- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Ethical Dilemma in business
Posted on 10/13/16 at 5:01 pm
Posted on 10/13/16 at 5:01 pm
I have to write a paper evaluating a current ethical dilemma in business that is on a large national scale. Keep in mind the issue at hand has to have taken place within the past 6 months or so. Any ideas?
5
Posted on 10/13/16 at 5:04 pm to lipripper1907
Pharmaceutical price gouging for life-saving drugs.
Posted on 10/13/16 at 5:05 pm to lipripper1907
Employing undocumented immigrants.
It is easy to say don't employee any illegal immigrants. But it is impossible to run a lot of jobs/companies without them. Lot of Americans don't want to do the jobs that they do, for a lot less. Therefore, a lot of business, especially small businesses can survive only because they can hire cheaper labor.
Easy to argue both sides, which makes for a perfect paper.
ETA:
BOOM!
It is easy to say don't employee any illegal immigrants. But it is impossible to run a lot of jobs/companies without them. Lot of Americans don't want to do the jobs that they do, for a lot less. Therefore, a lot of business, especially small businesses can survive only because they can hire cheaper labor.
Easy to argue both sides, which makes for a perfect paper.
ETA:
quote:
Pharmaceutical price gouging for life-saving drugs.
BOOM!
This post was edited on 10/13/16 at 5:07 pm
Posted on 10/13/16 at 5:07 pm to AmeriKop45
I can only argue one side but that seems like a damn good topic
Posted on 10/13/16 at 5:09 pm to AmeriKop45
there are plenty or articles to go around for both of those, shouldn't be hard to make something out of either of those
Posted on 10/13/16 at 5:12 pm to lipripper1907
quote:
I have to write a paper evaluating a current ethical dilemma in business that is on a large national scale. Keep in mind the issue at hand has to have taken place within the past 6 months or so. Any ideas?
Wells Fargo.
You can discuss the ethical issues that may arise from sales driven bonuses/compensation.
Posted on 10/13/16 at 5:20 pm to Layabout
quote:
Pharmaceutical price gouging for life-saving drugs.
Price gouging is one part of it. They also have heavy influence over the FDA. Falsify data to get drugs pushed into market. Mislead doctors/consumers about potential dangers. The Purdue Pharma painkillers scandal is a whole paper by itself.
Posted on 10/13/16 at 6:19 pm to lipripper1907
Wells Fargo jumps out... but honestly I'm not sure it's as much of an "ethical" dilemma as just straight up law breaking.
Drug prices would be interesting with the epi-pen stuff.
Drug prices would be interesting with the epi-pen stuff.
Posted on 10/13/16 at 7:00 pm to LSUFanHouston
Yep, pharm is the way to go here. Arguments against price gouging are obvious, arguments for high pharm profits include increased research and development of new potentially life saving drugs. Easy stuff. Pound it out.
Posted on 10/13/16 at 7:01 pm to LSUFanHouston
Auto insurance companies have your credit score factored into insurance quotes
Basically 40 years ago auto insurance could use race as a factor for what your risk would be. If a certain race had more accidents they could just charge them more.
When that was no longer allowed they realized credit scores mirrored their racial statistics since minorities tend to have lower scores. The credit score hurts all races but one could make the argument that it abundantly makes more minoities pay more for their insurance instead of white people which mirrors the 1970s race factors that is no longer allowed.
Also, this causes more minorities not to carry insurance because of rates which hurts everyone when an accident happens.
I'm not saying it is or it isn't but I know it's a topic of discussion and could be problematic to insurance companies if it appears they are gouging certain races based on credit scores even if they have a perfect driving history
Basically 40 years ago auto insurance could use race as a factor for what your risk would be. If a certain race had more accidents they could just charge them more.
When that was no longer allowed they realized credit scores mirrored their racial statistics since minorities tend to have lower scores. The credit score hurts all races but one could make the argument that it abundantly makes more minoities pay more for their insurance instead of white people which mirrors the 1970s race factors that is no longer allowed.
Also, this causes more minorities not to carry insurance because of rates which hurts everyone when an accident happens.
