Related Article Here
The papers are reporting that NBA players who signed with teams in China due to the lockout are regretting it. The lockout is over in the states, so these players now want to come back to their big salaries. The problem is they signed contracts that said they would stay in China and play out the season. Additionally, the Chinese teams are required to forfeit their season if any of their players leave and play in the NBA. The Chinese would have to sign a documenting allowing them to return to the states and play, which they are not going to do. Essentially they are being held to their contract.
The question is why are they trying so hard to get out of these contracts? There are reports of faked injuries, missing practice, and generally being difficult, from players trying to get out, but ethically, these guys have a responsibility to fulfill their contract. Why can't these guys just suck it up and play out their contract and then go back to the states next year. Seriously, their being babies.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Housing dilemma
We have been shopping for apartments recently and came across a place we thought was perfect for us. We had done a lot of shopping and knew when we saw this place it was what we wanted. The only problem was the renter had set up a system where potential tenants give them $300 as an "earnest" payment. Essentially what this means is that your place in line is saved. The first person to pay the earnest has 72hrs from the time they pay it to say they don't want the place. If they don't want it the next in line gets the opportunity, and so forth. We were second in line. First in line was an extremely young couple (according to the renters) who definitely didn't need a spare room and probably didn't understand that this place should be out of their price range. Needless to say, the renters preferred us over them, but unfortunately had already made the "earnest" deal with the other couple. They also thought this other couple wouldn't actually come through and take the place.
We couldn't help but think of all the reasons we should get the place over the other couple. As we waited the 72hrs we tried to come up with all sorts of creative ways the renters could get around the promise they had made. It seemed to be in everyone's best interest to tell the first couple no and tell us yes, and don't they have the right to rent to whoever they want to rent to?
The couple did end up taking the place, the renters felt bad dragging us along all week, and we had to start over on our housing search. I'm sure everything will work out fine with those renters, but it sure seemed like there could have been a different result. Utilitarianism would have benefited us with the apartment, I'm sure.
We ended up signing on a new place the very next day. It is much nicer and cheaper, and is furnished as well. We feel like we ended up with a much better deal over all.
The situation with this apartment was similar to the first, were the renter had already had a few people see the place and like it. They had told us and two couples before us that whoever could get back with a deposit would be able to rent the apartment. This seemed a little better than the "earnest" situation, but because we only wanted to stay until April, it still caused some drama.
We had told the lady we would go right home and get the deposit immediately. As we drove, the renter called the other couples and told them we were going to take the apartment. She said she offered it to one of the other couples since they had been there first, and were wanting a place for a year, but they said they would keep looking. They said they almost called us and told us they didn't want to just rent it for one semester, but decided at the last minute to let us. I felt like she had given us her word, but we still were nervous for the whole ride home and back that she would call.
Now we have signed a contract, so I don't think they can back out if they wanted to. I think we ended up with the best situation overall.
We couldn't help but think of all the reasons we should get the place over the other couple. As we waited the 72hrs we tried to come up with all sorts of creative ways the renters could get around the promise they had made. It seemed to be in everyone's best interest to tell the first couple no and tell us yes, and don't they have the right to rent to whoever they want to rent to?
The couple did end up taking the place, the renters felt bad dragging us along all week, and we had to start over on our housing search. I'm sure everything will work out fine with those renters, but it sure seemed like there could have been a different result. Utilitarianism would have benefited us with the apartment, I'm sure.
We ended up signing on a new place the very next day. It is much nicer and cheaper, and is furnished as well. We feel like we ended up with a much better deal over all.
The situation with this apartment was similar to the first, were the renter had already had a few people see the place and like it. They had told us and two couples before us that whoever could get back with a deposit would be able to rent the apartment. This seemed a little better than the "earnest" situation, but because we only wanted to stay until April, it still caused some drama.
We had told the lady we would go right home and get the deposit immediately. As we drove, the renter called the other couples and told them we were going to take the apartment. She said she offered it to one of the other couples since they had been there first, and were wanting a place for a year, but they said they would keep looking. They said they almost called us and told us they didn't want to just rent it for one semester, but decided at the last minute to let us. I felt like she had given us her word, but we still were nervous for the whole ride home and back that she would call.
Now we have signed a contract, so I don't think they can back out if they wanted to. I think we ended up with the best situation overall.
Home Depot
Because of class I have been over aware of ethical situation that occur to me. This one was actually pretty obvious, so I am glad I did the right thing.
The other day my wife and I were at home depot. We were getting some Oak for an art project she needed to do. When we checked out the cashier was not able to scan the item, so she typed in the code. It turned out she typed the wrong code, and charged us $11 when we expected $24. I probably wouldn't have even noticed, but we had to wait for them to bring us a roll of quarters. As we stood their we looked over the receipt and noticed the error. It took nearly half an hour to get everything sorted out, all the while I'm asking myself why I have to pay for this, its not my fault she rang me up wrong. After customer service fixed the issue we were on our way, but I was able to have a clear conscience at least for the ride home.
