Mosley is gonna walk

[graywolf624]

it's been in the news ever since this thing surfaced, i'm not assuming anything...

Yes because they made an assumption.. And yes Ive seen bits of the movie.. lets see.. prison uniform that is similar to a nazi uniform.. check.. one woman speaking german.. check...
Its not a foregone conclusion that it was nazi in nature.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by Mattk ^Why is it crazy to act in your own interests? You're saying that motorsports organisations should vote Mosley out even if that harms themselves. You'd be pretty silly to do that.

Then why have moral standards at all? I mean according to your way of thinking, anything that self-harms shoudl be avoided, even if it involves taking an ethical stand.

You may make a good lawyer one day, but your will be a very poor judge - but sadly that wouldn't stop you from sitting on the bench passing judgement over others morals and ethics one day.

[Mattk]

I never said it was the right thing to do, because I don't think it is. On every level, if I were a motorsports organisation, I woud be incredibly unwilling to associate myself with Mosley. But to avoid self-harm is the way the world works. People are inherently selfish and care more about themselves than others.

If we're talking about moral standards, the motorsports chiefs who voted for Mosley have some, just different. Their version of morality is to do whatever is necessary and within the law to improve motorsports in their given area. If it means keeping Mosley in, so be it. They have moral obligations to members and regional motorsports programmes.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by Mattk I never said it was the right thing to do, because I don't think it is. On every level, if I were a motorsports organisation, I woud be incredibly unwilling to associate myself with Mosley. But to avoid self-harm is the way the world works. People are inherently selfish and care more about themselves than others. If we're talking about moral standards, the motorsports chiefs who voted for Mosley have some, just different. Their version of morality is to do whatever is necessary and within the law to improve motorsports in their given area. If it means keeping Mosley in, so be it. They have moral obligations to members and regional motorsports programmes.

And excatly how does their voting to keep mosley in office ethicaly and morally serve regional motorsports programmes and members?

It doesn't.

[fordgt84]

Originally Posted by Mattk ^Why is it crazy to act in your own interests? You're saying that motorsports organisations should vote Mosley out even if that harms themselves. You'd be pretty silly to do that.

i never said it's crazy to act in your own interest, obviously in the business world nothing is more important. however i think in this case associating oneself with a man who has had his image completely ruined isn't necessarily smart as it will do some damage to their image as well

Originally Posted by graywolf624 Yes because they made an assumption.. And yes Ive seen bits of the movie.. lets see.. prison uniform that is similar to a nazi uniform.. check.. one woman speaking german.. check... Its not a foregone conclusion that it was nazi in nature.

come on you're saying all of the media reports were made on assumptions? including the big shots like CNN and BBC? i know about media sensationalism but don't u think that's stretching it a little bit?

[Mattk]

And excatly how does their voting to keep mosley in office ethicaly and morally serve regional motorsports programmes and members?

Because they are duty-bound to safeguard their members' interests, i.e. keep running race events, general management. Perhaps without an effective FIA, it's not going to work as well. 103 organisations thought so. But 55 did not. Keeping Mosley in charge is obviously very important to the interests of a lot of people, although not to others. It's not possible to generalise individual interests.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by Mattk Because they are duty-bound to safeguard their members' interests, i.e. keep running race events, general management. Perhaps without an effective FIA, it's not going to work as well. 103 organisations thought so. But 55 did not. Keeping Mosley in charge is obviously very important to the interests of a lot of people, although not to others. It's not possible to generalise individual interests.

So you are of the opinion ethics and morals have no place in the world - just self-interest.

Duty-bound to safeguard their members' interests? You still have not explained how abandoning all moral and ethical values is in anyone's "best" interest - other than making sure the voting members have appropriatly sucked up to mosely in fear of retaliation.

Using your logic then every commercial company is duty bound to lie, cheat, steal and rip off as many consumers as possible, including deviously undercutting quality and build integrity of products sold in the singular pursuit of profit with no regard for employee safety and healf nor any concern for local public health and welfare - well, because, ethics and morals do not enter into it - only the duty-bound responsibility to the share-holders only - even to the detriment of all others and all else.

[Mattk]

Using your logic then every commercial company is duty bound to lie, cheat, steal and rip off as many consumers as possible, including deviously undercutting quality and build integrity of products sold in the singular pursuit of profit with no regard for employee safety and healf nor any concern for local public health and welfare - well, because, ethics and morals do not enter into it - only the duty-bound responsibility to the share-holders only - even to the detriment of all others and all else.

