Moral Judgements About Political Actions - Essay Example

Political Ethics al Affiliation Introduction Political ethics, political morality or public ethics involves making moral judgements about political actions and political agents in a country. The practise is divided into two branches which are; the ethics of process and the ethics of policy (Gunnell, 2012).The ethics of process focus on public officials and the methods they use in office while the ethics of policy deals with judgements made about policies and laws. Both draw their belief on moral and political philosophy, democratic theory and political science. In the second branch of political ethics of process, the major question would be to what extent the ethical principles that govern political office differ from those that govern moral life. We would also be interested to know to what extent are politicians permitted to take actions that would otherwise be judged wrong by the general public (Valier, 2012). Ethics would generally require politicians to avoid any harm towards innocent citizens. On the other hand they may be obligated to sacrifice the lives of the same innocent citizens if it is for the good of the whole nation. Example; according to moral ethics, a president may be obliged to order military action even with the knowledge that some civilians will lose their lives. There are two features of public office which makes it prone to ethical problems which are; its representational and organizational character (Gunnell, 2012). While public officials act for the citizens, they assume the rights and obligations that ordinary citizens do not enjoy. In this case, they would be permitted to use force, lie, keep destructive secrets and break promises in the offices they hold. While some of these worse violations of the moral principles governing the society are committed, the problem of ‘dirty hands’ is created. Discussion The notion of poverty It is the lack of, or inability to achieve, a socially acceptable standard of living. Usually, people who live in poverty lack the command over economic resources because their incomes cannot warrant them (Giovanni, 2005). Example; people are considered poor when they lack the basic needs or if they lack the income to purchase basic needs. Poverty also involves the inability or lack of capability to participate in societal activities. There are two types of functioning’s that every individual must participate in the society which are real functioning (a set of alternatives) or realized functioning (what he is able to do). When people are unable to achieve any of these functioning’s they are considered poor. Example; when one is disabled, it may reduce his/ her ability to earn income and also makes it hard to convert income into the two functioning’s. Poor people usually lack human capital which may be in terms of education and good health or social capital which includes positive and trustful communities. However, money to a large extent determines whether people are grouped as poor or not (Valier, 2012). Lack of adequate financial resources is thus considered as poverty. According to the UNDP, respect for human rights are necessary for different socio- economic out comes (whether people are rich or poor). This definition challenges the idea that poverty is to be measured based on income and expenditure levels only. There are basically two types of poverty which are; absolute poverty and relative poverty. Absolute or extreme poverty occurs when people are not able to obtain adequate physical health and food resources (Giovanni, 2005). In this case people may be struggling to survive and is characterised bystarving, lack clean water, poor housing, lack of sufficient clothing and lack of medicines. In this case, poverty is measured by the value of basic goods which offer minimum subsistence and are important for survival. Example; it may look at the value of basic food materials and the minimum income required so as to lead descent lives. Relative poverty usually occurs when some people’s ways of life and income is worse than the general standards of living in the region or country they live. These people really struggle to live a normal life and also participate in normal economic, social and cultural activities. The definition of relative poverty varies from one county to another and this depends on the standards of living enjoyed by majority of the population (Giovanni, 2005). Poverty in this case is based on inequality and it reflects the changing social and economic conditions in a given place at a given time. Example; if the poor in a given region are individuals whose incomes fall below 50 percent of the average income, the average income will certainly grow because the rich will tend to gain more while the number of people in relative poverty increases. How the question of proper living standards relates to current economic and social outlooks Poverty basically depends on what is deemed or socially accepted standard of living by the population in a given place and time and how this standard of living is measured. Example; in a society where most of the people own cars, somebody who uses public transport is termed as poor. However, in other regions, owning a car or TV might be considered a luxury as such people lack the most basic human needs (food, shelter and clothing) (Giovanni, 2005).Due to inflation costs for food, energy, housing and transport, coupled with cuts on wages, benefits and public services, middle class families in Britain are continually losing the hope of ever having a decent lifestyle. Politicians and the media shy away from the topic of poverty by pretending that it doesn’t exist.However, those at the edge of poverty in the UK experience its real consequences. The Minimum Income Standard (MIS) suggested that the increasing number of people with low incomes will never be able to afford an acceptable standard of living (Butler, 2014). The living standards in the UK have risen by 21 percent as compared to other states in the EU. Individual consumption was used as the measure of living stands because it usually includes all goods and services that are consumed in a household. Britain’s standards of living were actually boosted by public service such a health and education which are largely funded by the government (Butler, 2014). There are several factors which affect people’s living standards both socially and economically. These factors are inequality, corruption and development. Inequality At the most basic level, poverty deprives people off both economically and socially. Poverty hinders development and increases inequality levels in the society. In the developing world, the