Question

Please read the case study entitled “Casinos and Crime” that you find in the reading assignment. Based on what you have learned in this unit, answer the following questions: 1. In most casino states and counties, laws protect owners from liability claims arising from problems caused by gambling. In ethical terms, however, if you’re the sole proprietor of the casino, do you feel any responsibility for this episode? Why or why not? If you feel any responsibility, to whom would it be? What could you do to set things right? 2. You’re an equal partner in a nonprofit organization that runs the casino to support the cause of building schools for children in impoverished sections of Peru. You spend a few months every year down there building schools and giving free English-language classes. In ethical terms (and regardless of what the law allows), do you believe anyone involved in this episode should be able to sue you personally for their suffering? Why or why not? 3. Say that the casino under discussion in this set of questions is the MGM Grand Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas, which is owned by a large, public corporation. You have five shares of stock inherited a few years ago when a relative died. You are legally protected from liability claims. In ethical terms, however, do you believe that anyone involved in this episode should be able to sue you personally—or just plain blame you—for their suffering? Why or why not? 4. Pigouvian taxes (named after economist Arthur Pigou, a pioneer in the theory of externalities) attempt to correct externalities—and so formalize a corporate social responsibility—by levying a tax equal to the costs of the externality to society. The casino, in other words, that causes crime and other problems costing society, say, $1 million should pay a $1 million tax. In terms of casinos, would such a tax more or less satisfy any ethical claim that could be made against them for the social problems they cause? Why or why not? https://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/business-ethics/s17-05-case-studies.html

Answer 1

1) Being a casino owner, I dont have any legal responsibility left as laws protects us from damages. But being a human and social animal , I can contribute something to society by strictly not allowing the childrens to enter and join casinos. Casino is a type of gambling and childrens should keep themselves away from gambling as it does,nt contribute to the society.

2) Chances are rare that somebody may sue me directly if laws protects the casino owners . The persons who are playing casino,s are entering there after knowing the terms and conditions thus they are accepting the laws and byelaws . So in court also they would not be able to stand by their points which can harm me.

3) Share holders are the silent partners and not the managing committees of the organisations thus they dont bear these direct business liabilities. Liabilities are limited to loss and profits only.

4) Ethically they are correct , that it causes problems to the society but if laws protects them then how tax could be levied. It would be void in the court itself. Otherwise if we think ethically only, then paying such taxes are justified.