The other day my wife and I were at home depot. We were getting some Oak for an art project she needed to do. When we checked out the cashier was not able to scan the item, so she typed in the code. It turned out she typed the wrong code, and charged us $11 when we expected $24. I probably wouldn't have even noticed, but we had to wait for them to bring us a roll of quarters. As we stood their we looked over the receipt and noticed the error. It took nearly half an hour to get everything sorted out, all the while I'm asking myself why I have to pay for this, its not my fault she rang me up wrong. After customer service fixed the issue we were on our way, but I was able to have a clear conscience at least for the ride home.
The Smartest Guys in the Room
This is actually the second time I have watched this movie. I caught most of it the first time on CNBC one afternoon when I was sick. I thought I needed to watch it because I had heard a lot about it, but didn't know any of the details. As I am shifting into this business career I feel like I have a lot of catching up to do.
The biggest thing that stood out to me in this movie was the accounting principle they were able to get legalized. It basically said that you could count any money that is certain to be coming to you right when you sign the deal. It is as if you sell your car to your neighbor on Monday, but he doesn't get you the money until the next week. You trust your neighbor, so you go out and buy a new car with the money your neighbor is planning to give you. This principle is all good until the neighbor doesn't actually pay you. Then you are stuck with a new car payment and less money than you originally had.
Essentially this is the permission that was granted to Enron by the SEC. This allowed them to build a new factory and count all the money that they planned to make off it as earnings in the first year. When they didn't make what they expected they had to do it again in order to make up the money they told people they had. Every quarter after that they had to "expect" a little bit more money to cover the losses of the month plus some in order to get their stock to increase. Eventually this had to crumble.
I thought about this and realized that I had been in a similar (although not so large) situation last year. I was working on my research for my masters thesis and was supposed to talk to my professor once a week to just catch him up on what I had done. Some weeks were great, and we had a lot to talk about. The numbers in the following scenario are created to describe the situation, but are totally fictional. I dont remember exactly how the weeks passed.
Others were poor due to many responsibilities taking me away from my research. These weeks I thought to myself that I would just do a little extra work next week and skip my appointment until then. My goal was 10 hours a week of work, so I would just have to do 20 hours the next week. Well, at the end of week two my situation was predictable. I had logged about 5 hours of work at best. At that point I could admit my defeat and visit my professor, or...
Week three came to a close and I had done probably 10 of the 30 hours I was expected to have done. Surely I could come up with one big win and have it look like I had accomplished those 30 hours, right? I didn't have a choice not to.
Week four and five came and went. There were no big wins. Eventually I had to admit my defeat and talk to my professor. He was fortunately very forgiving, and we got back on track. I found that the key was to visit weekly even if there was nothing to report. It is amazing how quickly you can get behind, and there are no big wins that will get you out of it. I wasn't gambling with money, but clearly I was gambling on my time. Time has a funny way of not being any more available one day to the next, and I learned that it doesn't just appear when you need it.
The biggest thing that stood out to me in this movie was the accounting principle they were able to get legalized. It basically said that you could count any money that is certain to be coming to you right when you sign the deal. It is as if you sell your car to your neighbor on Monday, but he doesn't get you the money until the next week. You trust your neighbor, so you go out and buy a new car with the money your neighbor is planning to give you. This principle is all good until the neighbor doesn't actually pay you. Then you are stuck with a new car payment and less money than you originally had.
Essentially this is the permission that was granted to Enron by the SEC. This allowed them to build a new factory and count all the money that they planned to make off it as earnings in the first year. When they didn't make what they expected they had to do it again in order to make up the money they told people they had. Every quarter after that they had to "expect" a little bit more money to cover the losses of the month plus some in order to get their stock to increase. Eventually this had to crumble.
I thought about this and realized that I had been in a similar (although not so large) situation last year. I was working on my research for my masters thesis and was supposed to talk to my professor once a week to just catch him up on what I had done. Some weeks were great, and we had a lot to talk about. The numbers in the following scenario are created to describe the situation, but are totally fictional. I dont remember exactly how the weeks passed.
Others were poor due to many responsibilities taking me away from my research. These weeks I thought to myself that I would just do a little extra work next week and skip my appointment until then. My goal was 10 hours a week of work, so I would just have to do 20 hours the next week. Well, at the end of week two my situation was predictable. I had logged about 5 hours of work at best. At that point I could admit my defeat and visit my professor, or...
Week three came to a close and I had done probably 10 of the 30 hours I was expected to have done. Surely I could come up with one big win and have it look like I had accomplished those 30 hours, right? I didn't have a choice not to.