powerful subjugate the poor by making them dependent on their decisions. When these people try to stand up for theirrights, they are usually silenced and face violent oppression or persecution from the ruling elites and also outside who feel that their national interests are being threatened (Giovanni, 2005). Many people will tend not to question the policies provided by the ruling minority. A successful nation or society is built when all its institutions such asa functioning and non- corrupt democracy, an impartial media, equitable distribution of land and wealth and a well structured judicial system work for the good of the people but not of the rulers. However on the flip side, a lack of any of these can lead to marginalization of a fraction of the people. Unequal societies are involved in unequal trade where those at the top of the ladder who are the dominant society enjoy higher standards of living than those much lower. Most of the poor nations lose their space to develop their own policies and local businesses ends up competing with well- established multinationals (Rowlands, 2011).It has been noted that crime and unhappiness characterise unequal societies and inequality leads to instability. Corruption Corruption is a major course of poverty around the world and it occurs in all levels of society from local to national governments, civil society, judiciary, businesses, military and other services. Corruption mostly affects the poorest in both poor and rich nations (Giovanni, 2005). It also undermines political development, democracy, economic development, the environment and health. Bribery and corruption make most multinational companies to earn contracts in public work and military equipment. Transparency has been suggested as one of the pillars democracies can use to tackle corruption. This involves knowing what is happening in the society and being able to make informed decisions which improve participation of the public in national matters. Development Thirdworld countries are often described as ‘developing’ while the first world is defined as ‘developed’. However, a lack of material wealth does not necessarily mean that a county is poor and a strong economy in a developed nation does not mean that it is rich. The concept of human development is much more than the rise and fall of national incomes and expenditure (Rowlands, 2011). It’sall about creating an environment where the people involved can be able to develop their full potential and lead productive, creative lives as pertains to their needs. It is thus much more than economic growth which is only a means of enlarging people’s choices. At household, community, societal, national and international levels, there is need for commitment to various democratic institutions that do not become corrupted so that development can take place. In many developing countries, the available resources are usually diverted to markets in developed nations. This has led to dire consequences where the involved lack basic access to food, water, health, education and other social services. This has remained a major obstacle to equitable development. Standards of living in UK The mid range households income between 2013 and 2014 in the UK was 6percent more than the one experienced in the pre- crisis years. 10 percent of the richest people have seen their incomes hit hardest as it had a 9 percent fall since the recession (Davis, Donald & Matt, 2014). On the other hand, 10 percent of the poorest saw their incomes drop by 2.4 percent over the same period. This basically means that the earnings increasedslower than the piece of commodities while the benefit rates rose with the cost of living. There is no reason to expect a full recovery in living standards over the next few years. There are some illegal loan sharks, but a significant number are registered as required by the law but which charge incredibly high interests. Some even warn the applicants that theirservices are only suitable for short term loan fixtures that would be used for purchasing special anniversary gifts or to go for a weekend away (Gunnell, 2012). But as we know, people who would need to use such services are not people who need to buy expensive anniversarypresents but these are hard pressed working families or students who have not yet paid rent or household bills. There are also those at the very desperate end who have a routine of borrowing so as to purchase the most essential needs. There are more and more families which are actually falling below what the public perceives to be an acceptable standard of living (Gunnell, 2012). The increase in the Minimum Income Standard (MIS) is driven by increasing health care and transport costs coupled with cuts to in- work credits. Parents are continually facing low wages and pressure on their working time and there is little hope that they will find the extra cash they need to meet their house hold expenses. Infact as compared to how the state was in 2008, people are living more modest lifestyles only that the ability of many families to afford the essentials has changed. More and more people are resulting to high interest money lenders, family, friends or the banks for short term loans thus indicating that a substantial number of workers in the UK are not paid enough to keep them out of loans and debts. Child poverty A report from Resolution Foundation in (June 2012) indicated that though child poverty in the UK had fallen since the mid 1990’s, its nature has changed. This is because in the 1980’s and 1990’s, the families under pressure tended to be those where the parents were unemployed but today, increasing numbers of families falling under the poverty levelhave atleast one working parent. The government has noted that getting a family into work, supporting strong relationships, getting parents off drugs and also out of debt can do more to a child’s well being more than how any amount of money can (Gunnell, 2012). Today, 61 percent of children considered to be living in poverty are already living in homes where both parents work. Small policy interventions would make significant differences to such families. Such policies may include better marketing and clear points of access for free financial and debt advice, betterregulation of the private regulated housing sector, and better child care provision for working parents. It would also include an urgent need for cheaper credit for those people stuck in high state banks and better provision of emergencies such as illness and school needs other than credit cards or pay day lenders (Gunnell, 2012). An overview of the standards of living around the globe The disparity between the rich and