Donald Sterling – Sometimes Business Ethics Means Shutting Up

On May 14, 2014May 14, 2014 By southwerkIn business ethics

Donald Sterling – Sometimes Business Ethics Means Shutting Up

Self awareness is an important skill. Sometimes, individuals lack any perspective on themselves. The advantage of this is that you feel good about yourself with little or no justification. You have a golden and continuous opportunity to project all of your inferiority and weaknesses on everyone else. Thus it is for Donald Sterling who is undoubtedly wondering out loud to his wealthy friends even as you read this how unfair all this news coverage is. He is no doubt explaining to his friends that the media just won’t stop saying he’s a racist when everybody who knows him, anyone with half a brain knows he’s no more a racist than Martin Luther King.

If you think I’m being cruel – watch the interview, the level of self-deceit is incredible. In his mind, his beliefs are “factual.”

And that in the end is the benefit of being a member of the .01 percent, you have the privilege of being stupid. Because in that comfortable world, there is no countervailing reality to have to deal with. You can believe any set of comforting nonsense. It is a pity that Anderson Cooper didn’t ask him about voting rights or taxes.

Before business ethics can be exercised there has to be an understanding of facts and reasoning. There has to be a firm connection to reality. That is harder than it sounds. There are many individuals who have a difficulty telling opinion from facts, and many more who don’t understand how logic and reasoning are exercised.

When I was very young man, I worked at a store. One day the owner explained to me that doctors had told her that black people were arranged differently on the inside – their organs were in different places. When I appeared surprised, she was surprised that I didn’t understand something so obvious. It has been more than thirty years now and I have not yet ran into a “black” physiology textbook. I’m not expecting it to happen soon.

Her “facts” were different from reality, and when such is the case, business ethics are often irrelevant.

James Pilant

Donald Sterling’s interview disaster: Rich old racist self-destructs to Anderson Cooper – Salon.com

Donald Sterling, in all his reprehensible anti-glory, is officially representative of only one person, Donald Sterling. But it was hard not to think about the insularity and cossetting the super-wealthy enjoy, once they get super-wealthy, watching the maligned Los Angeles Clippers owner self-destruct with Anderson Cooper Monday night.

Sterling is a man who is obviously used to holding forth on his mind-blowingly prejudiced views without challenge. He wants us to think V. Stiviano entrapped him with her magic lady parts — “I don’t know why the girl had me say those things,” he told Cooper — and got him to launch a paranoid racist rant out of lust. But clearly that is not true, unless he’s lusting after Anderson Cooper.

“I’m not a racist,” Sterling told Cooper. “I made a terrible, terrible mistake. And I’m here with you today to apologize and to ask for forgiveness for all the people that I’ve hurt. When I listen to that tape, I don’t even know how I can say words like that…. I mean, that’s not the way I talk.” Actually, it seems to be exactly the way Sterling talks.

It’s hard to know where to start with the NBA franchise owner’s outrageous remarks. He called Stiviano “a street person” and said Magic Johnson “ought to be ashamed of himself.” No, that doesn’t do Sterling justice. This is what he said about Johnson:

Here is a man, he acts so holy. He made love to every girl in America in every city and he had AIDS. When he had those AIDS, I went to my synagogue and I prayed for him.

“Those AIDS”? (For the record, Johnson has HIV, not AIDS). But it got worse:

What has Magic Johnson done? He’s got AIDS. Did he do any business? Did he help anybody in south L.A.? I think he should be ashamed of himself. What does he do for the black people? I’m telling you he does nothing. It’s all talk.

I spent millions on giving away and helping minorities. Does he do that? That’s one problem I have. Jews, when they get successful, they will help their people.

And some of the African-Americans, maybe I’ll get in trouble again. They don’t want to help anybody. What has Magic Johnson really done for Children’s Hospital which kids are lying in the hallways. They are sick. They need a bed. What has he done for any hospital? What has he done for any group?

via Donald Sterling’s interview disaster: Rich old racist self-destructs to Anderson Cooper – Salon.com.

From Around the Web.

