Ethics applied to Economics

[thinkdr]

To supplement the previous post, I found this choice bit of information: https://institute.coop/news/were-teamin ... te-program

This is a good practical response to the issue of who manages these worker co-ops? For if they didn’t have wise management their failure rate would be higher than that of businesses structured in more conventional ways – i.e., in 19th-century ways. Actually these co-op start-ups [as far as I know[ have the same failure rate as do those with the ole, outmoded structure.

I shall be doing further research to learn the truth about the successes of these organizations that put democracy into living action.
Here is the mission of this program at Rutgers School of Management:

Geared toward managers in large firms, small businesses, cooperatives, and non-profits, the program will show participants how to create a values-driven, participatory work environment by:
• Improving transparency when sharing information
• Empowering employees in decision-making
• Developing a management style that fosters participation
• Engaging employees and promoting their growth
• Building organizational citizenship and a high-involvement organization
They apply Ethics, bring it to life.
And, as a bonus, here is yet another good link:
https://institute.coop/resources/employ ... n-solution


What say you?

[Kriswest]

Cooperative companies work only if all are of a like mind. Cooperatives were the beginning of social business. Pack/herd but leaders will manipulate to be the one. If you really look at cooperates there is leaders that take more. Very very few are truly equal. Humanity is herd. Leaders are still needed and followers give to leaders. I respect what you are proposing and hope that eventually evolution heads there but. It will not occur within enough generations that we will see it. Evolution needs many generations in most cases, not all but, most. We actually have evolved enough to remove many prejudices. We know and accept that the Amazon tribes and the other what we call primitive peoples are humans and equal to a point. We protect their primitive life. Why????? Have you examined this question at all? Why do the governments and elites protect these tribes? What do they have that we do not?

[thinkdr]

Cooperative companies work only if all are of a like mind.

That is exactly what I said in the early pages of the STRUCTURE OF ETHICS booklet!:!: See especially page 6.

sMany of the members subscribe to the Newsletter of the Institute for Workplace Democracy this helps.

It is true, Kris, what you say about some few getting paid more than the others who work in the same shop,office, or warehouse. This is because the company had to hire a manager with special unique skills who could bargain for more pay.

The aborigines of Brazil are part of the ecosystem of the Amazon Rain Forest. They help maintain the forest. The forest serves as "the lungs of the planet." It consumes the Carbon Dioxide out of the atmosphere, and in turn, provides the planet's air with pure Oxygen for us to breathe.

An ignorant Climate-Crisis denier (a friend of Donald Trump - another one) is cutting down the rain forest; he has the power to do it. Under-informed or misinformed people voted him in.
Can anyone think of a more stupid thing to do? Well ...maybe going to war with Iran. Or establishing bases in The Middle East. ...Or stealing Iraqi sweet oil instead of putting full-blast efforts in researching and implementing alternative clean, green energy, such as solar, wind, geothermal and tidal power. [Ironically, George W. put solar panels on the roof of his own home but he went into The Middle East anyway -- for the expansion of the American empire.

Comments? Views?

[thinkdr]

Given the current economic system, called Private Enterprise, it is ethical to recommend and encourage any new small business starting up to organize itself as a workers co-op, one which engages in democracy-at-work, and is structured so that each new hire is automatically a part-owner. What the highest-paid employee (staff member) is compensated shall not exceed, say, six times what the lowest-paid worker gets in pay ...if there are more than one dozen worker-owners in the company.

If less than one dozen, they should all start out with equal compensation, and then, - if the proposal to do so is justifiable (is sensible and practical) - vote as a group to give a specific individual more pay than the rest get.


What, though, is 'Production for Use'
Can anyone explain it for us here in simple terms? In doing so, tell us the advantages, if any, and the disadvantages if any.

[thinkdr]

While I was doing research on UBI, came upon this very-interesting column reporting on its progress. You may want to check it out, to learn what is going on in Stockton, California.
See" https://www.citylab.com/equity/2019/10/ ... nt/599152/

As you know, UBI stands for Universal Basic Income. Experiments with it are currently going on in Finland and (last I heard, still continuing) in Toronto, Canada.

From all accounts, people who receive the grants still continue to work at jobs.