Week four and five came and went. There were no big wins. Eventually I had to admit my defeat and talk to my professor. He was fortunately very forgiving, and we got back on track. I found that the key was to visit weekly even if there was nothing to report. It is amazing how quickly you can get behind, and there are no big wins that will get you out of it. I wasn't gambling with money, but clearly I was gambling on my time. Time has a funny way of not being any more available one day to the next, and I learned that it doesn't just appear when you need it.
Should Paterno be morally obligated to alert the police?
An article came out today about Joe Paterno’s release as head
coach of Penn State. He was the winningest coach in college football and had
been at penn state for 46 years.
Why would Paterno have a moral obligation? He did what he
was supposed to—he alerted his superiors. I would think that if he found out
about it a second time he would have this moral obligation, but this first time he had every reason to trust
that his superiors would do what is right and alert the police. I don't think he should have been fired.
Ethical Dilemma Paper
We were given the opportunity to write about an ethical dilemma that had happened to us that we could discuss as a class. I wrote about a time I was approached twice by the same beggar:
Ethical
Dilemma
Dan
Miller
Section
2
After approaching you begging for money once, the same
woman is now returning, hand outstretched, asking for “just 2 or 3 dollars” in
order to buy some food. You can see she is in need, and remember the command
that we feed the hungry, that we are all beggars.
Just returning from my last big vacation before I headed
out from my mission I ran into a similar situation. Full of “greenie” fire, I
was travelling home to Washington DC from New York City. The trip was a quick
one, just a weekend, but included visiting my friends ward for church on Sunday
and hearing the announcement of the Manhattan temple, a huge blessing for the
members in the area.
I had taken the cheapest form of transportation available
to me, the greyhound bus. Besides having a low fare, this mode of
transportation allowed me time to think about my upcoming assignment to the
Colorado Springs mission. Both directions gave me the opportunity to discuss my
feelings toward the gospel with fellow passengers. On the first leg I read
through the first discussion with the person sitting next to me, and on the Sunday
return a neighboring lady asked if I was a Mormon, basing her comment on the
tie I was wearing and the Sprite in my hand (apparently only Mormons drink
Sprite.)
This bus ride also gave me the opportunity to study. I
specifically read through King Benjamin’s address in Mosiah, paying special
attention to the direction he gives concerning those we describe as beggars:
16 Ye yourselves will succor those
that stand in need of your succor; ye will administer of your substance unto
him that standeth in need; and ye will not suffer that the beggar putteth up
his petition to you in vain, and turn him out to perish.
17 Perhaps thou shalt say: The man has brought upon
himself his misery; therefore I will stay my hand, and will not give unto him
of my food, nor impart unto him of my substance that he may not suffer, for his
punishments are just—
18 But I say unto you, O man, whosoever doeth this, the
same hath great cause to repent; and except he repenteth of that which he hath
done he perisheth forever, and hath no interest in the kingdom of God.
19 For behold, are we not all beggars? Do we not all
depend upon the same Being, even God, for all the substance which we have?
--Mosiah 4:16-19
As I stepped off the bus at our destination, those verses
still visible in my mind, a beggar woman approached me, hand outstretched,
asking for “2 or 3 dollars” so she could buy some food.
Clearly, King Benjamin’s lesson was standing right there
in front of me. This was not even a choice. I pulled out my wallet and handed
the lady a few dollars, to the disgust of everyone watching. Smiling I sat down
on my bag and waited for my ride.
Then, after waiting for half an hour for my ride, this
same woman approaches. I’m sure she didn’t recognize me, because again, her
hand was outstretched, and again the same request came: “2 or 3 dollars” so she
could buy some food. Clearly this woman had “brought this misery upon herself,”
right? Can’t I just ignore her like everyone else at the bus stop? What would
you do?
Christian Morals
Recently I read an article on CNN.com about the reasons people can't wait to have sex until they are married. I found the thought process was dissonant to my moral compass, but you can read the article here and see for yourself:
I only have a few thoughts about this. Basically, what does
the time exposed to temptation have to do with how ok it is to fall into its
trap? Isn’t right right, and wrong wrong? Aren’t our ethics based on something
that is greater than time? I think that they are. I feel that there is not an ever
growing need to stop trying, as this writer suggests, but to try harder to
instill in our children and our selves a sense of the weight our morals carry,
that they are not something that can be disregarded because it’s hard, or we
have been trying for a long time, so now we can give in.
Ethics Journal
For the next few posts I will be writing as part of my ethics journal. We are required to consider ethical situations and write about them outside of class.
I really like this class so far. It is nice to be in a class where everyone is on an equal playing field it seems. Ethical dilemmas seem to be constant and all around us, but the key is to recognize them when they come so that we can effectively and purposefully deal with them. Anyway, don't judge me for my thoughts. If you disagree feel free to tell me.
I really like this class so far. It is nice to be in a class where everyone is on an equal playing field it seems. Ethical dilemmas seem to be constant and all around us, but the key is to recognize them when they come so that we can effectively and purposefully deal with them. Anyway, don't judge me for my thoughts. If you disagree feel free to tell me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)