Take the bonus?

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Ethics
  3. » Take the bonus?

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Elmud
 
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2009 03:43 pm
Wasn't going to post any new threads for awhile, but, had to try this one. Big insurance company. Receives a government bailout. Taxpayer money. Now, the fact that bonuses are to be issued is brought to light. The company cannot withdraw the bonuses due to contractual obligations. So, everyone is angry. A real can of worms. So, here is the ethical question. If you were an employee of the insurance company, would you consider returning the bonus, in light of the current circumstances?
 
Alexander phil
 
Reply Wed 18 Mar, 2009 02:19 am
@Elmud,
Nope, let them wallow in the mess that they've made. I think a financial apocaplyse is well due. !
 
Fido
 
Reply Wed 18 Mar, 2009 05:42 am
@Elmud,
Abalard said: Jus is the Genus, and Law a species of it... Certainly, the contract on its face to give those bonus's is legal; but if the law is not just, then the law is not really law, but in this case, as in many cases, is only an agreement between the powerful to enforce their own prerogatives...

Whether they should take the money is immaterial... I am certain they will, and that it will provide a clear lesson for the people... The rich are not rich because they love us, and because they care for our well being...The rich are rich because they hate us, and hold us in contempt, and want to hurt us...
In protecting the economic system the politicians thought to protect themselves... Now they are learning that their help is expected, and that the people are expected to support the economy which does not support them... It is time for a change, but first, people must change their minds, and when they realize all their morality is pointless so long as immorals run their world, then there will be change..
 
Mr Fight the Power
 
Reply Wed 18 Mar, 2009 07:07 am
@Elmud,
The entire point of the bailout was to make taxpayers foot the bill for bad business decisions, I don't see why there is an outcry now from the politicians who passed it.
 
Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Wed 18 Mar, 2009 02:45 pm
@Mr Fight the Power,
Would I consider returning the money? Probably not, but that just makes me a selfish jerk.
 
Fido
 
Reply Wed 18 Mar, 2009 02:48 pm
@Elmud,
I guess they promised the money for successfully winding down the losing businesses...They probably earned every penny of it just for not walking and leaving a big mess..
 
Elmud
 
Reply Wed 18 Mar, 2009 04:21 pm
@Mr Fight the Power,
Mr. Fight the Power wrote:
The entire point of the bailout was to make taxpayers foot the bill for bad business decisions, I don't see why there is an outcry now from the politicians who passed it.

I was in the shop working, listening to the news on the radio. I guess there was some sort of protest outside the building of the insurance company. Also, there were reports of a few death threats toward some of the CEO's. So, the outcry, which started with the politicians, has spread.
 
Elmud
 
Reply Wed 18 Mar, 2009 09:42 pm
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas wrote:
Would I consider returning the money? Probably not, but that just makes me a selfish jerk.

I don't think that would make you a selfish jerk necessarily. Depends on your needs at the time. I can't relate to a 1.4 million dollar bonus. I probably won't make near that much money in my lifetime. These are people who make tons of cash. They are CEO,s. Middle or under class folks like me can't relate. But, if you could imagine that your lifestyle were that of one of those people, more than likely they are getting by just fine, would you still take the bonus? That was what I was trying to get at.
 
Fido
 
Reply Thu 19 Mar, 2009 05:36 am
@Elmud,
Elmud wrote:
I don't think that would make you a selfish jerk necessarily. Depends on your needs at the time. I can't relate to a 1.4 million dollar bonus. I probably won't make near that much money in my lifetime. These are people who make tons of cash. They are CEO,s. Middle or under class folks like me can't relate. But, if you could imagine that your lifestyle were that of one of those people, more than likely they are getting by just fine, would you still take the bonus? That was what I was trying to get at.

It would make you a selfish jerk if you were not already one... Look, we all buy into the moral corruption, and not one of us is free of it... But the rich are so many parasites...They know what a just profit is and they know who pays the bill, and it this instance it is the people...If the economy- capitalism is so good then it ought to support its government.. It does not, and the government does not govern capital; but now both have conspired to pursue excess and then together take wealth directly from the people without so much as a product, which the people cannot buy, and would not buy; even if they had the money.. Now, the people own that 'business'; and if they cannot control the pay, or even compel those who made the mistakes to make good their loses, then they are not very smart bosses..Acting for the people and in the peoples best interest the government should have ultimate power...It acts as though it is infinitely weak...In fact, it demands no authority over -free- enterprise...So enterprise can be free the people must be constrained... I am glad people are thinking of doing violence to those people,and not because I want violence, but because if the worm will turn then there is hope that the people will some day reign...
 
Elmud
 
Reply Thu 19 Mar, 2009 09:42 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
It would make you a selfish jerk if you were not already one... Look, we all buy into the moral corruption, and not one of us is free of it... But the rich are so many parasites...They know what a just profit is and they know who pays the bill, and it this instance it is the people...If the economy- capitalism is so good then it ought to support its government.. It does not, and the government does not govern capital; but now both have conspired to pursue excess and then together take wealth directly from the people without so much as a product, which the people cannot buy, and would not buy; even if they had the money.. Now, the people own that 'business'; and if they cannot control the pay, or even compel those who made the mistakes to make good their loses, then they are not very smart bosses..Acting for the people and in the peoples best interest the government should have ultimate power...It acts as though it is infinitely weak...In fact, it demands no authority over -free- enterprise...So enterprise can be free the people must be constrained... I am glad people are thinking of doing violence to those people,and not because I want violence, but because if the worm will turn then there is hope that the people will some day reign...