From the web site, Abagond.

http://abagond.wordpress.com/2014/04/28/donald-sterling/

Donald Sterling (1934- ), an American billionaire, is best known as the owner of the Los Angeles Clippers, a basketball team. It accounts for a third of his wealth. On April 25th 2014, a recording of what seems to be him talking to his girlfriend, Vanessa Stiviano, was made public on the Internet. In it he tells her not to be seen in public with Black people.

We do not know where the recording came from, when it was made or whether it has been edited. But it is probably all too true: In 2009, for example, Sterling was made to pay $2.725 million for discriminating against Blacks and Latinos at his apartment buildings in metropolitan Los Angeles. It is a matter of public record that he has said stuff like this:

Is she one of those black people that stink? […] Just evict the bitch.

…

On racism:

Sterling: It’s the world! You go to Israel, the blacks are just treated like dogs.

Stiviano: So do you have to treat them like that too?

Sterling: The white Jews, there’s white Jews and black Jews, do you understand?

Stiviano: And are the black Jews less than the white Jews?

Sterling: A 100%, 50, a 100%.

Stiviano: And is that right?

Sterling: It isn’t a question – we don’t evaluate what’s right and wrong, we live in a society. We live in a culture. We have to live within that culture.

No Free Pass for Lying Politicians

On May 14, 2014 By southwerkIn business ethics

Please visit Talking Ethics and add your thoughts or even better sign up as a follower.

Talking Ethics

When we conducted an informal survey last year asking people when it’s okay to tell a white lie, a large majority, 71%, came down hard on politicians, saying it’s wrong for them to shade the truth, even when it’s just a matter of emphasizing facts that support their point of view and ignoring those that don’t.

But lying by politicians remains rampant.

View original post 384 more words

What is “Postcapitalism”?

On May 13, 2014 By southwerkIn business ethics

This is the very first post of a brand new blog. I find what is being said of interest and I hope you will take a look at this blog with as high a hope as I have for it.

Postcapitalist PDX

So I realize there are quite a few different uses and meanings of this term, but I’ll be focusing on one that was developed by Gisbon-Graham in their book A Postcapitalist Politics.

For the purposes of this blog, postcapitalism will refer to a space, place, moment, project, etc. that does not lie “within” the capitalist mindset. It doesn’t rely on free-market money making principles but instead reminds us that we have other values– we’re a community oriented, environmentally minded, sharing, creative, and caring society.

It’s time to change the current discourse from one that is “capitalocentric,” one where “other forms of economy (not to mention noneconomic aspects of social life) are often understood primarily with reference to capitalism: as being fundamentally the same as (or modeled upon) capitalism, or as being deficient or substandard imitations; as being opposite to capitalism; as being the complement of capitalism; as existing in capitalism’s space or…

View original post 131 more words

The Ethics Sage Discusses the Sterling Scandal

On May 5, 2014 By southwerkIn business ethics

The Ethics Sage Discusses the Sterling Scandal

Steven Mintz also known as The Ethics Sage has some thoughts on Sterling’s racial comments and their origin. As always, please go to his site and read the whole entry, stay for a time and enjoy some of his many other posts and then sign up as a follower to get first notice of new posts.

James Pilant

Does Sterling’s Punishment fit the Crime? – Ethics Sage

I grew up in the 1960s and recall many arguments with my parents over the treatment of African-Americans in the U.S. The differences were not whether schools should be segregated or blacks should sit in the back of the bus or that businesses could refuse to serve black people. It wasn’t that blatant an offense that we disagreed about. It was the more subtle issues such as whether blacks were as capable as whites to make a success out of their lives and be contributing members of society or whether they could learn as well as whites or whether they have the same work ethic as whites. I tried my best to convince my parents that the differences they perceived which, in their minds, made blacks an inferior race were born out of a time when blacks were blatantly discriminated against. In other words, the mistreatment of blacks in America for so many years was the basis for thinking they could not accomplish what whites could. How could they at that time given their ability to progress and accomplish what whites had done was held down for such a long period of time.

