Ethics

Rushmore Kidder describes three basic moral models of thinking in simple phrases that summarize some of the more complex philosophical models of ethics. What are Kidders three basic moral models of thinking Describe each.

Kidder recognizes that to merely analyze a dilemma is not to resolve it. He says that resolution requires us to choose the nearest right for the circumstance. To do this, he describes the following shorthand labels (models)

Ends-based thinking this is best known by the maxim do whatever produces the greatest good for the greatest number. The model demands of us a kind of cost benefit analysis, determining who will be hurt and who help and thereby measuring the intensity of that help. This principle is known to philosophers as utilitarianism. It is purely an assessment of consequences, a forecasting of outcomes. It examines the possible results and picks the one that produces the most blessing over the greatest range.

Rule-based thinking this is associated with Kants philosophical principle the categorical imperative, which Kidder explains simply as follow only the principle that you want everyone else to follow. The principle enables one to assess if hisher action could become a universal standards that others ought to obey. It suggests that ones action should create the greatest good or (in Kants words) the greatest worth of character, thus it is based firmly on duty  on what we ought to do, rather than what we think might work  deontological thinking.

Care-based thinking this principle is pegged on putting love for others first, coming into play frequently in the Golden Rule do to others what you would like them to do to you. This principle contributes to a feature known to philosophers as reversibility i.e. it asks to test your actions by putting yourself in others shoes and imagining how it would feel if you were the recipient rather than the perpetrator of your actions. Practically, some philosophers (including Kant) have disputed its standing but it is for many people, the only rule of ethics they know.  

Kidder also writes about four dilemma paradigms that are helpful in analyzing an ethical dilemma. Fully describe each of the four paradigms and how they are used in making ethical decisions
In deriving right  versus  right choices, Kidder writes that the really tough choices are genuine dilemmas precisely because each side is rooted in one of our basic core values. Four such dilemmas are so common to our experience that they stand as paradigms. They include the following
Truth vs. loyalty which can be explained as honesty vs. promise keeping, or integrity vs. commitment. A situation Kidder explains in his book about this paradigm is one of a professional working for a large defense electronics firm who found himself riding a roller coaster of concern about layoffs. At this time the executive met behind closed doors and the professional and his colleagues suspected a layoff. His boss confided in him that his team member would be slated but told him to keep that information confidential. When the team member approached him, because he new the truth, the honesty compelled him to answer accurately while he had given his word to the boss not to break the confidence and felt a strong loyalty to that relationship.

In an individual vs. community situation, you have to choose from helping yourself, or a small group of people, vs. helping a much larger group of people. Kidders situation in the book is a story of a man owning a hospital in the mid 1980s. In this time, no one really knew much about AIDS, or how they were spread. A few patients in the mans hospital needed care, but he discovered that they might have AIDS. He had to face the following decision should he give the individual patients the help they are entitled to, risking the health of his nurses and doctors, or should he keep these patients quarantined away from everyone, to save his community of workers

In short-term vs. long-term, you must make a decision that would benefit you either immediately, or would rather be helpful in the long run. Kidder explains short-term vs. long-term in a story of a man who graduated with his science degree. His job was a great job, got married and had two kids. Twelve years later he got another job that promised advancement, but to do so he would have to go back to school, soaking up most of his time with the family, this coming during his kids teen years when they need support for this often difficult transition in life. He has to decide if he should be there for his kids in the short period in life where his kids need guidance from both of their parents the most (short-term), or should he think of the future and the money he could make with more education, that would help support his kids for the future (long-term)
Justice versus Mercy which is upholding the belief that people have what is coming to them, or giving them another chance for their mistakes. Kidders situation in his book is about a new promising journalist working for a newspaper. All her work was great and she seemed to have a great future ahead of her, until one day when her boss discovers that she has plagiarized her last article. The boss is faced with the justice vs. mercy paradigm for how to deal with her. He could throw her out of the newspaper, put her on the black list and make sure she never has a job ever again in the journalism field (justice), or he could talk to her about it and see why she would do such a thing, considering the amount of talent she has

Give examples of each of kidders four dilemmas from your personal experience
Truth vs. Loyalty During biology practical, student ate the entire lab specimen. The teachers were questioning everyone about who did it and trying to find the people responsible for the destruction. When I was asked, I had to decide if I would be truthful and tell the teacher who exactly did it, or remain loyal to my fellow students and not rat them out.

