Made in the U.S.A Case
Josh Brant-ParkinBUS492Case 110/17/16 This case starts out with a company coming out with the next big thing; fire retardant pajamas for toddlers. It was supposed to be the safest thing for children, but quickly turned into a killer by causing kidney problems. Then an ad came out asking for any product containing tris and then selling them for 10-30% of the normal wholesale price. Another example was with the baby pacifiers that were causing choking related deaths. It then goes into the notification system, which is used to regulate the export of banned goods from the United States. Also it makes other countries aware of the banned products they are handling. The thing is, some third world countries don’t have the same health standards as the United States, so they would take the products at the decreased price with no problem. So if companies can still make a profit they will still be dumping, because at the end of the day, money is the most important thing to them.1. a) Moral question A company has to be able to cut its losses somehow. b) Non-moral question Dangerous products should not be used anywhere. Anything causing health issues and pollution is non-moral c) Moral question The U.S government sponsoring the export of dangerous products overseas is a moral question because the government is required to take precautionary measures in safeguarding the public as well as the environment from these dangerous products. d) Non-moral question
The information could be misinterpreted, which then leads to non-supporters claims to not be benefitted when the notification system isn’t supportive. e) Non-moral question The country’s reputation would be ruined from the damage it has on the people and environment.2. Dumping is when a company has an overabundance of product and is unable to sell them, which could lead to harming the people along with the environment. An example of this would be if a company had a product made of a banned material, which causes health issues, which is then dumped in another country. Yes, dumping does raise moral issues, because companies try to sell their products to cut their losses, even though they are fully aware of health issues that could come from it. An ethical relativist would say that dumping is permissible as long the country that is receiving the product can benefit from it. 3. When they can’t sell a product for any reason, they dump it in other nations to cut their losses, without having to spend the money on disposing the product in a safe manner. I believe that since it not considered illegal the company feels that it is morally correct, even though that it could impact the country in a negative way. If I were one of the producers for the pajamas, I would think of a way to dispose of them in a lawful manner by conducting research on the material to dispose of them in the safest way possible.