The legacy of white folk treatment of blacks is marked by years of slavery in America. I believe discrimination still exists today and goes cuts deep into the very core of how we treat others. When I was growing up I remember some of my friends looked downward when a black person passed by or crossed to the other side of the street. This is the essence of racism and, today, we see it in stupid comments made by people such as Donald Sterling, the owner of the NBA franchise Los Angeles Clippers. …

via Does Sterling’s Punishment fit the Crime? – Ethics Sage.

From Around the Web.

From the web site, Lizzy P. Beauty.

http://lizzypbeauty.wordpress.com/2014/04/26/donald-sterling-racism-and-the-clippers/

I have personally been a Clippers fan for years now. Win or loss the Clippers are my team. One thing I have known for sometime is that Donald Sterling is a racist, I look back at the day that Baron Davis was the lead star of the team. Sterling would sit on the sidelines and harass him. Yep that’s right harass his own star player with racial slurs. Even when Davis said something it was swept under the rug. There have been numerous other accounts as well. Including settlements outside of court to keep things hush, hush.

This recent audio that has surfaced is truly saddening but there is a wider issue as a whole with the NBA owners in general. Anybody remember when Lebron James left Cleveland and his owner wrote a letter that stated he felt like he owned him personally. As if to imply he was his slave, oh yeah you all let that one pass because you were mad at Lebron. Right???

“Talking Ethics” Discusses the Sterling Affair

On April 30, 2014 By southwerkIn business ethics

“Talking Ethics” Discusses the Sterling Affair

Mark Willen’s Blog, “Talking Ethics” has a new post about the basketball team owner, Donald Sterling. He lists five ethics failures associated with the scandal. As you can see with a quick glance at the quote from his blog below, I have only included the first two. That’s because I want you to go to his blog for the other three. I want you to visit, look around and maybe sign up as a follower or read some of his other postings.

He writes essays that I find interesting and enjoyable.

James Pilant

Five Ethical Failures in the Sterling Affair | Talking Ethics

The NBA’s decision to ban Donald Sterling, the owner of the Los Angeles Clippers, is a reasonable first step, but it doesn’t begin to deal effectively with the underlying problems – or even address some of the ethical failures by the too-many actors involved.

Five separate failures immediately come to mind.

1. Sterling’s comments. Now that Sterling has acknowledged that it really is his voice on the tape, there can be no explaining or excusing his views, nor any separate ethical acts he committed be used to mitigate the harm. Racism is inherently unethical, and we’re all obliged to help limit its harm.

2. The NBA’s past actions. While the lifetime ban announced today and the move to end Sterling’s ownership of the Los Angeles Clippers is a big step in the right direction, one has to wonder why the NBA didn’t act a lot earlier. Sterling’s long history of racism was no secret to the league and the other owners. A string of lawsuits for sexual harassment and housing discrimination, including one that led to a $2.76 million settlement with the federal government, provided plenty of reasons to act a long time ago. …

via Five Ethical Failures in the Sterling Affair | Talking Ethics.

From Around the Web.

From the web site, You Call It Gossip.

http://youcallitgossip.wordpress.com/2014/04/27/donald-sterling/

These are sad days in the NBA playoffs this year,
and not just because the Knicks did not make it (Knickstape).
I’m sure by now everyone who is a fan of basketball and even those who are not, have heard the comments made by LA clipper owner Donald Sterling.

Sterling told his Black and Mexican girlfriend he does NOT want her bringing black people to his games including Magic Johnson in whom she took a Instagram photo with. This statement was recorded and is now being broadcasted all over. No action has been taken yet in any suspension or fine against Sterling. (Yet they will fine JR smith in a hurry for blinking too hard). Apparently they are running a full investigation. Which to me is pointless, it is him and we all know it. He has a very distinct voice so what are we investigating? Hopefully action will be taken sooner than later, as Adam Silver announces “it will move quickly”. Sterling has also been caught in the past making other racist like gestures.

