies to any hippies that I may have offended; please don't hurl your sandals or whole-grain loaves at me... I was using you as an example, not a stereotype.)
August 15, 2011 at 3:55 pm
The same thing happens with Capitalism, but we admit it 🙂
-- Stephen Cook
August 15, 2011 at 4:41 pm
Stephen E. Cook (8/15/2011)
The same thing happens with Capitalism, but we admit it 🙂
Did you mean we "don't" admit it?
I think that's the case. At it's highest level, capitalism encourages a lot of monopolies, which cease to be the most efficient, but do not get brought down because of their tremendous market power.
August 15, 2011 at 4:43 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (8/15/2011)
Stephen E. Cook (8/15/2011)
The same thing happens with Capitalism, but we admit it 🙂Did you mean we "don't" admit it?
I think that's the case. At it's highest level, capitalism encourages a lot of monopolies, which cease to be the most efficient, but do not get brought down because of their tremendous market power.
Nope, Stephen's statement was accurate.
Regarding monopolies not being brought down because of their market power, do you remember a little issue between USA v. AT&T in the mid-1980's?
And let's discuss the abuse of monopolies: US Postal Service, Amtrak, ObamaCare. Between these 3 and AT&T, which one is still operating in the black, and of those, which one operates on Capitalism instead of Communism?
August 16, 2011 at 7:28 am
But what if the question wasn't "make a million ethically or some-way-higher-amount unethically", but instead was what if you could make a way-higher-amount unethically -or- be ethical but you end up losing your business, losing your house/wife/family? No decision is made knowing for sure what the outcome is going to be, so this is kind of a 20-20 hindsight type of question, but knowing the result could be utter failure, would you still make the ethical choice? Bernie Madoff (along with a cast of thousands) made the same kind of decision, and I would bet that he didn't think he'd get caught.
August 16, 2011 at 12:55 pm
ACinKC (8/16/2011)
-or- be ethical but you end up losing your business, losing your house/wife/family?
Wait, so if I'm ethical and all that bad stuff happens, but if I'm unethical, I get to keep my house and family and good life?
Screw karma, I want my wife and family. Easy decision, no regrets.
August 16, 2011 at 1:10 pm
ACinKC (8/16/2011)
. . . Bernie Madoff (along with a cast of thousands) made the same kind of decision, and I would bet that he didn't think he'd get caught.
Note that only less than $10B of Bernie Madoff's money has been recovered. He maintained a (very relatively) modest lifestyle. Where is the rest of the money? Not in his pockets, and he is not talking.
I think that he is convinced he served a higher, ethical purpose and getting caught and spending the rest of his life behind bars makes him feel ethically superior.
Welcome to post-modern ethics with its moral relativism.
August 16, 2011 at 1:56 pm
Heard an interesting story on the radio on the way to work this morning that relates to this discussion. It seems a family bought a raffle ticket for one of their twin boys to attempt to make an 89ft shot into a 3.5 inch goal at a hockey game. The ticket was called, but the son whose name they had entered wasn't in the arena. They sent the other son instead and he made the shot, winning $50,000. The next day they contacted the organizers to let them know that the boy who made the shot was NOT the one whose name was on the ticket. As of this morning there was not a resolution on whether or not they would get the money.
While they could have admitted the substitution at the event because they had to fill out paperwork verifying the identity of the winner, they still did the ethical thing, IMO, by admitting the change the next day.
Here's the story, http://www.canada.com/sports/hockey+goal+jeopardy+over+twin+switcheroo/5258051/story.html
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 47 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply