Business Ethics

The aroma of Tacoma:

1. If the Tacoma community chooses to keep the smelter open, should the EPA go along? What if the community chooses to close the smelter? Are their choices “Free”?

Yes, the EPA should go along the community. It is because they have consented on it. Much of their livelihood is dependent on this only particular thing. If the EPA doesn’t go with their decision, they have an obligation to provide them with such an alternative which is equal to the amount of benefits itprovides.If the community chooses to close smelter, then the EPA has a responsibility to think and examinecritically and work on the utilitarian principal, thus analyzing the total costs and total benefits of smelterand take actions accordingly. The major problem is that any decision is NOT FREE. Each of them carrieshuge costs and benefits with it. Thus before taking any decision, it is very important investigate andquestion every single possibility.

2. What do you think the Tacoma community should choose? Why? What would you choose?

I think Tacoma community should choose to keep the smelter open. It is beneficial for them because according to cost benefit analysis, it shows that the economy gains $20 million. The first and foremost argument of opposition would be that isn’t there any value of a person’s life? The reply in favor of my choice is that according to me 570 lives are more important to me than a single life that has disease of lung cancer.I would choose smelter to keep open because it not only benefits the economic life of many peoplebut also benefits the social life of many families. The economic benefit may not suppress the life of aperson who CAN have lung disease because of it but the social welfare of 570 families suppresses thatone life for sure.I would choose the same because of all the reasons presented and discussed above.