I am positive there are many racist around us daily but as a owner of a NBA team, you should at least try to curve your hatred toward African Americans. The NBA is 78% black. It is horrifying to know that you can say such horrible things to a black woman about black people, when you work with and root for them everyday. What kind of person is Donald Sterling? I say the kind of person that needs to be not suspended, not fined but fired from his position as owner of the LA clippers. There is no room for racist in basketball. This is the one place everyone can come together and forget about color forget about anything. In this game you aren’t judged by who you are but how you can handle a ball. It’s a team.

1.2 Trillion Corporate Welfare 2000-2012

On April 28, 2014April 28, 2014 By southwerkIn business ethics

1.2 Trillion Corporate Welfare 2000-2012

There is a new organization called Open the Books (this is their Facebook page) which is providing dollar amounts in expenditures in state and federal governments. I will be watching the development of their organization with interest. This first publication that I am aware of, is pretty striking. (It’s the one specifying the 1.2 trillion dollar corporate welfare and that number appears to be only partial.) Certainly, this amount dwarfs the amount spent on education or aid to the poor. And yet while those things are the subject of continuous debate, this kind of expenditure seems by comparison to be little considered.

Maybe that will change now with these new reports.

James Pilant

New Report: Fortune 100 Companies Have Received $1.2 Trillion in Corporate Welfare Recently

Posted by talesfromthelou on March 21, 2014

By Aaron Cantu

AlterNet

Bank of America.(Photo: Stefan Georgi / Flickr)Military contractors, oil companies and banks are the biggest ‘welfare queens’ around.

Most of us are aware that the government gives mountains of cash to powerful corporations in the form of tax breaks, grants, loans and subsidies–what some have called “corporate welfare.” However, little has been revealed about exactly how much money Washington is forking over to mega businesses.

Until now.

A new venture called Open the Books, based in Illinois, was founded with a mission to bring transparency to how the federal budget is spent. And what they found is shocking: between 2000 and 2012, the top Fortune 100 companies received $1.2 trillion from the government. That doesn’t include all the billions of dollars doled out to housing, auto and banking enterprises in 2008-2009, nor does it include ethanol subsidies to agribusiness or tax breaks for wind turbine makers.

What Open the Book’s forthcoming report does reveal is that the most valuable contracts between the government and private firms were for military procrument deals, including Lockheed Martin ($392 billion), General Dynamics ($170 billion), and United Technologies ($73 billion).

via New Report: Fortune 100 Companies Have Received $1.2 Trillion in Corporate Welfare Recently | Tales from the World.

From Around the Web.

From the web site, Class War in America.

http://classwarinamerica.wordpress.com/2014/04/22/the-12-trillion-welfare-ripoff/

The $12-Trillion Welfare Ripoff

It is a primary item of faith among conservatives that the reason we must not have a social system that helps the poor is that poverty is caused by inner-city blacks who refuse to work, belong to gangs, sell and use drugs, are unwed mothers, and so on. All they want to do is live in luxury on the welfare checks we pay for. This is presumed to be because they are naturally inferior and lazy, an argument that is older than slavery. (Every single one of these beliefs is provably false, of course.)

One thing never seems to be discussed: The entire cost to support poor people comes to about $58 billion, most of which would go away if it were possible for the poor to earn a living wage.

This is what the twelve trillion
corporate welfare looks like:
$12,000,000,000,000.

It seems unreasonable that anyone should receive undeserved money from the government, and the righteous right has been ranting about it since the dawn of time. All this ranting, however, doesn’t prevent the red states from using more federal aid than they contribute, which sounds like undeserved welfare to me.

Plus, for unknown reasons, the right doesn’t rant about the $12 trillion in corporate welfare that the 100 wealthiest companies and their very wealthy officers have received recently. It was handed to rich corporations gratis over the past twelve years, a trillion a year. The $58 billion social welfare cost they object to is 0.06% of one year’s worth of corporate welfare. That’s six hundredths of one percent, an amount that’s less than a typical rounding error.

The Ethics Sage – What does it take to make Ethical Decisions in the Workplace?

On April 23, 2014 By southwerkIn business ethics

It is my pleasure to publish a posting from The Ethics Sage. As always, I recommend you visit his site and sign up as a follower so you will be notified of each of his postings. I consider him a most capable colleague in the field of business ethics and hope you visit his site often.

