The parameters for the assignment are largely the same as with the first assignment:Form a well-reasoned response of 700 to 1000 words. Your response may, but need not, draw upon resources outside this course, but it definitely should reflect the concerns you addressed during the course and the information you gained from the course materials. The primary consideration in grading this assignment is not whether you are “right” or “wrong” (although any responses that show that the material presented during this course was not learned or applied correctly will count against you); the primary focus of the assignment, and the controlling element in your grade, will be your ability to present a well-reasoned position, in which you discuss some (or many) of the prevailing concerns and show an ability to incorporate the possible responses to those concerns which were presented in the book, applying these responses to the problem you are presented with.For your assignment please read the Ethical Considerations (end of Chapter 17) and (end of Chapter 18). Answer the questions as presented at the end of Chapter 18, but remember that the overarching question that you should be answering is: does a government have a right to take your money (or land, or intellectual property, or other rights) in order to do what it "thinks" is "best"?Your answer may be shaped one way if it is the United States government that is doing the taking, but remember that the question is asked in an international business environment. So what if the government that is doing the taking of your property is Venezuela, or South Africa, or North Korea, or ISIS (back when ISIS controlled physical space and someone could argue that it was something like an independant political body)? If you answer that a government does not such a right, then how do you justify tax at all? Aren't governmenal prerogatives like national defense, police services, public schooling, and public health care all a taking from individuals to do what the government thinks is best? If your answer is that governments do have such powers, then what is the barrier that stops the government from simply taking everything, or worse, taking everything from some people and not taking anything from another--or even, taking from one person and giving to another? And if you think that this last one is not possible, think back to the ethical considerations from the end of Chapter 1, p44, number 1 on that page. can't the payment of this "commission" be seen as another kind of taking: from the people of the country (through their tax base) to the individual receiving the commission? How should such takings be limited?
Required Text: International Business Law and Its Environment, by Schaffer, Agusti, Dhooge and Earle, 9th edition, published by South-Western Cengage Learning. ISBN 053847361
Pages: 491 – 493 Ethical Considerations - Chapter 17
Pages: 530 – 531 Ethical Considerations - Chapter 18