Sunday, July 17, 2011

Businesses and their concern with Long-term Consequences

Any business must be concerned with the long-term consequences of its actions.
Describe a specific situation in which a business might justifiably not be concerned with the long-term consequences of its actions. Discuss what you think determines whether or not a business must be concerned about the long-term consequences of its actions.
___

Businesses exist for an array of reasons. They may wish to fulfill consumer demand, ease the lives of people, and become a powerful entities and voices in society. Most importantly, they aim to make profits. Although many provide necessary services and products that allow people to survive in today's world, most make money to the detriment of the environment and human health. They should be compelled by governments to take measures to mitigate adverse long-term consequences to the environment and human health. Without taxation and regulation by governments, most industries would go about "business as usual" with free reign to pursue the highest profits possible.

While most industries contribute to environmental degradation, oil companies have gained a reputation for being the highest offender (at least in the public's consciousness). Highly publicized oil spills and their adverse effects on the environment (e.g., loss of wildlife, harm to fisheries, etc.) produced unpleasant, graphic images in Americans' minds. For instance, an investigation on the causes of the Deep Horizon oil spill of 2010 found that BP made several cost-cutting decisions resulting in the well explosion. These decisions include, among others, ignoring a failed pressure test and not plugging a pipe with cement. Failing to take precautions, indeed, was a reflection of BP's disregard for the long-term consequences of its actions.

Not only do such industries destroy the eco-system---they spread pollutants and chemicals that radically alter human beings' DNA and cause cancer. Such industries---which not only include oil companies-- inherently lack a social consciousness and therefore, need to be strictly regulated and taxed by their governments to mitigate their long-term adverse impacts on the environment and society. While an exact price cannot be put on these industries' harm to the environment, governments should refunnel tax money for environmental protection efforts. Granted, these efforts do not overcome or even cancel out the adverse actions of these industries.

Other industries are not known for their harmful environmental footprints but exploit human weakness to the detriment of their health. Companies selling unhealthy foods targeted towards children and those advertising alcohol and cigarettes are a few examples. Indeed, there is a reasonable argument to made that this is a capitalistic society where people have the freedom to buy any products they can afford. However, in a society beset by obesity and drug problems, governments should take responsibility to form policies that discourage businesses from exploiting the ignorance and recklessness of human beings. Again, such companies lack a social consciousness and will not take into account the long-term consequences of doing business without the intervention of public health advocacy groups and the government.


Ideally, all businesses should address the long-term consequences of their actions. This is especially in the case where their business leaves harmful footprints on the environment and human health. When businesses only harm themselves---and not others around them--they are not obligated by society to address long-term consequences. For instance, when a company employs people with poor customer service skills, they harm clients in the short-term. However, the long-term consequence of receiving a bad reputation in the community and then losing profits will only harm the business itself. While businesses may provide some good to society, like valuable services/products and jobs, governments and other groups must be present to keep them in check and hold them accountable for their adverse effect on the environment and human health.

1 comment:

  1. Again you failed to address an example where businesses are not concerned with long term consequences. For example, Pharmaceutical companies don;t care about long term consequences because they want profit. For instance, sleeping disorders and giving pills are a big deal. Pharmaceutical companies often don;t care of long term consequences and tend to make the drug seem mroe extragavant. They fail to address long term consequences because it would hurt their profit margin.

    ReplyDelete