James Pilant

What does it take to make Ethical Decisions in the Workplace?

I often discuss ethical decision making in my Accounting Ethics class because accountants and auditors are part of the internal organization structure and have an important role in preventing and detecting misconduct (i.e., occupational and financial statement fraud). I typically start by discussing virtue ethics that posits ethical people possess certain character traits that pre-dispose them to do the right thing when conflicts arise or ethical dilemmas exist. I favor virtue ethics because it provides a basis for evaluating the decision as ethical, which traditional philosophical reasoning methods do as well, and also it can be used to evaluate the ethics of the person making the decision. In other words, ethical decisions and decision-makers reflect honesty, integrity, fairness, due care, and responsibility and accountability in decision making.

One model I draw on to support the discussion is James Rest’s Model of Moral Development. In 1983, Rest proposed a four-stage model of the ethical decision-making process that links to the cognitive processes that individuals use in ethical decision making; that is, it depicts how an individual first identifies an ethical dilemma and reasons through what is the right thing to do, and then continues through her intention and finally courage to act ethically. Here is a brief outline of the model.

Moral Sensitivity

The first step in moral behavior requires that the individual interpret the situation as moral by noticing the moral features of the decision. A moral person ought to have a certain preference about how to behave and then ought to behave in accordance with that preference. Moral features are built around consideration of how our actions affect others and whether we respect the rights of others in decision making.

Moral Judgment

Moral judgment entails finding the ideal solution to an ethical dilemma. It starts with cognition, the process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience, and the senses. It continues by making assumptions and emphasizing some things over others. Typically, philosophical reasoning methods help in the process. An integral part of virtue ethics is the application of practical wisdom, gained through years of experience and developing good habits.

Moral Motivation

Moral motivation reflects the degree of commitment to taking the moral course of action, valuing moral values over other values, and taking personal responsibility for moral outcomes. Moral motivation reflects an individual’s willingness to place ethical values (e.g., honesty, integrity, trustworthiness) ahead of non-ethical values (e.g., wealth and fame) that relate to self-interest. A whistleblower who acts out of moral intent is willing to accept the risk of retaliation in order to follow her ethical beliefs.

Moral Character

Individuals do not always behave in accordance with their ethical intention. The whistleblower may know what the right thing to do is but lack the moral courage to do it. Rest describes moral character as persistence in completing a moral task, having courage, over-coming temptation, and implementing processes that serve a moral goal. A person with a strong ethical character is more likely to carry out ethical intentions with ethical action than one with a weak character because she is better able to withstand pressures from higher-ups in the organization to overlook wrongdoing.

Here are some tips in making ethical decisions in the workplace.

1. Consider how your actions affect others. All decisions have stakeholder effects and ethical people consider how those parties will be affected if I they decide to do one thing or another.
2. Do no harm. Your actions and decisions should never harm another party. One exception is whistleblowing where the greater good may dictate that a decision-maker should report wrongdoing whenever the action of one party harms others (i.e., investors and creditors). A good example is fraudulent financial statements where, under certain circumstances, the accountant or auditor should blow the whistle on fraud by contacting the SEC.
3. Make decisions that are universal. That is, ask yourself whether you would want others to resolve the conflict by taking the same action you are about to take for similar reasons in similar situations. If the answer is ‘yes,’ then your actions have universal appeal. Universality requires that your decisions respect the rights of others.
4. Reflect before deciding. As a final step, think about how you would feel if your actions and decisions appear on the front pages of a newspaper. Would you be proud to defend them; explain them to loved ones; follow-up with ethical behavior in the workplace?

The reason virtue ethics is an excellent tool of ethical decision-making is no matter how “good” an individual wants to be, in the workplace competing forces come into play such as loyalty to one’s supervisor or the organization. It takes a person of courage – integrity – to place the good of others (i.e., public interest) ahead of one’s own self-interest and that of one’s employer. Virtue ethics recognizes that the person must be honest, trustworthy, and fair-minded, and so on for the decision itself to reflect these characteristics.

