Personal Responsibility

There's a lot going on here.  This is an abysmal topic.  

So let me say one thing and then we'll move on for now.  If the "system" (which is really not an object at all, rather a name we put on the way we humans barter our time) is not a moral system, whether it be immoral or amoral or anything else, I see a problem.  I've voiced this to Jason and Audra already, but thought I'd drop it here as well.  

I was listening to NPR yesterday.  They were talking about whether our morals are inborn or taught (nature vs nurture).  A caller said if most of us are ruled by morals, there must be people on the earth who are amoral and maybe we can study their genetics to find out what is different- and maybe what causes a person to have morals.  

The scientist on the show said that was an interesting question and that there are people on the planet who are amoral.  They have no bias as to whether an action is "right" or "wrong."  They are psychopaths.  Their decisions are made based on something other than morals, thus they are more likely to take the path of least resistance or the most personally profitable route.  Thereby murdering, raping, bilking people out of money, or whatever else they choose.

And that's the problem I see with capitalism.   It's "market forces" push people to do things that are immoral, because the "system" doesn't make decisions based on right or wrong, rather supply and demand, profitability, risk-reward.  

Now, I'm open to the possibility that there are other institutions that are in place (or should be) to steer us  to  modify our behavior despite the market forces and do what is right and just.  Could religion be a guiding force?  Laws?  I assume so.

But the market is so big and diverse and clouded by marketing, it's hard to steer.  And most people don't care.  

Here's my question for the moment.  

If we are to take personal responsibility, despite what the market tells us to do, how far do our responsibilities go?  Am I responsible for treating my employees fairly?  What about my creditors/suppliers?  What about my customers?  What about the farms that produce the coffees I roast?  What about the people who pick the coffee cherries and cultivate the coffee trees on those farms?

What should I be accountable for?

Whither Thou Goest, Capitalism? Morality, Amorality, or Immorality?

The blog authors got into a lively debate today about several things, culminating in the discussion of whether capitalism was amoral or immoral.  Two of us (Jason and I) argued that it is amoral, as capitalism is a concept with no conscience, and that while individuals can act within that concept in a moral or immoral manner, the system itself cannot.   Brian argued that yes, of course the system can be immoral, if it has immoral results. 

I had difficulty with this concept because of my abstract thinking, but, as always, Brian makes me re-think my premises.  Unable to stop the questions in my head from Brian's points after our discussion had ended, I did some research.  While I was just SURE that the three of us were the first group on the planet ever to have this philosophical debate (I mean, our capitalist system just evolved on its own, right?), turns out other people are also having the same discussions, and several think the system is mostly moral.  I'm not nearly as smart as I think I am (we're nearing deficit territory), which likely comes as no surprise t0 many of you, and which only makes me want to be more educated about it.  

So, I turn to you good folks out there who may be reading this (including my co-authors) for any advice on reading materials about this issue. I'd like some book recommendations, both on the question of whether a system can be moral or immoral and on proposed answers to problems with capitalism, irrespective of the author's opinion on the question in this blog's title.  Anyone?

(It's probably not my turn to post, guys, but I figured a call for assistance doesn't count.  Forgiveness requested for jumping to the head of the line.  And I'm loving the discussions and what they're making my brain do.)

 

It's just business.

Growing up, I remember watching The Godfather and being confused about the famous refrain from Michael Corleone to his brother, Sonny: "It's not personal; it's strictly business." They were, of course, talking about killing a cop and paying off a newspaper to make it look like the cop was dishonest and mixed up in the drug racket. This, naturally, was accompanied by other similar "business" practices, like famously leaving the head of a prized racehorse in a dissenter's bed.

Apologies to all the guys out there who love The Godfather, but I didn't get it then. And I still don't get it. I have continued to hear that refrain repeated by others in the business world--It's just business--when talking about lesser evils: duping someone into paying more for a product or a piece of property than they think it is worth, or buying something for "a steal." Certainly nothing illegal about any of that. What we are made to understand by this refrain, though, is that what seems to me like taking advantage of another human being's poor circumstances or lack of education or lack of understanding is merely "business," and is an accepted and even lauded practice. We shouldn't let our emotions or our compassion stand in the way of a good business decision, no matter the cost to the other person on the other side of the table.

I have often questioned this practice to myself (and, of late, to Brian). The ethics of it don't work for me. It seems immoral, selfish, and downright mean. But this isn't a blog about morality (mostly); it's a blog about capitalism and the practices in it. I posit, however, that acting as though everything is "just business" without considering the effect to the person on the other side of the table is bad, not just because it lacks compassion, but because it IS harmful to persons other than the ones on the losing side of the deal. In other words, I posit that a compassion-less capitalism is harmful to capitalism.

As an example, take the recent subprime mortgage debacle, in which banks lent money at greater than 100% on the dollar to people who likely were never going to be able to pay it off. It was a get-rich scheme taking advantage of the real estate boom, low interest rates and, most importantly, many people who didn't understand the financial trap into which they were entering. It was lucrative for a while. But then interest rates went up, the economy went down, and now the largest lenders are having to request bail-outs, and massive foreclosures in some areas are driving real estate values into the toilet. And it hasn't only hurt the players in the deal--the mortgagor and mortgagee--it is now affecting the entire world market as fears about the United States credit situation cause massive sell-offs elsewhere.

And yet, meanwhile, CEOs in charge of the lending institutions at the heart of the problem exit with massives payoffs. (A much more reasoned and informed discussion of this can be found here: http://www.newsweek.com/id/98099).

It seems to me that this should be an obvious corollary of the butterfly effect: A lender takes advantage of a financially naive hourly wage-earner, and across the ocean, the Chinese market collapses.

But I'm not an economist, and I'm only recently a business-owner. I'm more of a humanist, hoping that there is a place for me in capitalist societies. Hoping that, just maybe, it's not just business.

I look forward to hearing what others think.

Thanks, Brian, for raising your hand.

I'm raising my hand

I feel sort of like I did in college. Sitting in class with questions in my head, thoughts to share, things to say, but not really wanting to speak. I'm not sure, but I think it was a combination of things that kept me from it, and possibly the same things today: perceived apathy on behalf of my classmates, not wanting to draw attention to myself for fear the teacher would think I had some answers (and I might be wrong), and the knowledge that if I didn't know the answers to my questions, no one else in class did either (so someone else might ask or we'd all stand a chance of getting it wrong). I prefer to sit back and listen. I learn more by listening than I do by talking, usually.
But I guess this time, it's not enough to sit in the back of class and hope someone else asks the questions I have.
I have opinions, but are they right? Maybe a running dialogue will help sort out some of the opinions I have that may have holes in them.
So... let's talk about capitalism.