Individual vs. Community this may be a bit more childish, but was a dilemma nonetheless. Playing a kickball type game in my gym class last year, I was on third base with about five other kids, ready to run to home base once the ball was kicked. When it was kicked and we started to run, the girl in front of me, who I never talk to before, slowed down all of a sudden. I smashed into her from behind and we both fell over to the ground. I was fine and got right up, but right before I started to run again, I noticed she was still on the ground. The game was very close and we needed me to score, but I also wanted to help the girl up considering it was me that knocked her over. If I helped her up, we both would get out without scoring, letting our team down, but I wouldnt look like a prick for knocking her over (individual). If I ran to home base I would score to put our team in the lead (community) but it would look like I had no remorse for knocking her down

Short-term vs. Long-term We have open mic coffeehouses once a month at my high school, and the final one of my senior year was coming upon us. It would be my last chance to play music with many people who were going to different schools, but at the same time a band I was currently in wanted to have a major practice that very same night. I could either go to the coffeehouse for one final goodbye to old friends (short-term), or I could have band practice, considering the band was very promising and we had very high hopes for it, aiming to have a record out within the next few months (long-term)

Justice vs. Mercy I was a best friend of Gordon since the first day of college studies, and now I, along with everyone else noticed that he was treating his girlfriend with a sickening degree of control. Everyone tried to help the girl, but she refused to be helped. Seeing theres nothing I could do, I stopped talking to my friend, and most everyone else followed. Seeing this as a kind of emotional problem, Gordon got upset I didnt want to be his friend anymore, and one night he smashed in the windows of my car. I had no concrete evidence that it was him, but everyone knew it was. I could either take matters into my own hands and make sure Gordon was repaid for his actions (justice), or I could do nothing and move on (mercy). I didnt do a thing, and the rule of karma followed. He was soon thereafter arrested for drug use, his girlfriend finally broke up with him, almost all of his friends abandoned him, and his car stopped working all by itself.

Mintzberg, et al, say that our society and corporations have been taken over by a syndrome of selfness.
Explain what they mean
Mintzberg, et al say syndrome of selfness that has taken over our society and corporations is built on a series of half truths, which has changed our mindsets to the following prospects a narrow view of ourselves as economic man a distorted view of our values which is reduced to shareholders value heroic and dramatic leadership lean and increasingly mean organizations and an illusionary view of the society as a tide of prosperity.

What are the fabrications that they suggest support this syndrome or selfishness
The following are the half truths (fabrications) that they say support this syndrome or selfishness the first is that we are all, in essence, economic man and are intent in maximizing our personal gains the second fabrication borders the view that corporations exist to maximize shareholders value contrary to the belief that corporations exist to serve the society. This expresses the way the shareholders have muscled out the other stakeholders including the fundamental societal contribution the third fabrication is that corporations require heroic leaders. There are famous books explaining how managers had seized control of large corporations and manipulated shareholders for their own purposes. This led to pressures in the financial community resulting to the mentality that led the pendulum swing the other way i.e. heroic leaders are necessary to run a corporation the other fabrication is a mindset that the effective organization is lean and mean. The attribute of mean as a virtue is saddening as Mintzberg, et al explains and the last fabrication is the notion of win-win resulting to the rising tide of prosperity lifting all the boats meaning that everyone prospers in the selfish economy.      

