Moral, Social, And Economic Dilemma Created By Financial Crime

Moral, Social, and Economic Dilemma Created by Financial Crime
Financial crimes foster unethical practices within the society. Whether it is by institutions or by individuals, financial crimes go far beyond the portents of the immediate outcome. The consequentialist view and the ethics of duty provide a way to ponder the moral dilemma surrounding financial crimes. As Pontell underlines, in the eyes of a consequentialist, an act is morally right if in its end, it results in the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people (756). In contrast, the ethics of duty emphasizes that an act can only be considered morally right only based on whether it was performed as a duty to others (Pontell 758). Conversely, financial crimes such as corruption

postulate that financial crimes can have both positive and negative implications to the health of an economy (277). Based on costs and benefits analysis, part of the immediate implication of financial crimes such as corruption and money laundering is that they open up windows of economic investment, which would otherwise be non-existent. New capital in an economy is healthy as it improves the potential for growth. Investments drive employment and greater buying power of consumers, thereby leading to better standards of living. Irrespective of the source, the government and the polity stand to benefit from tax revenue collected through economic activities and the incomes of people therein supported by the activity (Fisher et al. 280). As such, though not acceptable, some financial crimes are beneficial to the economy. At the same time, the same crimes result in adverse implications on the economy. For instance, they provide an opportunity through which resources are misused and benefit only a few in the society. They also limit the economic potential of growth that could be achieved through honest and transparent means. Above all, financial crimes hamper social development as they induce socio-economic disparities (Ene

Self-interest versus the interests of others are often at odds whenever a financial crime is mentioned. According to Gordon, financial crimes in a social setting reflect betrayal to others within the larger group where one individual benefits from resources for all (134). Yet by nature, humans are automatically motivated to guard their self-interests before the interests of others (Gordon 136). Few in the society can forego an opportunity to benefit directly from an act that promises financial rewards just in order to allow others to share the benefit. In this regard, financial crimes can be seen as opportunities for members of the society to advance their self-interests oblivious of the implications to others. By the same token, financial crimes can be viewed as nothing but the actions of selfish people who are ignorant and egocentric. There is no doubt that the world would be a better place for all if everyone was honest, responsible, and accountable for their