[thinkdr]

Earlier I wrote that Rutgers University School of Business is training managers (who intend to run operations in worker-owned cooperatives) in these skills:

• Improving transparency when sharing information;

• Empowering employees in decision-making;

• Developing a management style that fosters participation;

• Engaging employees and promoting their growth;

• Building organizational citizenship and a high-involvement organization..

Worker cooperatives exist in an array of industries, from
retail trades to engineering and manufacturing to administrative services and various professional services such as, for example, in child care and housekeeping service businesses.

There is equity in these businesses structured as worker co-operatives. According
to my research, I can accuratelyreport that in the year 2019 the average entry wage for such workers was$19.67 per hour. Along with this pay they received, on average, a year-end bonus of $8200.

Most remarkable of all was this fact: The highest-paid worker in the company (or corporation) earned at the most only double what the lowest-paid worker was paid!! The Compensation Ratio is only 2 to 1.
Even if it were 6 to 1, this would be amazing!

[thinkdr]

This is all happening under Capitalism.

Note this N.Y. Times column with the creative title: Who needs a boss?"
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/30/maga ... -boss.html

I would suggest that every business from now on that starts up structure itself as a workers-cooperative, one that is worker owned.

This is truly Ethics applied to economics

What say you?

[thinkdr]

ON UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME

What do you think of a UBI plan for the United States that would give every adult American citizen $700 a month, at the outset? The wealthy would get this too so the plan would be fair; although they wouldn’t experience the benefit of it by the grant they get but rather through the new secure society in which they eventually would live. This money would come from “a sovereign wealth fund” based upon productivity in the country. As productivity increases, this fund will grow. The original fund, set up by the federal government, comprising less than 3 trillion dollars, is to be invested in a safe manner, as are university endowment funds today. The administration would consult those who now manage such college and university endowment funds as to how to do it right.

We know the government can come up with such money for we have witnessed the Senate voting such amounts into existence in the year 2020, calling it a “Relief Fund” or “Rescue Package.” It is based upon a “trickle-up” theory, just as the national sovereign wealth would be. {After all, “trickle-down” has been tried for over 100 years and we note – as a majority of Economists will attest - it has not worked.}

See this discussion of UBI at this site: https://smartasset.com/financial-adviso ... sic-income

Note also that productivity steadily increases as more dull, routine, boring jobs are currently being replaced by robots and automation. Many, many programmers in the USA today are employed writing code that robotizes work currently being done on assembly lines of all sorts.

Check out some of the historical background: the story of how the USA almost got a bill passed initiating a UBI. It happened in 1969. Read up on it: https://www.alternet.org/2016/03/how-ri ... do-it-now/

It is desirable that everyone have a job that they enjoy doing, however the nature of the capitalist economy, "free enterprise" is the euphemism for it, is to suffer contradictions in its functioning, viz., busts that follow the booms - periodic depressions and job loss. We are living through a depression now. We need a solution to this chaos. Could a UBI plan be that solution?

Your views on this topic?

[thinkdr]

Check out this thoughtful article which is relevant to Ethics when it is applied to economic matters. It continues to offer rational arguments for a reform which is especially needed in these times of high unemployment in the United States:

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/ ... sic-income


After digesting its contents, and following the points it makes, did this discussion serve to add to your convictions regarding the concept of Universal Basic Income?
Or did it fail to be persuasive in making its case?
What is your evaluation of the article?
Share with us your views ...surely you have some.

[MagsJ]

What do you think of vaccines, foods, etc. being knowingly toxic, and yet still being brought to market to be sold to the general public?

Q. Where’s the ethics in food and medicine manufacturing?

A. Not much.

[Meno_]

Check out this thoughtful article which is relevant to Ethics when it is applied to economic matters. It continues to offer rational arguments for a reform which is especially needed in these times of high unemployment in the United States:

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/ ... sic-income


After digesting its contents, and following the points it makes, did this discussion serve to add to your convictions regarding the concept of Universal Basic Income?
Or did it fail to be persuasive in making its case?
What is your evaluation of the article?
Share with us your views ...surely you have some.

$700 a month is a lifeline, but not much. General relief in California is slightly less and is merely a conduit to crime, as recipients sell the tickets for drugs and alcohol. Thrv$2000 dollar a month proposed by the House is more realistic a measure, across the board, with the hope that eventually this social infusion of money will lift into a modicum of general relief.

But can the nation afford it, and will it not increase indolence by eliminating the motivation to change among those who have been effected chronically by generations of social dependence?