What are your thoughts about Marjorie Kellys views that shareholders have privileges of feudal aristocrats
Marjorie Kelly, in her the divine right of capital, expresses a valid opinion that shareholders have privileges of feudal aristocrats, when she asks why should one group particularly a distant from the operations that may have added nothing for years, lay claim to such a large share of benefits this in my opinion and based on Mintzberg, et al notional fabrication is a valid ideology, however, the shareholders are the contributors of the wealth being invested and must benefit from the same.

What is the effect of shareholder value on the other stakeholders
Shareholders value as a concept has muscled out all the other stakeholders and this is a pity. The other stakeholders including the overall societal allegiance is overridden by the need to maximize the shareholders value changing our perception of values from societal values to shareholders values.

Describe the authors view of engagement
The authors argue that engagement should be rooted in experience and should inculcate cooperative human engagement thereby enabling an open view. This will ensure that we engage ourselves to engage others so as to restore our sense of balance.

What is corporate irresponsibility
Corporate irresponsibility is a product of individuals irresponsibility. A socially irresponsible act is a decision to accept an alternative that is thought by the decision maker to be inferior to another alternative when the effects upon all parties are considered. Generally this involves a gain by one party at the expense of the total system.  (Armstrong, 1977 185) and as Bansal and Kandola suggests, when individual irresponsible actions become systematic and significant, the problem then becomes an organizational one. Further, as Armstrong (1977) suggests, a key element of corporate social irresponsibility is the exploitation of negative externalities. A familiar example of irresponsible corporate behavior is found in the tobacco industry, where information about the products harmful and even fatal consequences was withheld and even obfuscated.

What is the difference between actively doing something unethical yourself, and observing someone else behaving unethically and doing nothing about it yourself
The difference between actively doing something unethical yourself and observing someone else behaving unethically and doing nothing about it yourself is the same. Bansal and Kandola illustrates that leaders must demonstrate integrity and by doing nothing one is an accomplice to unethical thing the other is committing.
What is required of the individual managers to prevent corporate irresponsibility
Bansal and Kandola suggests two conditions which they say are necessary to prevent corporate social irresponsibility a set of strong organizational values that espouses corporate social responsibility and employee empowerment that permits and encourages individuals to express their concerns to management. Individual manager should naturally be concerned about issues that interest them personally while at the same time consider factors that perpetuates organizational goals and thus benefiting the whole society.

Bansal and Kandola suggest in their article that individuals are often guided in their behavior in social circumstances and in business organizations by watching other bystanders. What are the three ways they suggest that the bystander effect can explain how individual actions contribute to corporate social irresponsibility.

Bansal and Kandola suggest in their article that individuals are often guided in their behavior in social circumstances and in business organizations by watching other bystanders. They used the following three ways to suggest that the bystander effect can explain how individual actions contribute to corporate social irresponsibility ambiguity of irresponsible actions which contributes to bystander apathy, diffused responsibility and employee commitment and concerns where they say that most employees involved in irresponsible behavior experience guilt and anxiety.

Within a span of just a few years, the entire globe has seen many technological advances. Just a few years back, when there was no technological revolution in place, we had to stand in never ending queues for almost every other thing, be it paying some utility bill or doing some account transfer or even a query as small as the accounts balance enquiry. Few individuals could now be seen doing the transactions standing at the bank. We now do not have to wait for our turn to know our account balance and do not have to wait for the banks to open in the morning in order to withdraw cash for emergencies. This all has been facilitated by hundreds of software companies which are functioning across the globe with some of them providing new software products while the other offering software services.  It is generally these software companies who do a complete automation for every item over the internet for us viz. online shopping, facilitating the payment of utility bills, purchase of movie tickets and even the complex tasks like maintenance and update of bank accounts balances for millions of bank customers plus determining their credit limits and keeping a track of their card payments.

According to the author, Computer ethics is the analysis of the nature and social impact of computer technology and the corresponding formulation and justification of policies for the ethical use of such technology. The computer ethics are different from any other ethics as these ethics should consider personal as well as social policies. It is difficult to conceptualize the policy for using the computer technology because new value as well as old value has to be taken into consideration.

