The case of Bernie Madoff remains

The quality of Bernie Madoff remains to be a controversial grimace due to his energy to commit fraudulent acts against individuals and companies whether they may belong to the velocity or middle class. Due to this, the repercussions of is exertions remain to be a make out due to its timeliness with the ongoing Ameri freighter fiscal crisis. That is why studious considerations must be made in order to actively sympathize the parameters of this case and align its application with normative moral philosophy.Looking at this particular case, it can be seen that Madoff conducted what usual economists calls a Ponzi scheme. This system creates various business practices that object to hand over fraudulent information among a client base to commit significant income and profit (Moore, 2009). This setup forwarded increased profits on Madoff as he continued to lobby for this act in different sectors. much(prenominal) actions then resulted to huge losses as profits promised for cli ents were unequal to the demonstrable amount (Lezner, 2008).This patch also resulted in the furthering negativity for hedge bills as the economy and the stock market continued to decline and drop. The go for of the 70-year-old Madoff, widely considered to pay the magic touch as an investor, is another sedate black eye for the hedge fund industry and all non-transparent enthronization vehicles (Lezner, 2008, p. 1). Such ideas furthered rethinking how might have Madoff gained the ability to continue this practice for some(prenominal) years.Analyzing this case on the perspective in the realm of ethics, it may be a healthy portion to deal about Madoffs ability to act and commit actions that is considered good or bad. In here the standards and ideals put forwardd by society and the business perspective comes into picture as the question of whether Madoff should have been remaining trial at home or in jail. In contention for this scenario, it is essential to denote what norma tive ethics can provide and cast off sufficient justification for the actions connected by Madoff.In downstairsstanding the elements of normative ethics, it tries to research and provide theories of how individuals should live (Moral ism, 2005). This branch tries to explain the parameters of individual actions with the use of some(prenominal) approaches that denote different factors affecting human lives. By fostering on this element, a careful yet comprehensive approach can be deciphered if whether or not Madoff should be awaiting trial and verdict in home or jail.Operating on the virtue ethics category, it is essential to sprightliness into the parameters of the case such as the plaintiff, how the action was conveyed, and its relevant consequences (Moral Philosophy, 2005). Applying this on Madoffs case, it can be argued that his actions neither constitutes morally accepted traits nor seek to provide away that can help improve peoples lives. Since this look revolves around the application of virtues and character, the action portrayed by Madoff does not coexist with the positive traits an individual should posses.Due to this it makes it difficult and hard to establish a birth towards good. Applying this to the question of where he should be situated during trial, virtue ethics would argue that the most inhibit choice would be waiting verdict in jail. This is because it can help compensate and correspond to the negative values committed by Mardoff to his victims. Though this approach also considers undesirable consequences, it is still a manifestation of character that needs to be compensated accordingly (Moral Philosophy, 2005).Likewise, this is chosen because under the other condition, it can provide several freedoms that Mardoff can eff and acquire. By having serving time in jail during the trial, it will actively address the similar actions conveyed by Mardoff. On the other hand, operating(a) under deontological framework, it does not consider the consequences of the act given but rather focuses in the ability of whether an action is good or bad (Moral Philosophy, 2005). Operating on this approach, deontologists would argue that the actions committed by Mardoff are not congruent with what is appropriate of an individual.This element then necessitates the idea that it should promote something that is significant and essential towards what is convinced(p) by rules and standards of any group, organization and society. Thus, the element of whether or not Mardoff should be in jail or under shack arrest is not significant. What is significant for deontologists is establishing that the actions committed by Mardoff are right or defective in their own essence. Lastly, the condition provided by the consequentialist theory points out the entailment of the results created by an action committed by the individual (Moral Philosophy, 2005).Under this idea, consequentialism in normative ethics is concerned about the positive or nega tive outcomes of a particular action and how it impacts the creation of another event or situation related to such. It is through this framework that individuals and groups can create the necessary explanation of how it can create actions constituting good or bad. Applying this to the case of Mardoff, consequentialist would argue that the action appropriate for this case is that Mardoff be situated in the jail and await his sentence.This action is significant due to his ability to create consequences that affected some(prenominal) peoples and companys lives. His actions also contributed to the downfall of many industries as his assurances of noble profitability and stability went down the drain. Seeing this, it is only justifiable that Mardoff serving in jail due to the large consequences of his actions committed. On the other hand, operating on the other category, allowing Mardoff to stay at home under house arrest will only generate minimal outcomes compared to his actions com mitted to many.This opening move would only necessitate several freedoms that may not be open while in jail. Due to this, this action may not be a feasible option from the point of view of consequentialist. To conclude, applying normative ethics in the case of Bernie Mardoff revolves around the action of understanding how his actions constituted good or bad. Under the three different approaches, it can help provide clear insights and understanding of how the concept can be properly intercommunicate and administered accordingly.Due to this, it can facilitate a functional framework of interpreting the case of Mardoff in an effective and efficient manner. References Lezner, R. (2008) Bernie Madoffs $50 Billion Ponzi Scheme. Retrieved July 13, 2009 from, http//www. forbes. com/2008/12/12/madoff-ponzi-hedge-pf-ii-in_rl_1212croesus_inl. html Moore, M. (2009) Bernie Madoff. Retrieved July 13, 2009 from http//www. time. com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1894410_1893837_1894189,00 . html Moral Philosophy (2005) Normative Ethics. Retrieved July 13, 2009 from http//www. moralphilosophy. info/normativeethics. html