These questions remain unanswered, and current statistics do not support a notable change within groups if people who have been permanently changed with the aid of general relief, or dole.

A subscriptive social support , augmenting education and development here in California, changed ' welfare' into 'workfare' where the conditional receipt of financial help has to accompany attempts by those who receive the benefits, to train for jobs and eventually attain employable status and succeed to hold down a job.

So far the program has less then favorable reviews.

[thinkdr]

Q. Where’s the ethics in food and medicine manufacturing?

A. Not much.

Greetings, Mags

Thank you for responding.
What you write argues for the case that it is important that more people learn what Ethics is about. and what "ethics" means. The concepts taught in The Structure of Ethics book need to be more-widely disseminated. One day, when such lessons are taught in primary school, in language appropriate for that age group, ethical insight will improve, and will spread over the planet. Let's start by setting a good example.

[thinkdr]

Check out this thoughtful article which is relevant to Ethics when it is applied to economic matters. It continues to offer rational arguments for a reform which is especially needed in these times of high unemployment in the United States:

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/ ... sic-income
A

$700 a month is a lifeline, but not much. General relief in California is slightly less and is merely a conduit to crime, as recipients sell the tickets for drugs and alcohol. Thrv$2000 dollar a month proposed by the House is more realistic a measure, across the board, with the hope that eventually this social infusion of money will lift into a modicum of general relief.

But can the nation afford it, and will it not increase indolence by eliminating the motivation to change among those who have been effected chronically by generations of social dependence?


These questions remain unanswered....

[/quote
Greetings, Meno

Nice to hear from you again.

Two professors of Economics at M.I.T., a husband-and-wife team, along with a Harvard Professor, last year won The Nobel Prize in Economics for their experimental field work in ending poverty around the globe.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/10/ ... 11994.html

They showed that giving a Basic Income to workers did not tend to make them indolent. Their testing of hypotheses and experimental fieldwork approach earned them this treasured Prize.

To that extent the question is becoming answered.

Work gives meaning to life ..especially if it is useful work; and human beings need meaning - else suicide often results when no meaning is perceived. Merely getting some financial security will not keep people from their projects, some of which will add value to the society in which they live. If most are indolent and even one Musk, Einstein, Bezos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Bezos comes along, the economic value gained is well worth it.

What say you?

[MagsJ]

Q. Where’s the ethics in food and medicine manufacturing?

A. Not much.

Greetings, Mags

Thank you for responding.
What you write argues for the case that it is important that more people learn what Ethics is about. and what "ethics" means. The concepts taught in The Structure of Ethics book need to be more-widely disseminated. One day, when such lessons are taught in primary school, in language appropriate for that age group, ethical insight will improve, and will spread over the planet. Let's start by setting a good example.

So you think that simply setting a good example will work/is the answer?

What have you based that on?

[thinkdr]

Where's the ethics in food and medicine manufacturing?

A. Not much.

The way that I cope with the problem is I avoid eating manufactured food -- with the exception of some ice-cream, and also pasta coated with marinara sauce - no added seasonings - along with steamed vegetables, and with an egg that is hardboiled in the steamer pot.
Other than that I eat only fruit and veggies that are fresh, raw, whole, and preferably organically grown. Thus I in effect boycott the entire manufactured-'food' industry.

As to medicines, I take only a couple of generics which aetna Insurance [a banker or middleman outfit] provides for me at zero copay (since they appreciate that I am so healthy; and that I am giving them my government Medicare money each month: I help them make lots of profit while costing them virtually no expense, since due to not getting sick I never make a claim.

I switched to a plant-based diet when I was 18. Now, on October 11, I will be 90. I feel as spry as when I was 50. [For further details about the healthy lifestyle see the websites of the National Health Association and that of Life Extention Magazine.]

Agreeing with you that people who lack ethics - predators and con-artists - get into the so-called "health-care" business, my approach to dealing with them is to "give them the business," i.e., to have nothing to do with them and to endorse exposing their cheating practices. As an activist for Social Justice I strive to keep myself well-informed as to what is going on. To this end I listen to the Thom Hartmann broadcast (or read his website; listen to CNN and to MSNBC. It is an Ethical Truth that people learn Ethics more by witnessing a good example of it than they do by reading up on it.

