Bill Downe, CEO of the Bank of Montreal the utilitarian Bankster 

Bill Downe, CEO of the Bank of Montreal the utilitarian Bankster

Utilitarianism in short allows for consequences or a numerical value to be the determining factor as to whether an act is considered moral or not. Expressed in other words as the greatest good for the greatest number. Consider the following three examples: Automobile manufacture, Consumer products manufacture, and Slavery.

First an automobile company producing vehicles with a known defect. IE Ford Pinto with a gas tank located just behind the rear bumper. Company engineers recognize the hazards in placing a gas tank just behind the rear bumper. However, determine that recalling the vehicle would cost more money than the litigation cost incurred by the few drivers who are involved in an accident were the rear end of the Pinto is smashed causing the car to explode. This situation exalts profits above the minority who die.

Second being the consumer products manufacture using asbestos in household products. IE Johns-Manville was described by Ron Motley, a South Carolina attorney, as “the greatest corporate mass murderer in history.” Court documents show that the corporation had a long history of hiding evidence of the ill effects of asbestos from its workers and the public. One of many examples is a memo from Johns-Manville’s medical director to corporate headquarters. Again profits were exalted above those lives that are lost, currently suffering from, and will be lost in namesake of profit.

Third being slavery so long as a majority is established. I.E. as long as 50.0001% favor slavery it is morally okay to engage in slavery. Even while 49.9999% disagree with such acts, it may very well be just 1 single vote that tips the balance and determines what is moral.

Moreover, a consequential based framework may change what is moral one day into something else the next day. The driving factor of this morality framework becomes entirely dependent on what goals one is trying to achieve. If happiness is the desired goal than any and all acts that make someone happy are moral. If stealing from someone else makes you happy it is okay. What if an action has negative consequences or produces unhappy outcomes- is that act immoral? Consider a fireman or police officer on 9/11/01, the fireman/police officer decides entering a collapsing building could end one’s life which may in turn cause his/her family pain or sadness. If happiness is allowed to be the final arbiter of morality, than it would be immoral for the fireman and police officers to enter the trade towers and save others.

Bankster Bill Downe exudes many of these insidious character traits. As chief of BMO, Downe has engaged and directed others to engage in several unlawful and wrongful acts. Acts ranging from cover-ups, leaking confidential non public information to members of the press, disseminates material information to some investors in “private meetings”. Downe consistently proves to be among the most unethical leaders in the financial industry. Downe’s actions have caused considerable harm across members of society, with seemingly one goal in mind- self enrichment.