The issue I have when 'values' are introduced into socioeconomicpolitical discussion and debates is that the term is often given lip-service only in support of fallacious arguments.   

People, groups, governments, agencies, politicians and preachers should be prepared to really examine their own values, to weigh how consistently one operationalizes one's espoused values in one's own life, to acknowledge and overtly deal with the internal conflicts and dilemmas that always exist within one's system of values, to acknowledge and recognize the inherent dialectic between values and self-interest,self-preservation, and the id, to own up to all the many times in each of our lives we choose to ignore what our values otherwise guid us to do,and to otherwise treat a discussion that includes talk of values with the seriousness and importance it deserves.

Yes they should. But mostly they don't. What they are likely to do is rationalize some justification for failure to implement or operationalize their own espoused values. That being the case, playing the 'values' card is usually bullshit.

Incidently, in today's corporate world, those who allow their behaviors to be consistently guided by their moral or ethical values are likely to find themselves fired. Would that make ethical behavior a root cause of poverty?

Janie