INTRODUCTION TO BUSINESS LAW - Admission/Application Essay Example

Teacher There are too many ambigous and shady business practicess featured in the documentary Inside Job. One of the example of thisshady business practiceis the promotion of investment bankers of companies and financial instruments they know would fail and go bankrupt. This was this the case with dotcom companies which were vigorously promoted by investment banks and CDOs knowing that they were backed by poor quality loans such as subprime mortages that could never be repaid. These practice were a clear case of omission of not telling the real score about the companies and financial instruments they promote.

These acts were driven excessive profit motive or green. This was justified by utilitarian ethics as espoused by John Stuart Mill that a course of action that has favourable outcome is a preferred choice of action. It was reinforced by Jeremy Bentham’s theory of utility that an action with the greatest use is the right course of action. This may sound unfortunate but these are the guidelines that most business follow. According to Crane and Matten, if business is left on its own, it will resort to whatever means possible to make a profit consistent with the principles of utility.

It will capitalize on ambiguous ethical issues such as the promotion of companies likely to fail and poor financial instruments just to profit. This calls for the application of moral philosophy to clarify the ambiguous ethical issues that companies deal with (Crane and Matten 35).The presence of moral guidelines in the business practice of companies would have made the actors in our economy as documented in the film Inside Job differently. First, investment bankers would not have promoted dotcom companies when they knew that it would fail.

They would have cautioned investors that the increasing stock valuation of dotcom companies are artificial and that the bubble will eventually burst because the companies does not have real value to speak of. Instead of promoting dotcom companies to profit, they would have promoted companies that have solid business foundation albeit the profits are conservation. The same principle should be followed by Goldman Sachs whose indiscretion dragged everybody into recession. Goldman Sachs should not have promoted and lied about low value collaterized debt obligations (CDO) knowing that they are merely backed by subprime mortgages whom they knew were loans that never be paid.

Had they followed Kant’s deontological ethics, they would have instead advised investors to be cautious with CDOs telling them as a matter of fact that they are backed by poor loans that are likely to default. If Kant’s ethical perspective was followed, the world would not have slid into recession. The actors would have also followed Aristotlean or Nichomachean ethics based on nature which prescribed balance and moderation because anything in nature that is too much or too little is bad and that also includes human behavior.

In the case of Inside Jobs, it is obvious that investment bankers were motivated by greed that is why they promoted companies that they knew would fail and lied about poor CDOs backed by loans that could never be repaid. Had they followed Aristotlean or Nichomachean ethics, they would have instead promoted and recommended business with sound foundation albeit the profit are conservative because their quest for profit is moderate.Work CitedCrane, Andrew; Matten, Dirk. Business Ethics, 2nd edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2006