Ethically it becomes the responsibility of the all the relevant stakeholders to ensure that the cost allocations are made in accordance with the ethically acceptable procedure. This also means that the inefficiencies of the government in allocating costs properly shall be identified and must be shared in order to restrict the loss. If alternative cost allocation mechanism is faulty, it is most certain that the losses will be incurred and overall responsibility of failure will therefore fall on those who basically fail to properly account for the alternative costs identified at the initial stage.
It is also important to understand that the overall cost allocation and prevention of loss must be devised in such a manner that it can provide an organization enough time to prepare for its response in case of extreme external situations. The greater role of regulators therefore may serve as an strong deterrence against such type of approaches.
The article that I am going to discuss is about the “fees on debit and credit transactions raise costs for all, critics say” published in Washington Post on June 3, 2009.1 This article discusses as to how the hidden costs on the credit as well as debit cards make the purchasing as more expensive for those who prefer to pay cash. The charging of unauthorized commissions by the consumers therefore require that there must be an increase in the social costs for using this type of service.
Paying higher fees against your debit or credit card therefore requires the more extensive role of government. Though, according to the article, Bankers argue that this type of fee is necessarily important in order to run the credit system however, it also, on the other hand, attempt to increase the cost for consumers. Thus the overall cost allocation/loss approaches might not have been used at