Well, actually, that's Milton Friedman's logic. Not mine.

I can't and won't explain why Friedman's approach is good because I don't think it is. But it's what seems to work for a lot of people.

I also read this article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...rivacy.privacy

[graywolf624]

come on you're saying all of the media reports were made on assumptions? including the big shots like CNN and BBC? i know about media sensationalism but don't u think that's stretching it a little bit?

The videos on Youtube.. Watch it for yourself. Then come back and tell me what makes you sure its Nazi. CNN and the BBC have no more information then you or I... So the question is... Are you sure enough from watching the video that it's Nazi to take someones job? Erase what the sensationalism tells you, and look for yourself. If you forgot what you were told to believe, and your personal biases towards Max (which I have as well but I try to be more neutural) I can't say for sure one way or the other.

Using your logic then every commercial company is duty bound to lie, cheat, steal and rip off as many consumers as possible, including deviously undercutting quality and build integrity of products sold in the singular pursuit of profit with no regard for employee safety and healf nor any concern for local public health and welfare Well, actually, that's Milton Friedman's logic. Not mine.

ERrrr... Not even close to Milton's logic. At least try to pass it off for what it is.
Friedman exposed that a company will act in the publics welfare/health because it will benefit the shareholder. He also exposed laws for anti collusion and such. Apparently lawyers dont have to take economics.

[Mattk]

Well, generally, the Chicago School were of a laissez-faire mindset, opposing external mechanisms of ethics and accountability. A company would act morally if in their best interests (obviously). If not, well, they wouldn't. Responsibility for corporations is basically their legal obligations - the main one being the fiduciary obligation to their shareholders. Friedman also said that corporations were less obliged to be responsible because they were artificial constructs, not people as such. This last point was also the law until the Tesco case.

[graywolf624]

Well, generally, the Chicago School were of a laissez-faire mindset, opposing external mechanisms of ethics and accountability

Within reason I may agree. The Chicago school was still for anti collusion external mechanisms. Its a proven fact that internal mechanisms will regulate more efficiently then external.

Friedman also said that corporations were less obliged to be responsible because they were artificial constructs, not people as such.

This I'll agree with, but you still dont understand the Chicago School. Read Capital. Freedmans arguement is that the internal mechanisms will regulate if society feels the regulation is of value and the item is not a public good. (externality) He proved statistically that this is true. You have over simplified his theories.

If the morality in question is valued by society, shareholder value will be maximized by the morality as failing the morality will hurt the shareholder in the long run via lack of sales.
Monetarism isn't the lack of morals. Its the lack of morals that the public doesn't value. Given laws are essentially made by public value, in a properly operating capitalistic society (one free of govt interference, with information flow, externalities assigned value, and no collusion) morals of companies do not need to be externally dictated.

[fordgt84]

Originally Posted by graywolf624 The videos on Youtube.. Watch it for yourself. Then come back and tell me what makes you sure its Nazi. CNN and the BBC have no more information then you or I... So the question is... Are you sure enough from watching the video that it's Nazi to take someones job? Erase what the sensationalism tells you, and look for yourself. If you forgot what you were told to believe, and your personal biases towards Max (which I have as well but I try to be more neutural) I can't say for sure one way or the other

i think we misunderstood each other, clearly what he did was not an act of nazism, but he was nazi role playing, pretending to be one. it's this type of role playing for foreplay that i and millions of people around the world find disgusting.... is it enough to have his ass fired? hell yes. ppl have expectations for a man in his position, and he completely shat on them.

i mean how can u use that for foreplay? after the history of all the misery, pain and death in those nazi prisons... then again he did think his fascist father and close friend to hitler was a softy.

as far as my biases towards mosley, i couldn't care less about the suits in motorsports... but i do care if they still get to stay in power when they are obviously twisted

[toffytofik]

Oh, i see you guys are playing that new game!

[graywolf624]

but he was nazi role playing, pretending to be one.

Again.. What makes it nazi and not jail... Delousing was also used in the shawshank redemption.. clearly jail not just nazi.. The one prostitute spoke german. and stripes are a standard prison uniform. Its sick either way, but I think the jury is out on is or isnt. Id be more curious why british secret police were involved.

[fordgt84]

^ he spoke german as well, spoke english with a german accent too... said something like "we must give her ze punishment" ... u can see why ppl would draw the conclusion that he was acting like a nazi, if it was just prison role playing why wud there be a sudden need to speak in german?