I talked with my cousin last night. she lives in Hot Springs. She works for a broker down there. She called one of her clients who lives in Texas and who, by the way, works for this insurance company. She is not a big shot, just another employee. My cousin asked her, how are you doing? She said, well,,,,,, okay. I guess. She was clearly afraid of the situation. Seems there has been some tension down there as well. Now, this girl has to experience a feeling of fear and apprehension. So, we begin to see how this situation graduates to the innocent. with that in mind, would you take the bonus?
 
Fido
 
Reply Thu 19 Mar, 2009 09:52 pm
@Elmud,
Elmud wrote:
I talked with my cousin last night. she lives in Hot Springs. She works for a broker down there. She called one of her clients who lives in Texas and who, by the way, works for this insurance company. She is not a big shot, just another employee. My cousin asked her, how are you doing? She said, well,,,,,, okay. I guess. She was clearly afraid of the situation. Seems there has been some tension down there as well. Now, this girl has to experience a feeling of fear and apprehension. So, we begin to see how this situation graduates to the innocent. with that in mind, would you take the bonus?

I am not gay; but as the price of making a living I have had to endure many a *****...So would I take; no...I might be on social security..If my pension fails I might have to be; but guys like me carry this world as long as we have legs...It is our honor and our pleasure to pick up where others left off, to do a fair job for a fair wage, to do a little extra, and to carry all those who cannot carry for themselves... To this load there are added all number of freeloaders, who will not walk while they can ride, who think the deserve to live by another's sweat, and they are so many john galts with necks ready made for the nooses or the guillotine....
 
YumClock
 
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 11:57 am
@Elmud,
Hey, most people think the government doesn't do enough anyway.
They're in a ~11 trillion dollar hole. One doesn't expect them to make good decisions, really.
And if I get some half a tril to keep my company alive? I can simply justify it by saying I've already given enough taxes to cover that.
 
EmperorNero
 
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 03:02 pm
@Elmud,
I would say, when you return money for the sake of being ethical, being morally right has gone a bit too far.
Though I agree that it would be technically the right thing to do.
 
Fido
 
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 04:53 pm
@Elmud,
Actually; NoEmp, Morality has no limits... Immorality is a limit...
 
EmperorNero
 
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 05:06 pm
@Elmud,
You are right. What I meant was, that it is technically morally right to give the money back.
But at some point you got to be pragmatic, and do the immoral thing. Just because always doing the moral thing is self-defeating.
 
Fido
 
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 06:11 pm
@Elmud,
You are pointing out the problem exactly whether you know it, or not... People have always considered that reason is the way to ethical behavior, that knowledge is virtue... What is more clear, is that people use reason to evade morality, and are moral out of emotional attachment...For this reason all ethical systems fail...No one can more easily reason to ethical behavior than they can reason to unethical behavior since ethics always involves an obligation... Ethics is not easy... The unethical is always pushing things down hill...
 
EmperorNero
 
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 06:38 pm
@Fido,
Fido;59292 wrote:
You are pointing out the problem exactly whether you know it, or not... People have always considered that reason is the way to ethical behavior, that knowledge is virtue... What is more clear, is that people use reason to evade morality, and are moral out of emotional attachment...For this reason all ethical systems fail...No one can more easily reason to ethical behavior than they can reason to unethical behavior since ethics always involves an obligation... Ethics is not easy... The unethical is always pushing things down hill...


I probably don't know. :confused:
I believe, that if you completely reject consequentialism, you can always pinpoint the moral choice quite easily.
After that, it is possible to intentionally not take the moral path. Of course you must try to restrict that.
That is in my eyes more honest than to always be trying to get yourself to believe that the option with less obligation is the morale one. Or not to have any ethics at all.
 
Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 05:40 pm
@EmperorNero,
EmperorNero wrote:
I would say, when you return money for the sake of being ethical, being morally right has gone a bit too far.
Though I agree that it would be technically the right thing to do.


What? Doing the ethical thing is wrong because it is so right?

EmperorNero wrote:
You are right. What I meant was, that it is technically morally right to give the money back.
But at some point you got to be pragmatic, and do the immoral thing. Just because always doing the moral thing is self-defeating.


What is pragmatic about being immoral? Don't you mean, instead, that at some point we should give up on ethics and just be selfish?

How is doing the moral thing self defeating? The purpose of doing the moral thing is to act properly. By always doing the moral thing, we always act properly. If acting rightly is to be our aim, how is doing the moral thing self defeating?
 
EmperorNero
 
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 06:08 pm
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas;59504 wrote:

What is pragmatic about being immoral? Don't you mean, instead, that at some point we should give up on ethics and just be selfish?

Yes. But not instead, it's the same thing in other words
Didymos Thomas;59504 wrote:
How is doing the moral thing self defeating? The purpose of doing the moral thing is to act properly. By always doing the moral thing, we always act properly. If acting rightly is to be our aim, how is doing the moral thing self defeating?

Because what's moral is not necessarily in you self interest.
This will explain what I mean, but you have to read to the end.

The Samurai Guild: A Sense of Justice and Honesty
 
Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 06:14 pm
@EmperorNero,
EmperorNero wrote:
Yes. But not instead, it's the same thing in other words


So being selfish is the same thing as being moral?

EmperorNero wrote:
Because what's moral is not necessarily in you self interest.
This will explain what I mean, but you have to read to the end.

The Samurai Guild: A Sense of Justice and Honesty


Now I'm really confused. Is acting selfishly the same as acting morally? Or are they different, and selfishness is better than morality?
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Ethics
  3. » Take the bonus?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.76 seconds on 12/11/2024 at 05:02:42