om the US if the ban was not removed as stated above, but the threats were more severe than what actually is and will happen, because of the involvement of a third negation committee such as the World Trade Organization. The welfare losses is that United States beef producers have a smaller market to sell too, making them have less revenue as well as less overall profit, allowing them to employ less. In summary, as technology progresses, many issues arise about ethics, between progress and the repercussions society faces from that progress. Sometimes the fact of what is better for the economy holds a stronger vote than what is important for the consumers. The larger point to consider is one of the externalities of consuming beef if Europes views are found out to be correct, since the United States consumes almost all beef using these hormones. The result of this consumption could be devastating. Another thing to consider is the fact that Europe was trying to regulate food quality and maintain the health of its country, while the WTO is trying to stop them from what they feel is right in the name of money. The unsettling question that remains at hand is how do you morally decide between what is right for the economy and what in proportion to that is the value of a human life....