We have come miles ahead when it comes to development of softwares  hardwares but are still at the some place when it comes to development of policies and framework for protecting the rights of the individuals who have developed these softwares. There are stringent policies in place safety and protection of physical objects but for softwares such policies are still missing. We need to develop a good framework and policies for protecting the rights of computer professionals such that they are inspired for more innovations and thus do not have their hard earned work getting stolen without much pain. Using pirated softwares etc. should be covered under the same policies and they should be modified from time to time in order to meet the changing needs of time.

Psychological egoism is the theory which states that all human actions are associated withif not completely motivatedby their own selfish desires. The theory assumes that individuals act merely to realize their self-interests. While it may seem that people have the capacity to want things for other people, the theory states that people only do such things if they believe that the happiness of other people is somehow related to their own happiness. In a manner of speaking, it could be said that goodwill and altruism are mere figments of the human imagination, for underneath the seemingly unselfish surface lies a selfish motive.

Thus, in a sense, it can be said that the benefits which human beings provide other individuals are mere instruments to gain what they want. It is presumed that individuals do things for other individuals because doing so serves as a bridge towards an underlying goal. Therefore, if one is to base his assumptions on the human race in the perspective of this theory, it is quite logical to state that man is selfish and immoral.

The theory also does not merely state what should be case in fact, it claims to be the ultimate truth and states that it is the case. The theory claims to be much more than a theory and that it is a description of reality. Apart from this, the theory also states that human beings are not capable of doing anything that is not somehow related to their ultimate end.

In relation to psychological egoism, consequentialism or liberalism with limits is the perception that morality consists of producing the right results in every possible circumstance. It also concerns the idea that morality is supposed to promote happiness and eventually remove suffering in the world also, consequentialism involves the idea of creating far more freedom for everyone else (Haines).

Therefore, it can be said that consequentialism is the opposite of it, since to be focused on ones personal happiness instead of the happiness of all is not considered to be moral. Consequentialism states that the results of actions can determine whether such actions are either moral or immoral.

According to Immanuel Kant (21), individuals do love humanity which is why most of their actions are based on the fact that they are doing their moral duties. However, amidst the good intentions, the self always turns up to assert itself and makes the individual realize that he or she is doing his or her moral duties because he or she will benefit from itand not merely because he or she merely believes in doing his or her duties.

On the other hand, nonconsequentialism or liberalism without limits is an ethical theory which argues that the morality or immorality of a certain act does not rely on the badness or goodness of the consequences of the given act. While it is accepted that the consequences can contribute to determining whether a given act is moral or immoral, it is stated that just because the results of a certain act is bad, that the act itself is automatically bad.

In fact, the theory also states that good consequences are not merely the result of good actions, but the result of an impartial calculation of good and evils. In relation to this, Adam Smith states that man is neither altruistic nor egoistic. He is bothfor love of self and love for others can co-exist peacefully within a human being.

Based on the previous discussion of psychological egoism, it could be said that belief on the theory may lead people to believe that there is no such thing as goodness in the world. People can be led to believe that no one does anything out of pure kindness or goodwill and that perhaps, anyone who does good things may be expected to be doing such things for it will benefit him or her.

Hence, in a manner of speaking, psychological egoism could lead people to believe that man is inherently selfishand that he will not do anything unless it benefits him in some way. It would ultimately defeat the notion that people can put other people first before their own intentions.

In fact, one can even say that if people indeed only act to satisfy their self-interests, then people are not doing good for the sake of doing good, but for entirely other different reasons, such as fear of apprehension or of being shun by other individuals. If the case is as such, then it can also be said that people are naturally immoral, for they will then not do good because it is good but because of the various implications that not doing good may cause.