The Ethics Sage blogs can be found at: http://www.ethicssage.com/

and http://www.workplaceethicsadvice.com/.

Genius and Ambition IV: The Heavy Hitters

On April 23, 2014 By southwerkIn business ethics

Please just go look at the beautiful picture!

Tim Haslett's Blog

Naturally enough the exhibition contains the Royal Academy’s two great heavyweights J.M.W. Turner and John Constable. The Constable is the magnificent a Boat Passing a Lock

He painted the scene again in The Lock

The centre of both pictures is dominated by the structure of a lock and the figure of the lock keeper who is releasing the turbulent power of the river. in Passing a Lock, the lock itself and the boat are in a state of chaotic energy in contrast to the rest of the picture and in particular to the calm and poised figure of the lock keeper who controls not only the force of the river but indirectly the force of the thunderstorm that sweeps across the background. It’s a combination of neoclassical ideas of man imposing order in nature with the well-kept fields, the church in the village in the background. It’s even got…

View original post 33 more words

The Effects of Bullying Last Many Years

On April 23, 2014April 23, 2014 By southwerkIn business ethics

The Effects of Bullying Last Many Years

Bullying is a moral wrong. It is also a failure in the practice of business ethics when it is tolerated and a gross breach of duty when committed.

Much has been written about bullying recently because of shocking events that often go along with it like violence and suicide.

But this new research (discussed below) takes bullying and show that it is a much more serious evil that had been previously thought. The effects last much longer, decades longer than was believed before.

This makes it a more serious offense and there will be changes in policy and law to reflect this.

As a business person, it would be wise to take a careful look at the company policy on bullying because now when we talk about damages we’re not just talking about the current situations, we’re talking about decades of after effects. That is going to be a lot of money both in terms of punitive damages and payouts for pain and suffering. And if your workplace encourages or tolerates bullying, you should have to pay every penny.

James Pilant

The New Bullying Prevention | Ethics, Equality and Equal Rights

Victims of bullies suffer the psychological consequences all the way until middle age, with higher levels of depression, anxiety and suicide, new research shows.

The immediate ill effects of bullying have been well documented, with experts increasingly seeing it as a form of child abuse. Influential studies from Finland have made the case that people who were bullied as kids continued to suffer as young adults – girls who were bullied grew up to attempt and commit suicide more frequently by the age of 25, for instance, and boys were more likely to develop anxiety disorders.

Now a trio of researchers has taken an even longer view. They examined data on roughly 18,000 people who were born in England, Scotland and Wales during a single week in 1958 and then tracked periodically up through the age of 50 as part of the U.K.’s National Child Development Study.

Back in the 1960s, when the study subjects were 7 and 11 years old, researchers interviewed their parents about bullying. Parents reported whether their children were never, sometimes or frequently bullied by other kids.

Fast-forward to the 2000s. About 78% of the study subjects are still being tracked at age 45, when they are assessed for anxiety and depression by nurses. By the time they’re 50, 61% of them remain in the study, and are asked to fill out a questionnaire that measures psychological distress.

The researchers found that people who were bullied either occasionally or frequently continued to suffer higher levels of psychological distress decades after the bullying occurred. They were more likely than study subjects who were never bullied to be depressed, to assess their general health as poor, and to have worse cognitive functioning. In addition, those who were bullied frequently had a greater risk of anxiety disorders and suicide.

via The New Bullying Prevention | Ethics, Equality and Equal Rights.

From Around the Web.

From the web site, Bullying Stories.

http://bullyinglte.wordpress.com/2014/03/03/dare-to-fight-back-against-bullies/

Bullies are getting a lot of press nowadays, but it’s difficult to tell whether bullying behavior is on the rise, or we’re just noticing and talking about it more than we did in the past. In our obsessively politically correct environment, there is an ever-increasing push to avoid confronting or even defending one’s self against a bully, and to opt instead for a more positive developmental response to aggressive behavior. We are also being told that the best way to deal with bullying is to ensure that our children don’t bully others in the first place. Our children’s schools often take a zero-tolerance approach to any physical confrontation, punishing both the victim for defending him or herself and the instigator for initiating the behavior. This is patently unfair to the victim, and does little if anything to stem the aggressive behavior other than forcing the bully to practice his or her aggression somewhere out of the school’s sight and/or jurisdiction.

