Business Ethics Post:
British Columbia is known for their large resource of groundwater, however, as written in the newspaper article, the 
lack of groundwater regulation in BC allows companies like Nestlé to extract the drinking water without having to pay a dime. While this regulation, or lack of regulation thereof, is not due the company itself but it still poses the question whether the company should be concerned with how they obtain the materials for their product.
The stakeholder theory, as purposed by Freeman claims that for a business must be providing benefit for all stakeholder; the shareholders, employees, and the community. While Nestle and companies like it do indeed need to make and consider what gives them the greatest profit, however, to have customers pay more for a bottle of water than the actual cost the company has to pay to extract hundreds of gallons of it seems unjust. A business exists in a community; its survival is dependent not only on their shareholders, but on consumers and the community in which they operate. Putting customers and the community of Hope at such a disadvantage seems unethical. As the article “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Profits” states, though the purpose of a business is to increase profit, it should not be done at the expense of social rules; in this particular case, profit shouldn’t be gained by creating a disadvantage for consumers and the community as a whole. If possible, companies should strive for equality in their profit and their ethical approach to gain it; one should not be achieved at the expense of the other. This is my view on business ethics as a whole.
Works Cited
Friedman, Milton. “The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profit.” Corporate Ethics and Corporate Governance. N.p.: Springer, 2007. 174-79. ProQuest Ebrary. Web. 10 Sept. 2014.
Fumano, Dan. “‘Wild West’ of Groundwater: Billion-dollar Nestlé Extracting B.C.’s Drinking Water for Free.” Times Colonist. Times Colonist, 14 Aug. 2013. Web. 9 Sept. 2014.