---

It is incredible how US companies who have employed their workers and sold their products to American consumers for decades- can suddenly just decide one day to pick up and transfer all of its manufacturing jobs to China- and yet not one moral voice has been raised in opposition.

In the religion of Judaism, there exists guidelines on how society can react to these issues. While there is recognition of private property in Judaism, the profit motive and the individual retention of the wealth created by entrepreneurial endeavors- the issue does not stop there.

In history, the Rabbis and Jewish Sages never denied their co-religionists a basic human condition- such as the desire to work, prosper, and provide the highest standard of living possible for their families. The free market was generally seen as an efficient and pragmatic mechanism for achieving the welfare of the community. Where this was not so, intervention and distortion of the market mechanism was insisted upon.

While free-market advocates claim that the growth and development of the market necessarily involves business failures, and that ultimately, the entire system works more efficiently when there is no interference in this process. But practically speaking, there are some individual instances where the hardship of a business failure really does outweigh the economic benefits to the market.

For instance, keeping an inefficient business in operation by limiting competition amounts to no more than a tax on consumers. Perhaps the gross income of this inept firm is a million dollars a year; ten percent of this is just a de facto subsidy paid by customers in the form of inflated prices for the firm's product. Result: $100,000 of consumer money wasted.

However we need to ask what is the alternative and perhaps it is more expensive? For example, what if there are no employment opportunities in the region of the failing plant? If the company goes out of business the burden on the dole may be $500,000 thousand dollars a year in additional welfare costs to care from the newly unemployed. The result is that $500,000 of public funds is spent instead of $100,000.

What will the cost be to the American people if American companies continue to transfer their manufacturing bases to China? Who will be left to tend to the financial and social needs of masses of unemployed workers?

The Rabbis and Jewish Sages would argue that it would make sense to levy a tax on American companies who move their manufacturing jobs off-shore- even if this does go against free market principles. Why shouldn't these companies pay the added cost of providing for the welfare of the workers they are leaving behind- rather than passing that cost off to the general taxpaying public? Closing down a plant because there is no longer any demand for a firms' product- is one thing. Closing it down and moving the factory offshore just so the firm can increase its net profits- is not morally acceptable- even if this violates the tenants of free market economics (what good will a free market be when there are no longer any consumers left to purchase the products that these company's manufacturer- wherever they are produced?)

In Judaism, profits for the individual and corporation are recognized and defended- however they don't take precedence over protecting the weaker members of society (in this case, the unemployed or about to be unemployed). In many instances the Rabbis intervened in the marketplace and ordered price caps to be put on certain products- or on rent that could be charged when a shortage of housing threatened to make certain elements of the population homeless. This wasn't done due to any anti-market philosophy- but simply a requirement that economic justice and protection of the weak is maintained. Taxing companies who move their manufacturing facilities off shore merely to earn higher level of profits could be treated in the same way. It is not only the corporation and its right to earn the highest level of profits that is involved in this decision. Society as a whole will be affected by this decision.

Government intervention by the Rabbis and Sages into the marketplace was accepted when it served a "moral good." While non-intervention was preferred- if it was required to protect the weaker members of society or served a larger public good- intervention took place. While respecting the rights of the entrepreneur to earn a profit, the Rabbis and sages have always tried to concern themselves with the social and moral values of society and then offer legislation to strike a balance between the economic loss resulting from restrictive practices and the human suffering arising out of unlimited competition.

Those that manage America's economy must begin to do the same.

Judaism views corporations as economic players in a market- and not above the "moral law" simply based on the corporation's desire for higher profits.