On September 17th, 2011, a group of local organizers, students and activists gathered in Zuccotti Park in Manhattan, the New York City’s financial district in protest against corporate greed and government exploitation that contributed to the global economic meltdown. This international protest movement was called Occupy Wall Street (OWS) which expresses concerns on moral and economic issues such as social injustice, income inequality and disparity, corruption, greed and the influence of corporations on politics.
Moral and Economic Implications
The movement’s moral implication is to fight against oppression and unfair economic system urging the government to focus its concern for the 99% who are the middle and the lower class people who suffer from the impact of irresponsible corporations influencing the politics and reaping financial benefits. The protesters believed that the 1% constitutes the rich corporations and political elites who have the power, money and influence and who cheated on taxes. They are enriching themselves at the expense of the middle and lower class people who pay higher taxes. Multinational corporations are provided with subsidies and government protection which is a practice of unfair economic policy. Income inequality is the major concern among protesters where majority of the funds were appropriated to the wealthy rather than equally distributing them to everyone. As citizens of the society, it is our moral obligation to extend help not only to the affluent but particularly those who are in desperate need. Income disparity is one of the causes of global financial crisis which is damaging the US economy. Corporations are cost cutting on expenses by exporting jobs overseas which saves a lot of money but leads to the increase of unemployment rate in the country. Concerns on the rising tuition fees and student loans were also raised.
The Movement’s Theory
Occupy Wall Street is considered a unique collective action movement because it signifies ethical transformation. The coordination among individuals in fighting for their common good and interests has formed a strong solidarity which is the “We are the 99%”. The protest brought them social awareness and how they are valued as members of the society. Their sentiments on greed and corruption created a deep hatred against the wealthy which gave them the right to fight for inequality. They believed that greed and corruption among corporations are immoral business practices that contributed much to the country’s economic downfall and which lead to the sufferings of the poor. However, being rich sometimes does not imply greed. Some wealthy people are willing to give and share their blessings to those who are in need because they believe that it is their moral responsibility to help. Social responsibility is an ethical business practice that denotes virtue and greatness.
The movement’s quest for social and civic virtue on the disparity
between the 1% affluent rich and the rest of the 99% have caused public
debates thereby putting the socio-economic system in question in terms of fairness and sustainability. This challenge could pose danger to society that could lead to social unrest and destabilization. The movement is against capitalism where dominant corporations establish monopoly and price control. To address this issue, the movement urged the government to propose a new financial system that would support multiple structures of incentives on corporate leaders that would establish equal profits, job creation and retention and other social concern. An economic system that would continue to support business and promote equal distribution of wealth not only to the 1% wealthiest but also to the rest of the 99% would be essential. Businesses should not be focused on acquiring profits alone but should develop awareness on social responsibility for our country. This is the principle of a free market democracy and is relevant to utilitarianism theory where the basis of morality is the satisfaction of expressed desires or interests for the happiness of mankind.
The Occupy Wall Street movement has struggled to find unity among its thousands of followers in achieving their goals. The implication of their message that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer leads to the identification of income inequality issues in the country. Income inequality is a result of excessive compensation and bonuses in billions of dollars among financial corporations which are set aside while the country is in economic turmoil. Corporations are cutting jobs in the hope to improve their financial status and stock prices up yet corporate executives are being paid millions of dollars and are receiving bonuses which are considered an outrageous crime. The movement’s goal is to encourage the government to take corrective actions and impose policies and legislation in the business system and in the way financial institutions compensate their employees. The Federal Reserve has not enforced restrictions on financial aid such as the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to failing banks where much of the funds went to compensation and bonuses. The implementation of Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act that gives shareholders the power to implement compensation package through voting did not seem to fix the issue because shareholders and top executives believe that highly competent employees demand high compensation package. This reform is highly contradicted by the protesters of the movement in the belief that excessive compensation can be reduced or eliminated through the power and authority of stakeholders’ decision. Stakeholders that come from different socio-economic and social backgrounds are more likely to make sensible decisions and are best recommended to become governing bodies on compensation package. In business, the compensation issue is relevant to Kantian theory where the movement’s ethics is best applied. Kantian ethics believed in the principle of morality where a person’s action should consider the objectives of individuals and not to use it for his own purpose or happiness. In decision making, the business firm should consider the best interests of all the stakeholders in which they should participate in
determining and reviewing the policies provided and how it affects
them before implementing. In the ethics of business, it is unethical to prioritize the interest and well-being of one stakeholder in the expense of others. The well-being of the company’s creditors, employees, customers and network of suppliers should be taken into consideration.