Thus, in a nutshell, psychological egoism is trying to say that humans are not capable of doing things which will not benefit them and that everything they do may be directly or indirectly related to their own interests. Man is not capable of helping other people for the mere reason that they want to help themfor man is always concerned about how his actions will ultimately benefit him.

Nowadays, we live in a time where we always are suspicious of motiveswe believe that other people are doing things not because they are good, but because they have some sort of hidden agenda. In fact, it can be said that a lot of individuals believe that there is something to gain from other people, and this is why it seems to be that other individuals are mere tools in getting what they want.

However, as discussed with regard to nonconsequentialism, there is no reason that one should assume that man is either completely altruistic or completely egoistic. In a manner of speaking, if man pursues his self-interests, it does not necessarily mean that he does not care about other individuals. Everyone has his or her own interests, but it is not correct to say that these interests will push the individual into using other individuals for his or her own benefits.

Apart from this, it is quite irrational to assume that there may be an underlying motive whenever one does something for another individual. Human beings are very complex individuals hence, it would be quite an assumption if one concludes that they can be boxed in either category of good or evil. People are imperfect, yes, but to assume that their selfishness is an absolute truth is a serious misjudgment.

Due to increasing number of uninsured Americans, poor access to health care and rising costs of care, the Health Care reform Bill has been proposed under President Obamas administration. From the government sponsored proposed plan for ensuring all Americans have health insurance, there have been increased debates on quality of care among other issues. This work focuses on the way in which the reforms will affect quality of health care and at the same time identifies some of the groups that are for and those against the reforms. Reasons behind each argument as presented by each group will also be highlighted.

Impact of health care reform on quality of care
The effects of the health care reforms on quality of health care are both positive and negative. This arises mainly due to the effects of the high costs expected to be incurred in implementing the bill. It is estimated that the reforms may require about 635 billion over a period of 10 years. The quality issue therefore arises on how it will be possible to meet these costs without compromising on quality yet the low income earners will not be taxed further. With this view prevailing, it is expected that quality of health care will go down at the expense of covering everyone.

Since health insurance will be under the control of the government, quality of health care is predicted to go down. This is because private players will not be competing for prices any more and with lack of competition in price also comes lack of competition in quality. It also implies that the government will be the one to decide the quality of health care one receives, a type of rationing of health care.

Even with projections that quality will go down, a section of people believe that it will improve quality by attending to persons with pre-existing conditions and also make providers and third parties more accountable in their healthcare provision.

Groups for and against health care reform 
Political role in this debate is inevitable with majority of Democrats supporting it while most Republicans oppose it. The Democrats are for the reforms mainly on the argument that it ensures that every American has access to affordable and quality health care. They also argue that pre-existing conditions will also be covered by insurers adding up to patient protection. They also argue that doctors will receive incentives from the reforms thus motivating them to provide high quality health care.

The Republicans on the other hand are opposed to the bill citing that it will be very costly to run. They also fear that choice of health care will be scrapped out and eventually compromise on quality. The republicans complain that employers will prefer government run insurance which is of lower quality over private and high quality insurance. In addition, they also argue that middle class income earners will be overtaxed to finance the bill and this will translate to high cost of health care.

Other than political players, private insurance providers are also opposed to the plan out of the fear that they may get edged out of the market. This is because most people and employers will opt for government sponsored plans. Doctors also fear that they will be restricted in their earnings by being subjected to government directed remunerations.

In conclusion, the controversy over the health care reform bill is not yet over even with its successful development so far. So long as these controversies are not cleared in a satisfactory manner, the battle of arguments will persist.

I. Introduction
One of the important aspects of the society is the presence of the government. The people and the society rely on the government and its effective functioning. The people and the society believe there is something that the government is expected of which would contribute to the well-being of the society and the people. In the analysis of history, it is noticeable how different leadership in different countries produces governments that are characterized by how they are different from one another, largely through the comparison on how the government responds to its roles, obligations and responsibilities in the society. Some governments are considered as bad governments because they failed in fulfilling their obligations. Others are considered as good or ideal governments based on how they respond positively to the roles and obligations society and the people expected them to undertake. The government influences significantly what happens in the society and impacts the lives of many people based on how the government performs its roles and fulfills its obligations.

