Morals

“The idea that a corporation is a legal person with constitutional rights is, of course, a controversial one. Some commentators argue that it's bad policy. In my view, however, it is a well-settled principle of US constitutional law and justifiably so. The legislative history of the Fourteenth Amendment suggests that Congress substituted the word ''person'' for the word ''citizen'' precisely so that the provisions so affected would protect not just natural persons but also legal persons, such as corporations, from oppressive legislation.”

Some may claim a Walmarts’ arrival in a community is helpful to improve the growth and development in the community, but others tell a different story. Many claim that a Walmart is great way to create new jobs in the community. They are partially right, between construction and development, plenty of jobs are created. Also, about 300 retail jobs are created based on the amount needed to run a Walmart super center twenty fours a day, seven days a week. However, Kenneth Stone, a professor of economics at Iowa State University, conducted a study in which two Super Walmart centers in two different states were evaluated. The study lasted about two years and showed that for every one job Walmart had created, 1.4 jobs were lost in local communities (Davidson 1). Walmarts’ low prices come with additional costs that we are

According to UNI report (2012) the presence of Walmart stores in local communities has a devastating impact. Large retailers like Walmart force smaller businesses to close up as they

The idea that corporations should have no rights simply because the Framers felt it should be so on the grounds of an old grudge is preposterous. As previously stated, corporations, like unions, are composed of the people, and the people have undeniable rights allotted to them by the Constitution.

Because the courts have ruled that in this context money is the same as speech, there is no reason that corporations should be able to hide their speech from the public. As shown in the documentary, PACs can follow around politicians and record their statements, yet this is not seen as an infringement on free speech. Likewise, having a record of “statements” made by corporations also does not infringe on free speech, as it does not at all prevent these corporations from speaking but instead allows others to know who is doing the

The Fifth Amendment, "no person shall be...deprived of...property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”, also applies to corporations. Without this amendment applying to corporations, commercial property could be taken away arbitrarily, without just compensation at any time for any reason. In a country that is built upon a rich history of business ownership and commerce, it is important to note the fact that America would not be where it is today without its corporations being given significant legal rights.

Corporations can be large or small but they all have some sort of ethical impact on their employees, shareholders, customers, community, and surrounding environments. Richard DeGeorge writes, “We can speak of corporations having moral responsibilities to act in certain ways, and they are morally responsible for the consequences of their actions on people.” (p. 200). Large corporations are comprised of the board of directors, management, and their workers. They also deal with suppliers, customers, and have competitors. This essay will examine the moral responsibilities within a corporation.

The corporate world has an unfavorable view of itself by being selfish, evil, and against the average American. Companies market themselves and their products in certain ways that makes them and their products appealing to everyone and if not everyone then a certain group of people. Every company has a mission to follow and values to go by, but some companies lack ethics and morals. In this paper I am going to talk about one company that engages in ethical behavior and another that doesn’t.

Issue 1: I do believe that corporations have a responsibility to society as a whole, not only to maximize their own profits and benefit the economy but also to respect the community that they reside in. They achieve this by not only providing employment, but also upholding an image. It is up to

Not only does Walmart directly affect the economical situation of your community, it also puts significant strain upon the environment we live and depend on. In October of 2004, North America sued Walmart for violating the Clean Water Act CWA in nine states, causing a huge uproar both from the defensive Walmart corporation and more so from the targeted communities. Relying upon a communities oblivion, Walmart takes advantage of the situation in which it's presented, posing a threat to all nearby water supplies because of all the toxins and pesticides literally oozing from Walmart facilities worldwide. Much more costly towards the environment than the tinkling of spare change resounding in our pockets. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that a single Walmart location expends countless amounts of energy to maintain,

Many reports have been written documenting the economic and eventual social and environmental degradation which occurs when Wal-Mart “comes to town”.

* Is it acceptable for corporations to use their considerable power tp shape government policy?

If an employer has set values that he or she wants to be displayed in the company, then boundaries must be established upfront for employees to use as a guideline. In America “the constitution’s right to free speech only applies when the government is trying to restrict it” (Bussing). Employers legally have the right to restrict expression of thoughts while employees are at work. An employee of a company is set to represent the views of the employer’s mission statements and core values. It is important for boundaries to be set because “employees who act contrary to those values in public will reflect poorly on the company and possibly cause loss of revenue” (Watson 5). People who have agreed to work with a company must be aware of their actions both on

There are several problems that can we seen in business ethics. “Discussions of the role of the corporation in society and the very purpose of a corporation as a social institution are examples. It is not disputed that the purpose of a for-profit corporation is to make a profit for stockholder, but there has been an intense debate about whether maximizing stockholder profits is the sole legitimate purpose of corporations” as Milton Friedman and other have argued and whether beneficent corporate conduct is justifiable. This question is normative, but there is also the question of moral psychology raised by Smith: “Does beneficence have any place in the world of business?” An example is found in public utilities’ program to help customers pay for electricity, gas, oil, phone service, and the like. This attitude not only won’t increase the company profits but reduce. In fact, this is a corporate form of charity. The money is taken directly

The organisations have no natural right to these benefits, and in order to allow their existence, society would expect the benefits to exceed the costs to society". The society allows the corporation to operate as long as it meets their expectations. Again considering the Legitimacy Theory, the organisation should consider the rights of the public at large, not merely those of its investors. If the company fails to meet these expectations, the society would react by imposing sanctions, for example legal restrictions or high taxes, fines, demand reduction of the company's products, eliminating the supply for labour and financial capital top the business.