Question 1. In most casino states and countiess aws protect owners from iabi ity c aims arising from prob ems caused by gamb ing. In ethica termss howevers if you’re the so e proprietor of the casinos do you fee any responsibi ity for this episode? Why or why not? If you fee any responsibi itys to whom wou d it be? What cou d you do to set things right? ANSWER; As far as I am concerneds I wi fee terrib y gui ty for anyone who is negative y impacted in the episode. I wi not be satissed with the provision of protection by ega statements that frees the casino owners from such ofenses of ife and property destructions. herefores I wi fee very responsib e for such damages. My conscience wi not re ease me even though the aw of the and re eased me. My best so ution wi be to pacify the afected ones who are sti a ive with any compensation I can even se ing a my properties. ina ys I wi c ose down such business of destructions comp ete y and ook for jobs that can beter the ife of peop e without any inc ination towards crime. Question 2. You’re an equa partner in a nonprost organiiation that runs the casino to support the cause of bui ding schoo s for chi dren in impoverished sections of eru. You spend a few months every year down there bui ding schoo s and giving free Eng ish- anguage c asses. In ethica terms (and regard ess of what the aw a ows)s do you be ieve anyone invo ved in this episode shou d be ab e to sue you persona y for their sufering? Why or why not? ANSWER; here is no amount of cover up services to humanity that can pay or compensate for the irreversib e and irreparab e damages caused by the running of a casino. It is not wise to destroy fami iess maim peop es in the name of p anning to do good. We mustn't do wicked y to be ab e to do good. No crime is ega iied in the name of doing good. herefores I be ieve that anyone invo ved in this episode shou d be ab e to sue for their sufering. Question 3. Say that the casino under discussion in this set of questions is the MGM Grand Hote and Casino in Las Vegass which is owned by a arges pub ic corporation. You have sve shares of stock inherited a few years ago when a re ative died. You are ega y protected from iabi ity c aims. In ethica termss howevers do you be ieve that anyone invo ved in this episode shou d be ab e to sue you persona y—or just p ain b ame you—for their sufering? Why or why not? ANSWER; hose who are afected in this episodess have the right to ho d it against me in the case of any damages caused by their invo vement in the the gamb ing business or the injuries received from those invo ved. he evi of casinos is mu tifaceted and everyone afected by any of it's evi channe s is free to ho d the direct and indirect proprietors responsib e for the resu ting damages that ensues. Question 4. igouvian taxes (named afer economist Arthur igous a pioneer in the theory of externa ities) atempt to correct externa ities—and so forma iie a corporate socia responsibi ity—by evying a tax equa to the costs of the externa ity to society. he casinos in other wordss that causes crime and other prob ems costing societys says $1 mi ion shou d pay a $1 mi ion tax. In terms of casinoss wou d such a tax more or ess satisfy any ethica c aim that cou d be made against them for the socia prob ems they cause? Why or why not? ANSWER; As far as sensibi ities can fathoms there is no amount of money that can compensate for the irreversib e and in so many casess I wi rate the damages caused by this episodess irreparab e. ami ies are separateds kids future are trauncateds suicide are commited to state but a few of the menace of casinos and crime to the society. herefores in terms of casinoss such a tax cannot more or ess satisfy any ethica c aim that cou d be made against the owners for the socia prob ems they caused the society. Reference(s); Brusseaus J. (2012). Business Ethics. New Yorks NY: 2012 Book Archive roject.