Indeed, the government has many different roles to fulfill. The fulfillment of such roles can be viewed via the analysis of the different obligations the government is expected to handle, particularly two important social obligations namely practical and ethical obligations. The objective of this paper is to identify the role of the government, focusing the discussion on several different important aspects of this topic which include the fulfillment of the social obligations of the government, the role of government with regards to its practical obligations and ethical obligations, the analysis of the role of the government and the need for appropriate actions and the role of the government and the optimal ethical, decision-making processes.

II. Discussion
Fulfilling the social obligations of the government
The government is a social entity which is bestowed with great powers because of the responsibilities that is placed on the government so that the government can fulfill what is considered as social obligations. The social obligations refer to the obligations of the government to the society, to which it is answerable to, to which service should be rendered by the government. The social obligations includes two important sets of obligations  first, the practical obligations, and secondly, the ethical obligations. The government is responsible for making sure that the society is maintained in such a way that it is productive, effective, sound and healthy. The government can do this if, in its part, it can deliver its social obligations. The governments failure to fulfill its social obligations can result to the breakdown in the social life in different spheres. Productivity will be affected and the state of life will deteriorate. The people will lose hope in the leadership of its government and will rely on themselves for survival and self preservation, the society unable to construct a sense of order among its people and their life.

Role of government practical obligations
One of the important roles of the government is how it should function to accomplish its practical obligations. By practical obligations it means the focus is centered on the government providing for things that have practical purpose in the life of the people. This is important because this includes many different important things and affects many different social spheres. The idea of practical obligation and the role of the government is that the government is created out of necessity. There is a need that the concept of government can and should accomplish. The undertaking of such task and set of responsibilities for the government as an entity in the society is what defines the role of government when it comes to practical obligations.

Practical obligations as part of the essential set of roles that the government should undertake are also the aspect by which the government is judged for its effectiveness or lack of. Through the presence of the practical obligations of the government, the people are given the tool to use so that they can assess, analyze, scrutinize and see if the government is working and is functioning as expected. The inability of the government to perform its practical obligations can help the people identify and determine whether or not the government is not suitable for the lifestyle of the society, It can also determine if the government is not in sync with the present conditions, or if the government needs to be changed when it comes to leadership and policies and policy implementations and actions so that the practical obligations are undertaken.

Nonetheless, the aspect of practical obligation as an essential role of the government serves two functions. First, it gives the people a central provider for things that the people equally enjoy like infrastructure, public service, social welfare etc. Second, the practical obligation is a tool that can be used to see if the government is still functioning as it is expected. This allows the people to gauge the ability or inability of the government, from which change can start so that a new form of government, or a restructuring of the government in people and policy, can be implemented to make the government function again in the manner expected of it. The role of the government that is included in the concept of practical obligation includes things that are of use to the people. That is the reason why it is called practical. The government is responsible in the task of making sure a system is in place and it is working and functioning so that it can provide for the people things that they need.

For example, departments are created by the government and these departments have different focus (i.e. education, health, environment, public works, energy etc.). These departments function under a set of policies and guidelines as designed and prescribed by the central government leadership. Independently, each department attends to the particular need of the people. Collectively, the departments all accomplish the different expected outputs of the government in response to its responsibility on practical obligations. Through these departments, the government allows the creation of bridges and roads to help transportation and commute. A department is dedicated to studying and producing methods and ways to produce health related things that can help the people if they get sick and is in need of medical attention, etc.