the poor in the whole world is increasing day by day. The singlemost underlying factor in this is that great wealth is controlled in the hands of a few nations, which coexist with absolute poverty everywhere. The rich in developed countries continue to get rich by the day at the expense of the poor. Countries in Latin America, Africa and many parts of Asia have continually seen their desperately low standards of living decline even further.Poverty is the most acute factor that contributes to problems in the developing world (Rowlands, 2011). Among the developed counties, European countries enjoy a high overall standard of living as compared to otherregions in the globe. People enjoy high standards of healthcare, infrastructure and recreational facilities. These countries further enjoy political stability and relatively low crime states which helps people to feel safe and secure in most places. In America, several countries in Central and South America still attract expatriates because they haverelatively stable political movements, improvinginfrastructure and pleasant climate. However, many locations are challenging due to naturaldisasters, economic inequality and high crime rates. NorthAmerican countries on the other hand offer high standards of living and are attractive destinations to companies and expatriates. Consumer goods are available and also infrastructure and recreation facilities are excellent (Siscovick, 2014). The Middle East and Africa regions remain the most challenging regions for multinational organizations and expatriates. These regions are characterised by regional instability, disruptive political instability such as civil wars, lack of good infrastructure and natural disasters such as flooding which hinder good standards of living. Difficulties in defining a ‘Minimum Income Standard’ (MIS) The minimum income standard is based on what members of the public perceive to be enough money to live on and maintain a socially acceptable quality of life at a given place (Davis, Donald & Matt, 2014). One of the challenges in defining MIS is the fact that it variesfromregion to region. Example; In developed counties, what is perceived and accepted to be the MIS may not be the same as the one in developing countries. However, in these same regions, there are some people who live in utter poverty and so their definition of MIS would not be the same as the rest of the population. This means that in one country, we can have different definitions of MIS because they live according to their levels of income. The other challenge is about change which is bound to happen in any place, county or region. This means that as time changes, the Minimum Standard of living that is upheld by a group of people will also change. Example; in the UK, a lone parent with one child now needs to earn£27100 up from£12000 in 2008. The overall cost of a basket of essentials has risen by over 28 per cent from 2008. Relating MIS to philosophical questions of distributive justice The concept of distributive justice defines a fair society as a state or nation whose population have agreed in advance on how assets (wealth, freedom, voting rights) should be fairly distributed and divided among the people. Although people may well agree to distribute some of these assets such as legal rights, voting rights and opportunities, it’s not clear that they would feel the same way about distributing material assets such as money, property and land. In most of the capitalist nations in the world, wealth and income is unevenly distributed (Valier, 2012). The vast of the wealth is concentrated at the hands of a relatively small minority thus leading to large and increasing wealth and income inequalities between the elites and the rest of the population. These corporations exert a lot of power and influence over government policies and political campaigns. The assurance of a certain minimum income for everyone or putting a level which nobody needs to fall below appears to be a necessary part of the great society in which an individual belongs to. This is because the Minimum Income Standard actually depends on the opinions of the public. Distributive justice upholds the values of democracy which is the government by the people and for the people (Valier, 2012). If it is applied to measure and gauge the minimum income standard in societies, there would be no wealth inequalities among people and development would be evenly distributed. It would also reduce the gap between the rich and the poor which continues to increase every day. Conclusion I have discussed the notion of poverty and its causes. Inequality makes sure that the poor will remain poorer while the rich get richer. There are also varying definitions of the Minimum Income Standard according to different societies. Political leaders will put government policies which maintain the status quo. In a democratic regime, the question would not be what citizens should do to the leader but rather what citizens and the state should do to compensate the leaders for decisions that are legitimately made in private (Gunnell, 2012). In such regimes, the focus would be to examine all the policy areas and the need to make collective decisions which favour all citizens both morally and politically. References Butler, P. (2014). Many British people will never afford an acceptable minimum living standard. The Guardian. Available at http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/01/minimum-income-standard-joseph-rowntree-foundation. Davis, A., Donald, H. & Matt, P. (2014). A minimum income standard for the UK in 2014. Joseph Roujntree Foundation. Available at http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/minimum-income-standard-2014. Giovanni, L. (2005). Impacts of policies on poverty: The definition of poverty. Urbino: Univesity of Urbino. Gunnell, B. (2012). Staying alive in Britain: Can the poor afford it. Inclusive Democracy. Available at https://www.opendemocracy.net/5050/barbara-gunnell/staying-alive-in-britain-can-poor-afford-it. Rowlands, N. (2011). 4 ways to measure you standard of living. Matador Network. Available at http://matadornetwork.com/life/four-ways-to-measure-your-standard-of-living/. Siscovick, M. (2014). 2014 quality of living worldwide city rankings- Mercer survey. Mercer. Available at http://www.mercer.com/content/mercer/global/all/en/newsroom/2014-quality-of-living-survey.html. Vallier, K. (2012). F.A. Hayek: Enemy of social justice and friend to a universal basic income. Bleeding Heart Liberations. Available at http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2012/05/hayek-enemy-of-social-justice-and-friend-of-a-universal-basic-income/. Read More