South African Investment - Essay Example

South African Investment South African Investment Following a South African investment case study four, this paper will answer questions asked concerning the investment. First, “In your judgment, were the possible utilitarian benefits of building the Caltex plant in 1977 more important than the possible violations of moral rights and of justice that may be involved? Justify your answer fully by identifying the possible benefits and the possible violations of rights and justice that you believe may be associated with the building of the plant, and explaining which you think are more important.” In 1997, what could have really motivated Caltex to expand and undertake its business operations in the republic of South Africa? It is a question that nobody should ignore to ask. Truly one would say that they were majorly after improving their margins in profit. As an assumption, it is then fair to think so as based on corporation for profit. This paper’s argument is not against profit but against being party in profit generation with wrongdoers. I believe societies have capacity to improve when stewards who are capable capitalize and take helm to create technologies that are labor saving, establish jobs for the public and raise people’s living standards with quality lives. Who knows what decision makers of Caltex held in their hearts when it had its entrance in South Africa? A point was reached when Caltex clearly realized that a conflict existed between their business health and that of the society. When a man discovers that the course he is taking is wrong, his direction quickly changes. He aborts actions of his starting point that could cause him harm. In that case, Caltex could have stopped its actions upon this machine they saw as a cog that was important rather it was harmful. It did not do so. In fact if I could be in South Africa, I would sell the oil rights, the equipment and contracts to a different individual or corporation. Caltex bad reputation is a cultivated sin that they were to bear the burden by themselves. Stipulations that should have been added by Caltex were maintenance of fair housing for the black, colored workers and Indians and fair pay. Even the laid down creator principles are overlooked upon by ethics more so such principles are over and over proved true. Expanding or building business in a nation like South Africa is equally likely to give addict money therefore funding bad morals. Addiction is prolonged till all the resources are exhausted. The continued apartheid was as a result of these oil resources developments and business expanded in South Africa which led to injustice and unacceptable human abuse. It was like South Africa killing its own son. If there were any benefits associated with the building of this oil plant, then majorly it was for the whites. How would one see the face of South Africa being economically enriched yet its sons lives are not improving? According to Alexander 2003, human life being the most important thing and a right to every creature, I therefore strongly and justify my opinion that justice and moral rights should be adhered to. In 1997, building the Caltex plant with its utilitarian benefits was not important to negligence of human rights. Secondly, “If you were a stockholder in Texaco or Standard Oil (now named Chevron), how do you believe you ought to vote on the three kinds of stockholders resolutions that were proposed (the first asking Caltex to terminate its operations, the second asking Caltex not to sell to the military or police of South Africa, and the third asking Caltex to implement the Tutu principles)? Justify each of your answers fully.”Being a stock holder, my vote would be a yes for the first resolution. Operations for Caltex ought to be terminated. No benefits would have existed in such a state but for sovereign and a free society we see today. Caltex building the plant strengthened and provoked the state racism power. The most important resolution of South Africa in 1997 was to end apartheid by its removal. The pressure of removing apartheid was to mount to larger extends in order to break the white ruling will to the minority. For the second resolution, my vote could be a yes too. It was quite evident that the South African military and police were the ones who beat up, abused and even murdered the black protesters. But Caltex fueled their trucks with refined gasoline. The company’s tax revenues paid the police salaries and that for politicians and soldiers. As an impact, Caltex drove the South African economy which in turn was like the most expensive vehicle that supported the worst unethical actions of the government of South Africa. For the third resolution also my answer would have been a yes. As a stock holder, I do believe that Tutu principles were to be implemented under removal of the union clause. Historically, unions sometimes become horses for the political work rather than serving the interests of its workers. Principles for Tutu however, promoted respect, fairness and improved everybody’s quality of life (Alexander 2003). Third, “What kind of responses should the managers of Texaco and SoCal have made to each of the three resolutions? Justify your answer fully.” Just as explained above, managers of SoCal and Texaco should have taken the same course to respond to these resolutions. Mankind has got a great task to members of its own kind. Negative, real and tangible consequences are always as a result of ones wrong deeds. Even as written in God’s laws, a person who commits actions against others will always go unpunished and their actions being accounted for. Anyone should give out what he or she also expects in return. If actually the SoCal and Texaco managers were human enough, they could have implemented Desmond Tutu’s principles within the company as soon as possible. They could widely open their eyes and see all the brutal actions towards the minority in South Africa. They were the right people to initiate and implement policies that could be fair to all. These policies were to be fair enough to the South African child who lived pathetic lives with low pay. They were to support the protestors who were against apartheid laws. Ethics in business was actually to be their main stand. Abusing human kind was like breaking God’s laws. I believe that even the managers were created in the same form like those who were termed minority in the state of South Africa. Their policies were to guard human lives against abuse. Lastly, “in your judgment, does the management of a company have any responsibilities (i.e., duties) beyond ensuring a high return for its stockholders? Should the management of a company look primarily to the law and to the rate of return on its investment as the ultimate criteria for deciding what investments it should make? Why or why not?” Liberty to decide upon a high return production is not a company’s mandatory. Majorly laws based on nature of accountancy enable leaders to decide high returns within ethics and fairness limits. The return rate is vital and can be maximized so long as it doesn’t abandon the love and unity of mankind. Leaders have therefore a responsibility to esteem the creator’s will for fairness, kindness, love and honesty. Any individual taking action and working in this world has no reason whatsoever to be an exemption from the laws of God. Every member in any given society has to strongly speak against any action that is termed to be wrong. We must refuse at any capacity and condemn violators of human life. References Alexander, N. (2003). An Ordinary Country: Issues in the Transition from Apartheid to Democracy in South Africa. New York: Berghahn. Read More