A country that has a government that is not able to fulfill its practical obligations to the people is often considered as an ineffective and useless government. For example, war and armed conflict that decimated the government and made the government incapable of responding to its practical obligations cannot provide for the education, security, health and other essential needs of its people, the inability to respond to the practical obligation being used to define the state and quality of the government in place in a particular country. Governments that are proven to be excellent in responding to its practical obligations to its people are hailed as governments that are exemplary, effective, efficient and productive. Without the practical obligation as a key role of the government that it has to undertake for the sake of its people, the government will have very little or no function at all.

In the US, one of the longest-running debates is the see-saw battle regarding the idea of the extent of the power of the state and federal or national government. The main argument of both sides is centered in the idea of the practical obligation of the government to its people and the role of the government as the agent that will accomplish this particular need of the society. Those in favor of increasing the power of the federal or national government believes that this will result in the better servicing of the federal or national government all across the US (which is tied with its accomplishing its responsibility regarding practical obligation). On the other hand, state government is resisting such development. They believe that it is the state government that should have a stronger role when it comes to undertaking the task of accomplishing the practical obligations expected of the government.

Role of government ethical obligations
Besides the practical obligations of the government, there is also what is considered as the ethical obligations of the government, which, for example, includes the protection of the human rights of the people as John Locke explained it in his discourses on politics. The ethical obligations of the government, as a concept, refer to a set of expected actions from the government to protect and preserve the sense of ethics inside the society and among its people. This is expected to be undertaken by the people who will serve in the government the moment they took office. Ethics dictate the way people should behave and act in the society. The government is expected to take actions (1) as a result of the expected ethical behavior from the government, and (2) to influence the prevalence of a sense of ethics among the people in the society. Often, the role of fulfilling the ethical obligations leads to the government acting as an agent of intervention during disputes wherein the issues blur the line between ethics and law. Their actions, in return, strengthen and reinforce the sense of ethics in the society and among its people.

The ethical obligation of the government is a very sensitive and important case and issue. The realization of ethics of the government as an entity is dependent on the people forming the government and their sense of ethics as a person. Like the practical obligations of the government, the ethical obligations of the government also acts as a means for the people to judge whether or not the government is performing up to the expectations and0at par with the standards the government should0act and behave, ethics-wise. The government often uses the role of fulfilling the ethical obligations as a launchpad towards enacting and enforcing law. If not, the governments handling of ethical problems and issues in the society influences the status quo and dictates how the people should behave in a socially-accepted manner.

For example, the American company Hewlett-Packard which produces computer and computer-related items and materials underwent a crisis involving the leaking of confidential information to the press and the subsequent ethical concerns with regards to pretexting. This was used as an approach by the investigators for them to be able to track down the individual guilty of leaking the information. Noticing the ethical aspect of the problem and judging the impact on the sense of ethics of the people in the society with the surfacing of such problems, the US government acted and intervened. Later, they used the problem and what it perceives as unethical actions involved in pretexting to push forward and approve the law making pretexting illegal in the future. This is just an example of how the government tries to fulfill its ethical obligations to the society, by acting ethically and by protecting the sense of ethics of the society.

The government is expected to act ethically, and at the same time, influence how the individuals in the society perceives and reacts to the concept of ethics and the degree by which ethics should influence the behavior of the individual. For example, the US government, both state and federal government, was deeply involved in the problem of the Hudson River clean up after the identification of the toxic PCBs in the river and its role in deteriorating the health and animal and plant life surrounding the area because of the dumping done by GE there. Like in0the previous example, the parties involved in this case are locked in a legal battle which evidently does not favor strongly a particular side since by law it is hard to pin down who between the two parties is correct. However, the governments action on intervening in the issue is hinged strongly on the ethical implications of the problem.

The government believes that action should be done by GE and by the government on the basis of ethics alone. While GE was indeed allowed to dump PCBs on the river legally, the availability of the new information identifying such situation as a potentially problematic and harmful situation for man, animal and plant life gives GE and the government the ethical responsibility to do something0about it. Not doing anything is an act similar to acting against the ethical practices to which both the government and a corporate identity like GE should behave. Like its practical obligations, the ethical obligations of the government to its people and0to the society is important, relevant and significant.