Therefore, let's make some systemic changes by encouraging the spread of Worker Co-ops as a source of new jobs. In those, workers are the owners of the business. They tend to be ethical ...and they pay better!!

Your views?

[Prismatic567]

Recently I have been brushing through the following book;

Ethics and Economics by Amartya Sen
https://alvaroaltamirano.files.wordpres ... nomics.pdf

Amartya Sen is a reputable Economist who give Ethics a lot of attention and he is a Nobel Prize Winner in Economics.


The first thing to do with the concepts of Morality or Ethics as a system of knowledge is to establish which is to the PURE and APPLIED aspect of the field.
In this case I attribute Morality as the PURE and Ethics as the APPLIED.

Like Philosophy and other general fields [intelligence, emotional quotient, wisdom], Morality and Ethics is applicable to ALL human activities and every field of knowledge in their pure and applied aspects.

So it is appropriate the Morality and Ethics would naturally be applicable to Economics and other fields of knowledge.

What I notice with the above book is, its focus in more on the APPLIED aspects but do not give much attention to the PURE principles of morality.
In this case, it is engaging more in the firefighting than dealing with the root causes and prevent fires from the root.

Sen focus is on the productivity competence of the individual [capabilities approach, functionings, etc] to stand on his two feet within the economic sphere, but do not focus on the moral competence [thus attention to the moral principles] of the individual.
Overlooking the inherent moral function of the individual is like overlooking the inherent emotional intelligence of the individual.
Capable individuals of humanity without sufficient emotional intelligence would be a problem to humanity.
Capable individuals of humanity without sufficient moral competence would also be a problem to humanity.

[thinkdr]

Recently I have been brushing through the following book;

Ethics and Economics by Amartya Sen
https://alvaroaltamirano.files.wordpres ... nomics.pdf

Amartya Sen is a reputable Economist who give Ethics a lot of attention and he is a Nobel Prize Winner in Economics.


The first thing to do with the concepts of Morality or Ethics as a system of knowledge is to establish which is to the PURE and APPLIED aspect of the field.
In this case I attribute Morality as the PURE and Ethics as the APPLIED.

Like Philosophy and other general fields [intelligence, emotional quotient, wisdom], Morality and Ethics is applicable to ALL human activities and every field of knowledge in their pure and applied aspects.

So it is appropriate the Morality and Ethics would naturally be applicable to Economics and other fields of knowledge.

...Overlooking the inherent moral function of the individual is like overlooking the inherent emotional intelligence of the individual.
Capable individuals of humanity without sufficient emotional intelligence would be a problem to humanity.
Capable individuals of humanity without sufficient moral competence would also be a problem to humanity.

Greetings, Prismatics

Thank you for a fine contribution. I agree with the case you make. There is indeed an important distinction between theoretical [pure] and Applied Etjocs.

Dr. Sen is a wise man; and like you he is ethically sensitive. His main focus is on the poverty of under-developed countries. His research is helpful.


I highly recommend viewing this YouTube video to its conclusion. It is essential to an understanding of Ethics applied to Economics. Do not judge it prematurely until listening to the entire argument it presents:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzSYZcv ... jYj&index=

Comments? Critiques? Additions? Analyses? Your views?

[Ecmandu]

Thinkdr,

I know you nor other members of this board aren’t going to like this... I say it so often in these boards.

Ethics, morality, condenses to one concept:

Nobody wants their consent violated.

That’s it.

What’s the reality we live in? Everyone is having their consent violated in some way, shape or form!

Zero sum realities always violate consent (where there’s a winner and one or more losers for everything)

In a zero sum reality, ethics and morality is only about doing our little part to reduce some consent violation. That’s the best we can do in a zero sum reality.

The goal of ethics and morality is to place everyone in non zero sum realities that never violate consent. That’s the goal of spirit.

I not only just summed up all of your readings and work, I bettered it. That’s the factual answer to all of your possible posts.

[Ecmandu]

Oh that’s right... this is specifically about economics!...

viewtopic.php?p=2770262#p2770262

[Prismatic567]

Recently I have been brushing through the following book;

Ethics and Economics by Amartya Sen
https://alvaroaltamirano.files.wordpres ... nomics.pdf

Amartya Sen is a reputable Economist who give Ethics a lot of attention and he is a Nobel Prize Winner in Economics.