While eliminating the violence in the first place is admittedly the ideal solution, we have to realistically acknowledge that it is not the whole solution. Sometimes, you simply have to fight back if you hope to get the bullies to leave you alone. Fortunately, by helping our children to understand what drives the bully, we can better prepare them to deal with it in the most effective manner. In short, fighting back needn’t always involve physical violence. By understanding and responding directly to the underlying causes of bullying, the bullied child can emerge from the situation with an increased level of self-confidence, which is kryptonite to the bully’s attempt to be Superman (or Superwoman). …

Tim Haslett on Privatization!

On April 19, 2014 By southwerkIn business ethics

Tim Haslett on Privatization!

Tim Haslett is an Australian blogger whose work I find persuasive and enjoyable. Let me let him describe himself: (from his blog)

After 30 years in academia, with a Ph.D. in non-linear dynamics and systems modelling and a Masters degree in English literature, I’m keen to broaden my writing audience. I am interested in becoming part of an informed community of commentary on matters of public interest. For me this will include politics (mainly Australian), films, books and the general cant, hypocrisy and stupidity that seems to infest public life.

That’s pretty good. I think it is better than my self description. Below is a two paragraph piece from one of his blog posts. I recommend it and I would like you to visit his site and sign on as a follower.

James Pilant

Why privatisation really doesn’t work. | Tim Haslett’s Blog

There was a time when a large proportion of our essential services; water, electricity, transport, telecommunications, postal services, health, education, police force, fire-fighting and to a lesser extent the banking system were provided by the federal or state governments. This was based on the assumption that the state, through taxpayer funding, will take responsibility for the provision of the services for the general population. Providing this level of service required a taxation system that progressively taxed those who earned the most money. It also required that the average taxpayer would pay relatively high levels of taxation. With the steady erosion of the tax base under the Howard/Costello government, the amount of revenue available to provide the services declined. This was combined with adopting policies based on supply-side economics, which encouraged private enterprise at the expense of state funded activity.

These changes were particularly evident in the provision of health services where individuals were able to take out insurance to avoid the impact of expensive surgery and to avoid waiting for places in publicly funded hospitals. Win this insurance was provided through a government, not-four-profit insurance company, namely Medibank Private, it effectively meant that people, normally the better off, could pay an extra tax to fund a specific use of the health system. …

via Why privatisation really doesn’t work. | Tim Haslett’s Blog.

From Around the Web.

From the web site, Sussex Against Privatisation.

http://sussexagainstprivatization.wordpress.com/2013/12/05/official-statement-on-suspensions/

Five Sussex students were today, Wednesday 4th December, suspended by Vice-Chancellor, Michael Farthing as he exercised his “authority to temporarily suspend [their] studies and exclude [them] from the University campus.” The suspensions follow protests against the outsourcing of Sussex services to private companies, the occupation of Bramber House in support of fair pay in higher education and the presence of students at the picket lines on the December 3rd national strike.

The occupation was a legal, peaceful means of protest and one undertaken as a last resort. Approximately one hundred students entered the conference centre on Tuesday 26th November in a calm, non-confrontational manner. The occupation was not disruptive to any academic activity nor were any academic lectures rescheduled or disrupted as a result of its presence. Its purpose was to reclaim a University space now owned by a profit-driven private company and to support striking staff in their endeavours to gain fair and equal pay. Any “disruption”, then, was to the private company and its business ends as opposed to students or University staff. It raises concern that Management prioritise the concerns of a business above the concerns of their students and employees. Further, it is laughable that Management have chosen to accuse students of “intimidating” behaviour given the continued and systematic intimidation and censorship of those involved in legitimate, peaceful protests at the University.

Pilant's Business Ethics Blog

Category: business ethics

Donald Sterling – Sometimes Business Ethics Means Shutting Up