Morality and Economics are Closely Related Essay example

Smith believed that self, self-interest, and self-determination, all were mechanisms where individuals are motivated to gain wealth and power for individual gain and group gain. Smith believed that ‘self' is a matrix of reason and passion (Levine, 1998). Furthermore, Smith believed that sympathy leads to empathy, and our individual self-determination leads to accumulation of wealth that benefits others as well as us (Levine, 1998). Examples of this concept are evident in our current economic society today. We see Bill Gates and Microsoft providing technology to communicate more efficiently, Henry Ford's posterity changing the transportation market, and many others who impact man with their accumulation of wealth.

“In the state of nature, Profit is the measure of Right”(Hobbes). This quote is talking about the nature people, and how they measure if something is “right” based on how profitable it is for them. As Thomas Hobbes did, I believe that people are generally selfish and will only try to benefit themselves as shown in the article “The Dying Girl No One Helped” where a girl was stabbed and no one helped her even though people saw her dying.

Today in America, income and wealth inequality has continued to grow at an unsettling pace. The rich continue to get richer, while the number of people categorized as lower class grows exponentially. As Joseph Stiglitz has explained, many theories that are seen as strongly Republican, such as the trickle-down effect, has caused the rich to take money from the poor, and as a result the lower class grows and the middle class disintegrates. The top 1 percent of America’s households currently holds 30 percent of America’s economy, which is much more than other first-world countries and helps to emphasize the extremity of inequality currently in America today. This increased inequality has in turn caused America to become a much more divided society; those born in poverty typically stay in poverty, with little to no chance of self-improvement due to a lack of education provided in their areas. In contrast, those that are born wealthy typically go to better schools, have better health care, and are all but spoon fed information on how to remain wealthy. These two sides of society almost never cross, and this causes the country to be more divided than ever. In order to limit this inequality, drastic changes must be made, such as large corporations paying their fair share of taxes and giving back to the lower class, and minimum wage should be raised. If everyone in America works together, we can raise social mobility and re-unite what has become an increasingly divided country.

Conversely, by looking at it from the perspective that morals should not be the basis of decision making, you can see that if we don’t use them, then many people can get hurt as a result. If people make choices without thinking of the consequences or about what is important to them and the people around them, the wrong choice may be made. While morals shouldn’t be the only thing considered, they must be taken into account to ensure the right things are being done. If we only base our actions on morals, then some very important past discoveries may not have been made. If people only consider morals than not only will decisions be biased as each person has different morals, but many things in history may not have been accomplished. For example, the nuclear bomb may not have been invented or people might

Wealth in the United States is generally thought to be distributed fairly as the highest earners have a higher percentage of wealth. Although this common notion is technically correct, the wealth is not spread as fairly as people might believe. The United States uses a free market, capitalistic economy, which entails wealth inequality. However, the amount of wealth inequality depends on how the government limits the wealthy. Interestingly enough, the government does not have regulations to distribute the wealth more fairly as the top 1% of earners in the United States own about 40% of the financial wealth in the country and the bottom 80% of earners own a measly 4.7%. Astonishingly, the financial wealth for the top 20% increased from 1983 to 2010 meaning the wealth became more concentrated at the higher socioeconomic tiers as time passed. These economic inequalities benefited the wealthy as they gained political powers, controlled a large portion of the economic market, and used capitalism to manipulate the public’s perspective of the wealth distribution in the United States. While wealth inequality is a result of capitalism, extremely wealthy people use their wealth to exercise political power,but the average person does not understand that this is a corrupt method of crippling the economy in favor of the ultra wealthy.

Smith states that self-interest is the most essential component for encouraging general good for both the individual and the

Morality is defined as a system or code that we humans use to differentiate between right and wrong. This system could be derived from a number of factors: religion, culture, and upbringing. It is difficult enough to determine what an individual's morals are, but going further to determine how we came to possess those morals is even more ambitious. Still, regardless of its difficulty, this subject consumes many philosophers and psychologists. One such moral psychologists, Jonathan Haidt, is theorizing the possibility of evolution causing ones morality. Haidt is a moral psychologist at the Universtiy of Virgina further believes that complex social structures such as religion and politics as well as our need for social structures affect

/ Importance of ethics is also reflected in the performance of producing in different economies, such as Japan, code of honer and rule based behaviour has led to the creation of a efficient economy. / In summary, there are two ways in which good business behaviour can make economic sense:1.Improvement in society as a reward in itself. 2.Good behaviour can result in better performance, leading to more profit.

Economic way of looking at life helps individuals to know moral pathways and how to be ethical in economics. In chapter 7, social issues that are discussed, as labor supply in which you find household production, the family, and the life cycle can be well analyzed using economic way of looking at life. In making household decisions, certain factors have to be in mind, such as the economy, time, income and individuals involved.

Self-interest plays a motivator role in morality field that makes people can consider themselves without destroying the ability of others to meet their own wants. Starting with some key terms that Smiths mentions in his books: selfishness means someone who only knows to satisfy himself without consider others’ feelings and it might deprives others’ happiness (Black 2006, p.8). Comparing to selfishness, the term ‘self-love’ means ‘pure ego’ (Fitzgibbons 1995, p.137), while the term ‘self-interest’ is an updated version of self-love, because it contains virtue and leads to self-love into a moral level (Fitzgibbons 1995,

The “theory of moral sentiment” did not only explain how human behaviors are modified by sympathy, but in addition, the theory supported Smith’s view on what policies should be adopted based on these theories. Laissez-faire was the early form of attitudes that Smiths and some of economists pursued in Europe during 18th century. It suggested that government should reduce their intervention on import and export regulation, such as imposing taxes and tariffs on these transactions on private parties. In addition, governments should advocate perfect competition in the nation in order to maximize economic growth. The Theory of Moral Sentiment has properly backed Lassies-faire up and clarified why human beings can regulated themselves in an

In the book, “The Element of Moral Philosophy”, James Rachels explores the several criticisms of Utilitarianism. In this essay, I will touch on these criticisms, outlining the major implications they propose to Utilitarianism. I will also explain why many of the notions proposed against Utilitarianism are self-serving, and instead serve to improve the general good of a minority population, which contradicts the Utilitarian theory of equating moral aptitude to the general good of a majority population, and that in this respect a greater consequence is achieved. Lastly, I will demonstrate how many societal values have a Utilitarian basis, which proves that Utilitarianism can be salvaged in the face of most criticisms.

“We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; We know now that it is also bad economics”

Raising peoples’ living levels, i.e. incomes and consumption, levels of food, medical services, education through relevant growth processes. 2. Creating

This research also shows that economic growth, on average, raises incomes for both the rich and the poor. It helps to lift the poorest in society out of absolute poverty and does not automatically increase inequality. More importantly, no country has managed to lift itself out of poverty without integrating into the global economy.