Week 6 Discussion
TWO POSTS MINIMUM REQUIRED. BUT, POST AS OFTEN AS YOU WISH.
This week we are going to have a class debate and discussion about the Malden Mills case study. Please review carefully the sources provided in the Malden Mills Resources page.
Our debate and discussion will focus on the following article by Radley Balko, published in 2004:
https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/altruism-bah-humbug
Read the entire article. Consider the following statement,
“Feuerstein’s pledge to continue paying his workers eventually cost them their jobs, and cost Feuerstein his company. Feuerstein ran out of money, and Malden Mills was forced to declare bankruptcy. Welch, on the other hand, turned GE from a sleepy home-appliance company into an international mega-corporation that today is a leader in several industries. For every job slashed, he eventually created dozens of new ones. For all the praise heaped on Feuerstein and scorn heaped on Welch, it is Welch, not Feuerstein, whose…management style did the most good for the most people.”
And then, Balko closes:
“We need to get away from the notion that unfettered capitalism is amoral or, worse, immoral. As the Welch‐Feuerstein example shows, if we define moral corporate practices as those practices which create the most good for the most people, “ruthless profiteering” is not only not incompatible with morality, it brings about a great deal more morality than altruism does.”
TWO POSTS REQUIRED.
YOU MAY COMMENT ON ANY OF THE TOPICS BELOW. TRY TO DEVELOP A DIALOGUE AND EXPLORE THE ISSUES HERE.
TOPIC ONE, let’s clarify and examine the facts and issues of the case. Does Balko accurately portray the facts?
(Please read the case study carefully. Bradley Balko is a journalist. This is a quote from an article he wrote in 2004. There is more current information on this case in the Case Study resources.)
TOPIC TWO, do you agree with Balko’s position? In answering this question, consider the ‘approach’ to the issue Balko is taking. Is he applying a particular moral theory? (And he may be unaware that he is doing it.) Are there other ways of approaching the issue? What do you think?
TOPIC THREE, consider Balko’s position in terms of ‘ways of life’–Feuerstein’s actions, arguably, flow from his way of life that include deeply held religious beliefs. How might one’s ‘way of life’ influence the way on perceives the issue of whether or not Feuerstein did the ‘right thing’ in paying his workers while the plant was being rebuilt? Also, does Balko’s bias influence his analysis of the facts? Do our deeply held beliefs do that sometimes–influence the way we look at facts and evidence–how we identify evidence, how we interpret evidence? Offer your reflections.