I'm not saying it is or it isn't but I know it's a topic of discussion and could be problematic to insurance companies if it appears they are gouging certain races based on credit scores even if they have a perfect driving history
Posted on 10/13/16 at 10:12 pm to lipripper1907
Look at Procon.org. They have the pros and cons of both sides for a ton of controversial issues. I'm sure you can find something recent that's a business ethical dilemma on their. Also, it gives you all the sources and has the research basically done for you. Obviously, you need to tweak and make it work for your paper but it's a good starting point IMO
Posted on 10/13/16 at 10:27 pm to gobuxgo5
There is a plausible argument to be made that your credit score is a good barometer of how much of a risk-taker and how responsible you are as a member of society, which is totally legitimate for an insurance company to take into account. Same reason they give good grade discounts.
I like the thinking outside the box, but we actually discussed this at my firm one time regarding a possible class action, but we quickly hashed out that it's legit. And I fricking hate insurance companies
I like the thinking outside the box, but we actually discussed this at my firm one time regarding a possible class action, but we quickly hashed out that it's legit. And I fricking hate insurance companies
This post was edited on 10/13/16 at 10:40 pm
Posted on 10/13/16 at 11:22 pm to boosiebadazz
I agree but I also don't see how a 43 year old with no accidents and not traffic tickets is much more of a risk than a 43 year old with no traffic accidents or tickets but the 1st of the 2 racked up a JCpenny charge card they couldn't pay back because they lost their job.
Posted on 10/14/16 at 9:11 am to lipripper1907
quote:
I can only argue one side but that seems like a damn good topic
having two viable sides still helps you be able to flesh out the complexities of the situation and why the side your arguing is the better. if its a totally obvious one sided situation its a boring and short paper that illustrates very little talent in persuasion.
Posted on 10/14/16 at 9:27 am to gobuxgo5
quote:
I agree but I also don't see how a 43 year old with no accidents and not traffic tickets is much more of a risk than a 43 year old with no traffic accidents or tickets but the 1st of the 2 racked up a JCpenny charge card they couldn't pay back because they lost their job.
All insurance rate decisions are made based on company experience and data then approved by state Department of Insurance. If a 43yo with a lower credit score is charged more, it is because historically he is more likely to have an accident.
Posted on 10/14/16 at 10:02 am to GenesChin
Ok and at one point race factors were approved as well
This post was edited on 10/14/16 at 10:04 am
Posted on 10/14/16 at 10:03 am to GenesChin
I don't really see the issue with credit score and insurance. Credit score is a great indication of responsibility and insurance rates are all about better responsibility equals lower risk and therefore lower rates, it's not perfect but still a very good indicator.
Posted on 10/14/16 at 10:07 am to baldona
It's a very minor factor, and some insurance companies have been moving away from it recently I read.
Personally, I think it's gotten out of hand on the things credit score is checked for, jobs not directly handling cash mainly. But that's another topic for another day.
Personally, I think it's gotten out of hand on the things credit score is checked for, jobs not directly handling cash mainly. But that's another topic for another day.
Posted on 10/14/16 at 11:21 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
Wells Fargo jumps out... but honestly I'm not sure it's as much of an "ethical" dilemma as just straight up law breaking.
If you're going to argue WF, you should take the position that it's ethical and try to support that. Arguing that it's inethical is too much of a layup.
Posted on 10/14/16 at 12:57 pm to Cold Cous Cous
Lots of banks will open up multiple accounts. The branch managers have incentive to reach based on # of checking accounts, savings accounts, total loans, total investments, referrals to other lines of businesse, etc. You want a checking account? Oh, you are at the minimum getting a checking account, a savings account, overdraft protection, and a debit card. That's 4 products and a cross sell ratio of 4.0 and that qualifies for a bonus. A lot times they'll give you everything for "free" and waive the fees for 12 months and fund the savings accounts with a penny. Then people forget and start getting charged and may or may not come back in get it fixed. You only get checking account and a debit card, that's a cross sell ratio of 2.0 and no bonus which equals not hitting goals and possibly getting fired.
This post was edited on 10/14/16 at 1:09 pm
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News