Using at least two (2) of the foundational ethical theories studied in Module 2, you should answer the following questions.

With each answer, you should discuss the issues and set forth and defend a clear position on whether or not any constraint ought to be placed on the freedom of a business to:1.Export capital for production abroad: According to Shaw and Barry, deciding what sort of economic arrangements would best promote human happiness requires the utilitarian to consider many things. It is unethical to export capital for production abroad because this capital can be used for production facilities domestically and by exporting this capital, the opportunity is available for local and domestic use is restricted.Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with similar system of liberty for all. I believe the principle is saying that we should be free as possible to set the course of our own lives. Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions. First, they are to be attached topositions and offices to open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity; and second, they are to be to the greatest expected benefit of the least advantaged members of society. I believe the idea is that social and economic inequalities are not wrong, or bad, in themselves. They only become indefensible when they don't operate to improve the position of the worst off. The capital should be used for purposes which benefit the domestic market and does not in any way hamper the domestic necessity. Once capital is exported then the entire purpose of being available domestically is lost.2.Export commodities which have been banned from sale in the United States: Any commodity that has been banned for sale in the USA should be banned by all countries.These commodities cannot be sold by any country as one country has banned it. It is totally unethical to export these goods which are banned in to be made available to people regardless of market and profits and is against the ethical lenses of the golden rule of ethics and utilitarianism. Shaw and Barry say rule utilitarianism maintains that the utilitarian standard should be applied not to individual actions but to moral codes as a whole. The rule utilitarian asks what moral code a society should adopt to maximize happiness. The principles that make up that code would be then the basis for distinguishing right actions from wrong actions.3.Downsize in the face of economic difficulty: this need not be unethical if the rule of ethics is applied properly. In times of economic difficulties firms have to be downsized but not at a disadvantage to all. Shaw and Barry distinguish two different forms of utilitarianism. These two forms are act utilitarianism, which is the classic and most straight forward version of utilitarianism. We have one and only one moral obligation, the maximization of happiness for everyone concerned, and every action is to be judged according to how well it lives up to this standard. (Shaw & Barry, 2013) It brings the greatest amount of happiness in a particular situation regardless of the consequences. Shaw and Barry say rule utilitarianism maintains that the utilitarian standard should be applied not to individual actions but to moral codes as a whole. The rule utilitarian asks what moral code a society should adopt to maximize happiness. The principles that make up that code would be then being the basis for distinguishing right actions from wrong actions (Shaw & Barry, 2013).4.Break union contracts in the face of economic difficulty: This is unethical because there is a contract and these cannot be broken. The principle of least harm and the golden theory of ethics can be applied here. The textbook states each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with similar system of liberty for all. I believe the principle is saying that we should be free as possible to set the course of our own lives. Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions. First, they are to be attached to positions and offices to open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity; and second, they are to be to the greatest expected benefit of the least advantaged members of society. I believe the idea is that social and economic inequalities are not wrong, or bad, in themselves. They only become indefensible when they don't operate to improve the position of the worst off. The above is what I have thus far to answer the questions. For each question, I need to add a second theory and defend the position. The theories are Utilitarian, Libertarian, Rawls and Kant