It seemed to me, and still does, that the system of American business often produces wrong, immoral and irresponsible decisions, even though the personal morality of the people running the businesses is often above reproach. The system has a different morality as a group than the people do as individuals, which permits it to willfully produce ineffective or dangerous products, deal dictatorially and often unfairly with suppliers, pay bribes for business, abrogate the rights of employees by demanding blind loyalty to management or tamper with the democratic process of government through illegal political contributions.
I am not a psychologist, so I can't offer a professional opinion on what happens to the freedom of individual minds when they are blended into the group management through process of business. But my private analysis is this: morality has to do with people. If an action is hewed primarily from the perspective of its effect on people, it is put into the moral realm.
Business in America, however, is impersonal. This is particularly true of large American multi-national corporations. They are viewed by their employees and publics as faceless. They have no personality. The ultimate measure of success and failure of these businesses is not their effect on people but rather their earnings per share of stock. If earnings are high, the business is considered good. If they are low or in the red ink, it is considered a failure. The first question to greet any business proposal is how will it effect profits? People do not enter the equation of a business decisions except to the extent that the effect on them will hurt or enhance earnings per share. In such a completely impersonal context, business decisions of questionable personal morality are easily justified. The unwavering devotion to the bottom line brings this about, and the American public until now has been more than willing to accept this. When someone is forced into early retirement in a management power-play or supplier is cheated out of sale by under-the-table dealings, the public reaction is generally, "Oh, well. That's business." And management's reaction is often, "it's what's on the bottom line that counts." A person who shoots and kills an other is sentenced to life in prison. A business man who makes a defective product which kills people may get a nominal fine or a verbal slap on the hands, ff he is ever brought to trial at all.
In the author's view, if an American business makes an immoral decision as a group, the man aging individuals ______.
A. may be excused from trial
B. are often above reproach
C. may differ in interpreting morality
D. should not escape responsibility
Under SEC guidelines, a company in this situation is required either to submit revised financial statements or that they withdraw their plans for a public stock offering.
A. that they withdraw their plans
B. to with draw its plans
C. that it withdraw planning
D. to have been withdrawn from their plans
E. it should withdraw its plans
The state medical review board is considering a new regulation that physicians practicing
A. that physicians practicing in state facilities with past malpractice suits having been filed against them are required to disclose any such suits to prospective patients
B. that requires physicians practicing in state facilities to disclose any past malpractice suits filed against them to prospective patients
C. to require physicians with past malpractice suits filed against them and who practice in state facilities to disclose these to prospective patients
D. for physicians that practice in state facilities requiring them to have disclosed to prospective patients past malpractice suits filed against them
E. requiring physicians who practice in state facilities to disclose to prospective patients any past malpractice suits filed against them
Edmund likes to drive at a speed ______ the traffic limit. I wonder how be always manages
A. haying exceeded, to be fined
B. exceeded, having been fined
C. to exceed, to fine
D. exceeding, being fined