What happens to unemployment, during prosperous times

An employer who is considering hiring eva has asked donna, eva’s former supervisor, for a report on eva. in truth, eva’s work for donna has been only average. however, eva is donna’s friend, and donna knows that eva probably will not get the job if she says anything negative about eva, and donna knows that eva desperately needs the job. further, donna knows that if the situation were reversed, she would not want eva to mention her deficiencies. nevertheless, it has been donna’s policy to reveal the deficiencies of employees when she has been asked for references by employers, and she knows that some of eva’s faults may be bothersome to this particular employer. finally, this employer has leveled with donna in the past when donna has asked for a report on people who have worked for him. should donna reveal deficiencies in eva’s past performance? (remember to use one of the three moral theories acceptable for this test to solve this dilemma. any discussion of any personal opinion, religious perspective, or theory other than the moral theories acceptable for this test will result in a score of "0" for this question.)

Zapper has beginning equity of $257,000, net income of $51,000, dividends of $40,000 and investments by stockholders of $6,000. its ending equity is

David burdick is the ceo of acme bubblegum, a successful public company. as one of the cofounders of the company, burdick has enjoyed speaking and writing about the success of acme bubblegum for several years. typically, he speaks at conferences or directly to the press, but recently, he has been blogging about his firm anonymously. specifically, he defended a recent advertising campaign that was unpopular among consumers and pointedly attacked one of acme bubblegum’s competitors. burdick deeply enjoys his anonymous blogging and believes that none of his readers actually know that he works for acme bubblegum.should burdick be allowed to praise his company’s performance anonymously online? should he be allowed to attack his competitors without disclosing his relationship with the company? how would you feel if the ceo of a company at which you shopped was secretly writing criticisms of his or her competition? how would you feel if you knew a writer for your favorite blog was actually closely involved in a company that the blog discussed? 1. define the ethical issue? 2. who are the primary stakeholders? 3. what are the possible alternatives? 4. how could you evaluate the ethical implications of the alternative actions (use appropriate decision rules)? 5. what action would you recommend and why?