The first thing to do with the concepts of Morality or Ethics as a system of knowledge is to establish which is to the PURE and APPLIED aspect of the field.
In this case I attribute Morality as the PURE and Ethics as the APPLIED.

Like Philosophy and other general fields [intelligence, emotional quotient, wisdom], Morality and Ethics is applicable to ALL human activities and every field of knowledge in their pure and applied aspects.

So it is appropriate the Morality and Ethics would naturally be applicable to Economics and other fields of knowledge.

...Overlooking the inherent moral function of the individual is like overlooking the inherent emotional intelligence of the individual.
Capable individuals of humanity without sufficient emotional intelligence would be a problem to humanity.
Capable individuals of humanity without sufficient moral competence would also be a problem to humanity.

Greetings, Prismatics

Thank you for a fine contribution. I agree with the case you make. There is indeed an important distinction between theoretical [pure] and Applied Etjocs.

Dr. Sen is a wise man; and like you he is ethically sensitive. His main focus is on the poverty of under-developed countries. His research is helpful.


I highly recommend viewing this YouTube video to its conclusion. It is essential to an understanding of Ethics applied to Economics. Do not judge it prematurely until listening to the entire argument it presents:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzSYZcv ... jYj&index=

Comments? Critiques? Additions? Analyses? Your views?

What I noted is Prof Wolf proposed all the basic needs and goods should not be handled by those that are bent on profit maximization but left to all-participants-co-op, while non-essential products can be handled by the capitalists. To a certain extent I agree with this.

However I believe Prof Wolf missed the proximate root cause which is morality per-se.
Morality proper is an inherent mental function like intelligence, emotional quotient, wisdom, rationality, mathematics, and the likes which are applicable to all other fields of knowledge including economics.

Whatever the economics and political model, if the inherent moral competence of the individual is not developed, then we will continue to fire fight.

I don't agree with Prof Wolf, the current extensive spread of Covid19 infection is due to the economic reasons and politics he pointed out.

If you look at the statistics on Covid19 infections
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
there are many countries which are 3rd world and those less developed than the US and European countries, thus inefficient health systems, but their covid19 infections are very low, e.g. Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, and others. Capitalist nations like New Zealand, Taiwan, and others also have low infection numbers.

Therefore the Covid19 infection and death numbers cannot be attributed to profit maximation, capitalism nor democracy which the Prof is trying to pin point.

The root cause for the terrible high numbers in the US, European Union, Russia, Brazil are due the individuals lack of higher moral sense to work together to prevent the epidemic. You will note the individual in these countries are more morally bankrupt,indifferent and selfish to only their own interest, not being aware they are essentially and potentially Patient One if they are infected and could easily spread to others.

I mentioned E.O. Wilson, if there is threat to the insect colony, each insect will spontaneously do their part to protect the colony. They will not protest [re mask, freedom, lockdown] like those Americans who did.

But the problem with the US is, the individuals are very indifferent and do not appear to have any moral sense of unity and co-operation, concern, empathy and compassion if they get sick and spread the virus to others.

It is true, the more autocratic and dictatorial countries could be more efficient if the leaders are serious since they can FORCE everyone to obey the prevention measures. But that is at the expense of freedom and other rights.

It may not be done at present, but for the future, the priority is to develop the moral competence to co-operate in the event of threats to humanity, e.g. like an epidemic and other catastrophe.
This will have to be done via fool proof self developments programs and practices.
In this case the moral agent [in a very human sense] will voluntarily improve his own moral competence and act spontaneously [without coercion from external parties] in alignment with the interest of the human species like what the ants [insects] are doing spontaneously for their colonies.

[thinkdr]

Thank you, Prismatics, for raising some very important points.

Aren't we more evolved than the ants? We can consciously co-operate, as do those who join the workers co-op movement, or work in a workers co-op business, whereas the insects work together by instinct.

The average pay at a workers coo-op enterprise is $19.50 an hour, and their contract structure stipulates that any managers they hire can make, at the very most, no more than four times what the lowest-paid worker makes. Often top management makes less than four times; compare that with the private businesses you know today where the tip brass makes 300 times what the lowest-paid worker makes

I congratulate you for having the intellectual curiosity, and the willingness to learn, that is shown by your listening to Dr. Wolff's videos in their entirety. Here is a link to a recent one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzSYZcv ... jYj&index=

You are correct, Prismatics, that he doesn't say much about the moral sense, about the educated conscience. He believes, though, that Democracy - having a ssay in your own fate - is a high ethical value.

