Laws and Ethics…. Who’s Kidding Who?

years, I read an article written by a famous psychologist in which he wrote his studies, I found one percent of all human beings never lie, cheat or steal. One percent ever would lie, cheat, or to fly and taking into account the right set of circumstances, the rest of us probably lies, traps or.

say this to emphasize the fact that, if we can in this simple composition of principle – sobering but can be a point of reference we have to begin to at least try to understand the denigration of the ethic that lead to results such as Enron and WorldCom.

Believe that the moral majority walks hand in hand with unquestionable ethics. A quick search on a moral dictionary reveals how words, ethical, good, good, fair, honest, decent, honorable, just, principles and so on. All good words, no doubt. Too many words describing what most of us, including to Enron Exec-see in ourselves, morally integrate.

However, there are people who come up on his perch in an effort [dare I say] away from Magno proclaiming its unwavering commitment to honesty and ethics all the time to engage in activities contrary to wash. The walls of the lobby of the majority of the companies absolutely full of words of kindness and justice just so others can see, but in practice, never to be

.

to be honest, that the big dirty is not sacrosanct for unethical behavior or lack of willingness to appropriate actions considered harmful. Even something as simple as Internet or bad hair removal Office materials company.

The fact is that the Enron

and Worldcoms conquered the market in immoral conduct. We like it or not, today the moral degradation is systemic in society.

to try to shed some light on the reality of the true ethical conduct of the Supreme Court of the United States – Potter said: [ethics] “… is to know the difference between what you are entitled to do and what is correct”

Omniscient

words to say the least! Words that, in theory, make much sense. In practice, however, it can point out of it, when you are sitting on the bench of the Supreme Court and asked Judge nothing, its moral and ethical position, is and always will be, committed by a factor at the end, this is legal… What law?

Mount a pedestal that will, in practice, its commitment to ethics is that words, many words used to make so many companies gorillas of statements that direct the routine mission

juxtaposed.

the judge must in this case be criticized for not knowing the fundamentals of true morality/ethics or to defend the benefits contains. would or should he stand out from someone when it is made clear, also is handcuffed by the same principle that defies the rest of us – the thing that governs the outcome of all legal decisions of negocios-es ethics? The decision to dismiss employees 1-100-1 000 or more; You can do – but is it legal? The decision to withhold commissions, debts or taxes to weather, sometimes challenging economic-q: what are the legal implications?

do

the ethical dilemma of cutting or less service contracts to improve the bottom line and appease shareholders ethics be sentenced-q: what our legal position?

is not a world enough and is a joke that we try to eradicate our involvement by blaming the barons of business as WorldCom. Will agree, when faced with ethical dilemmas, all [if we] hide behind the skirt of Lady holding the scales of Justice.

…………………………………………

do

the question remains, however, as Enron and WorldComs hand so?

the answer is not so mysterious, especially if I buy that you leave in what has written before… given the right set of circumstances, that almost all of us [occasionally] take the wrong path

.

is short-sighted to believe management levels to get out of bed every morning thinking about how you can deceive the world, taking undue advantage or acting dishonestly. Quite the opposite! It is not to say, however, as well as in the case of the Supreme Court of Justice Potter, there is one circumstance beyond of their control that unequivocally may govern the decisions, which may affect their moral commitment innate

of ethics.

for example, who among us may not think a patro
This was posted on : Laws and Ethics…. Who’s Kidding Who?