Analysis of the role of the government and the need for appropriate actions
Since the establishment of the concept of government and nation-wide governance inside countries, it is noticeable how the government has hat the role of not just triggering and prompting action. It is also an agent that is relied upon for the needed appropriate action. This is because the government is first and foremost considered as an entity that has the authority, morally and legally, to undertake the needed appropriate actions. The government is de facto in possession of authority, and thus its acts are lawful. This is best highlighted by the fact that it is inside the government where law-making and law-enforcement is found. Laws, among other things, dictate appropriate actions. When problems surface that needs a revision of these previously existing laws to accommodate the ethical and moral implications brought about by the problems arising in the society, the need for appropriate actions is acted upon by the government. There are also other sectors of the society that can also relied upon for the needed appropriate actions like non-government organizations or NGO and other similar groups, private sector, corporate entities, etc., wherein the government is an important source of action. The government can be involved in the creation and implementation of action plan in many different aspects of the social life  social welfare, security, religious practices, financial issues, moral and ethical problems, culture and the arts, etc.

There are many ways by which the government is empowered lawfully and historically to take the necessary appropriate actions needed during particular situations and conditions. Unfortunately, the analysis of the role of the government and the need for appropriate action is something that should be assessed and gauged on per country and per government basis. For example, the performance of the government on country A is different from the performance of the government in country B when it comes to fulfilling the need for appropriate actions coming from the government. In both countries A and B, government per government comparisons based on leadership (i.e. term and tenure of presidents) can also be assessed individually and compared with one another to see if the government has approached this role in different manner depending on the leadership of the countrys leader  a monarchal leader, a dictator, a military general or an elected president or prime minister, etc.

The role of the government and the optimal ethical, decision-making processes
The government is not relied only for actions, but also for its participation and role in the societys optimal ethical decision-making processes. Everyday, the society is faced with the need for decision-making regarding what to do for particular problems and issues. The people and the society looks to the government to participate in the optimal decision making process that the society has to undergo in response to conditions requiring such task. The government is expected to contribute significantly so that the decision making process is characterized as a process that realized its optimum capability and is undertaken in consideration to measures and parameters characterizing ethical actions from the government.

III. Conclusion
Why is there a government What is the need of the society for a government These are just some of the questions explored in the analysis of the role of the government. This query puts forward the important concept regarding the need for the government. This is because the society is dependent upon particular things that the government is expected to deliver, as part of its fulfilling its role in the society and to the people. The government is expected to act as a leader and provider. As a leader, the government should be the first one with the initiatives and sets of actions to make the society life characterized by the best available way of life the society can offer to its people, and maintaining or even improving such status.

The government has an important role in the society. The people are expecting them to fulfill its social obligations. The government has two distinct roles to which the people expect a lot of things. These roles are practical obligations and ethical obligations. In an entity that is powerful and influential, the people look at the government when there is a need for appropriate actions on particular issues. When this happens, the government is expected to display optimal ethical, decision-making processes.

As a provider, the government acts as a conduit that connects the resources of the people and the provision of what the people need to have and should have based on the resources that they make available to the government. The government can, in turn, provide sufficiently to its people, by giving them not just roads and bridges and hospital, but also a set of moral and ethical values and practices, the services of a governing entity that is unbiased and is not prejudicial over a particular group of individual, among others. These can be achieved and realized through the identification of the social role of the government to fulfill particular obligations  ethical and practical obligations.

Overall, it is important to identify and discuss the role of the government and the different important aspects of this topic. These include the fulfillment of the social obligations of the government, the role of government with regards to its practical obligations and ethical obligations, the analysis of the role of the government and the need for appropriate actions and the role of the government and the optimal ethical, decision-making processes, to help inform the people and to remind the government as well via the constant wave of consciousness among the people and the society.