What do the rest of Forum readers and participants think? Did you gain any insights from listening to Dr. Wolff's Economic Update? He is an excellent teacher.

[thinkdr]

.


On this topic, here is a link to a highly-relevant transcript of an interview aimed at those who want to make an impact. It encourages investing time, money, and energy into the encouragement of worker-ownership -- which is the concept of employee-buyout of the business for which they work. A very interesting interview:

https://www.fiftybyfifty.org/2020/07/ra ... ff3747cd62

What do you say about this concept?

Is it not indeed Ethics Applied to Economics?

How would you describe it?

[thinkdr]

a businessman - who also is a pretty-good teacher of Economics – provides for us. Be sure to view this insightful video in order to gain the new knowledge. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th3KE_H27bs

It gives a capitalist’s perspective on why Neo-liberalism is a faulty ideology based on unsound ideas; and we are informed as to what we can do to counteract such misleading doctrines.

We can choose, he tells us, to fix the prevailing economic arrangements that aren’t working well. We can consciously choose to make things better, and this capitalist explains clearly how.

And check out thisYouTube video which may prove helpfull to understanding Ethics applied to Economics.
[Listen to all of it before judging what the message is – for that is the philosophical approach – don’t jump to conclusions until you have digested the entire argument by Dr. Wolff. He is an Economist, and a Philosopher of Economics:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzSYZcv ... jYj&index=

...Stumbled upon a site which tells about a non-profit organization that integrates ethic’s and activism: it sets policy agendas. This is practical, Applied Ethics. Check it out for your reading enjoyment:

Visit http://www.humanagenda.net/policy-agenda

And see especially the first paragraph here to learn the core values guiding the moral applications: http://www.humanagenda.net/claro


Did you learn anything by viewing thesee talks and articles? Tell us your impressions.

[thinkdr]

a businessman - who also is a pretty-good teacher of Economics – provides for us. Be sure to view this insightful video in order to gain the new knowledge. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th3KE_H27bs

It gives a capitalist’s perspective on why Neo-liberalism is a faulty ideology based on unsound ideas; and we are informed as to what we can do to counteract such misleading doctrines.

We can choose, he tells us, to fix the prevailing economic arrangements that aren’t working well. We can consciously choose to make things better, and this capitalist explains clearly how.

And check out thisYouTube video which may prove helpfull to understanding Ethics applied to Economics.
[Listen to all of it before judging what the message is – for that is the philosophical approach – don’t jump to conclusions until you have digested the entire argument by Dr. Wolff. He is an Economist, and a Philosopher of Economics:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzSYZcv ... jYj&index=

...Stumbled upon a site which tells about a non-profit organization that integrates ethic’s and activism: it sets policy agendas. This is practical, Applied Ethics. Check it out for your reading enjoyment:

Visit http://www.humanagenda.net/policy-agenda

And see especially the first paragraph here to learn the core values guiding the moral applications: http://www.humanagenda.net/claro


Did you learn anything by viewing thesee talks and articles? Tell us your impressions.

[Karpel Tunnel]

Ill just make a general comment.

You refer to ethics and Ethics as if it is one thing. As in the title of thread and in many parts of the OP and other threads.

But there isn't one ethics. People have different values and different priorities.

This doesn't mean you and your project are wrong, but coming into the discussion as if someone can answer a question about whether we should have ethics in economics as if Ethics is a single thing is problematic. I think on some level it will alienate people, especially those who have different ethics than you do and different priorities. IOW someone who values freedom higher than you do and equality less than you do on some scale. IOW someone who is more willing to put up with inequality in the name of freedom will consider themselves ethical but disagreeing with you. But the way you frame the issues is as if there is one ethics, so even if you do not say it, it is implicit that they are not as ethical. When in fact they simply organizes their values differently than you and or have different priorities and values. They have a different ethics.

It comes off kinda naive. Hey, we all want to be ethical right, so of course we want X. Even if someone does want X, they may not want it at the cost of Y. Or they may want it differently. Or they don't want government to ensure X, but want X as much or less than you do, but via other means.

We are less alike than a read of your posts might imply. It is as if other people have forgetten ethics, when in fact they simply have other ethics.