Who is Responsible for Income Inequality and Wealth Distribution?
The widening financial gap in the US has hit its highest point since the 2007 recession that brought Americans in financial peril and unemployment. Today, the income of the middle and lower class continue to suffer from economic downturn while the income of the 1% rich has taken 25% of the country’s wealth. How is income inequality explained? Most of the government officials belong to the growing elite where public policies and decisions are made in preference of their wealthy constituents. Lawmakers prioritize the interests of the wealthy Americans and are less responsive to the interests of the middle and lower class. Some of these policies include reduced capital gains tax rates, unrestricted financial system and cutting of tax rates on high earners. The result of these public policies has worsened the financial gap. Lobbying of organized pressure groups, campaign contributions and threats of supporting rivals also have major influence on lawmakers’ decision and policies. Globalization is another key factor in the financial gap where the income of highly skilled workers is rising compared to low-skilled labor. Social and economic inequality have been building up for years where surveys reveal that between 1970 and 2008, younger men earned less compared to their father’s income during the same age. An ordinary family’s income was lower compared to previous years while the wealthy families earned nearly half of all the income. Declining rates of unionization, trade and immigration are some of the influential factors but the driving force is the evolution of technology such as the technological innovations of microchip, computers and the Internet to accelerate the process of production. This resulted to changes from labor-intensive to capital-intensive where there is a high demand of highly skilled workers than middle and low-skilled workers.
Equitable Outcome
The Occupy Wall Street movement has succeeded in raising the issues on income inequality and poverty which has caught the attention of the media and government entities. This only proves that the power of the people can create change and the only way to do it is to continue to express their issues or concerns and to do what they believe is right. To break the chains of powerful corporations and the government which promotes capitalism in order to make way for that equitable change in the society, is such a noble intention. Though much has been said and done, the movement still needs to define a specific platform and offer a solution. Despite its courageous move, the movement lacks the tools and mechanisms that could impact the success of achieving its goals. It needs to have respectable and knowledgeable leaders that could channel their voices in order to be heard and responded. Setting up demonstrations and occupying Wall Street is not enough. The movement as well as the protesters must first learn about the issues and corporate governance. They must encourage reform and establish a stable organization.
Prediction
After the movement’s courageous display of expressing their concerns, the question lies on where is it all going? The use of excessive police force and the hostility expressed among politicians against the protesters are indications that the government has no intentions of responding to these issues and bringing them to congress. Yet, the movement has no plans of giving up and might try other tactics. If the police continue to harass the protesters and use brutal force to the extent of declaring a national emergency where protesters are beaten and dispersed at gun point, then the public’s sympathy will shift in favor for the protesters. With this scenario, the government will pass laws in favor of the movement’s civil rights concerns which is a victory. To make it happen, the movement should have a strong leader that could identify specific goals, organize supporters and represent the movement. Navigated by the best captain of the ship, Occupy Wall Street movement will surely endure to the end and will be one step ahead in getting their goals accomplished.
References:
Forum Post: Utilitarian Capitalism: An Appeal to Rationalism, (October 21, 2011), Occupy Wall Street. Retrieved from http://occupywallst.org/forum/utilitarian-capitalism-an-appeal-to-rationalism/
Montopoli, B., Left behind in America: Who’s to blame for the wealth divide? (September 07, 2011). CBSNews. Retrieved from
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20102289-503544.html
Moore, K., Occupy Wall Street’s Moral Ground, (November 01, 2011). Yes Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.yesmagazine.org/people-power/occupy-wall-streets-moral-ground
