Adam Smith would argue that when people are free to pursue their own economic interest they will produce the greatest good for all (Shaw and Barry, 154-155.) I disagree with Adam Smith and take a utilitarian stance on this issue where the company needs to act in ways to produce the most happiness for the most people (Shaw and Barry, 59 – 62.) I feel a company has a moral obligation to pay its full tax liability on all their revenue and not use exporting as a way to evade the companies tax obligation to their home country. When a company avoids their tax obligations by outsourcing it 's revenue it leaves less money in the country that …show more content…
Although this makes a great legal argument in favor of not breaking the contract. Again I will take a utilitarian stance on this issue where the company needs to act in ways to produce the most happiness for the most people (Shaw and Barry, 59 – 62.) Breaking a union contract will hurt more people than it helps because a union contract typically protects the workers from the abuses of management. Not only does the union contract deal with pay but union contracts deal with a whole host of other workplace safety issues. Cuts should come from the executives first before they cut the lower paid employees who already live paycheck to paycheck. This produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people by lowering the welfare rolls and therefore reducing the tax burden on everyone. Breaking a union contract it 's also blatantly illegal regardless of the situation. The NLRB will enforce the contract regardless and heavily fine any violators of the