This is a discussion. I need your thoughts and viewpoints on this discussion. At least two paragraphs. Was Michael Milken a friend or foe to the financial markets, is definitely a question that sparks much debate. I tend to take a utilitarian approach to most things in life and this question is not an exception. While there are always lines in life that should not be crossed, I do think that if something is going to benefit more people than it will hinder it most likely is something that should be done. With that said my position is that Michael Milken was a friend to the financial markets. Michael Milken was an innovator in the financial world. He took the path less traveled and helped to jumpstart thousands of businesses in multiple industries that might not have been given a chance otherwise. This led to thousands if not millions of jobs being created helping to grow the U.S. economy. Not only did he take on risk that most others would not, he created financial tools that had a great impact in the world of finance and are still in use today. Along with his contributions to the financial markets during his time at Drexel, his contributions to charity and medical research over the years have been great. The work that his foundation has done to promote community and learning in schools has undoubtedly helped countless numbers of people and the cancer research that the foundation has funded has assisted in the medical community making great strides in treating cancer. With that said Michael Milken has obviously contributed a great amount of money, time and resources, to improving the financial markets, the U.S. economy, charity and medical research. He has made a positive impact in all areas and still continues as a philanthropist and speaker continuously spreading his wealth and knowledge. However, my opinion is not based solely on the great things that Michael Milken has done. The downfall of Michael Milken seems sketchy to me at best. He originally had 98 charges, to include insider trading, fraud and racketeering. However, according to a multitude of lawyers that have studied this case there was little to no evidence that supported any of these charges. The six charges that Milken did plead guilty to were upgraded to felonies, when prior to his case these would have been trivial offenses. According to those who worked with him, Milken might not have liked the rules and regulations that the government handed down but he would follow them. Overall, this is all a matter of perception. What one might consider ethical another will consider unethical it all depends on how someone looks at things. In my opinion, again using a utilitarian approach, I think that all the good Michael Milken contributed to financial markets and to society, outweighs any of the negative things he was accused of or possibly did. If there were stronger evidence to back up what he was charged with my opinion might be different. However, with little to no evidence for the charges and with what he did plead guilty to being trumped up to felonies for effect, I don’t believe he did anything that had a substantially negative impact on the world of finance.