Continuing with my last post.
Clearly, combining consequetialism with deontology can have very harmful results (housing crisis of 2008 and Obamacare). But what about virtue ethics. Virtue ethics would suggest that our leaders utilize the cardinal virtues of wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice, as well as the love of neighbor, when considering moral decisions.
The virtue ethicists were either absent from the moral decisions regarding housing and health care, or drowned-out be the opposition. You would think that they would rely on the virtues of justice and love of neighbor to at least understand the benefits to American citizens of affordable housing and health care. But, you would also think that they would have the wisdom to understand the risks of such programs and the humility to suggest that such policies may not work and might have very harmful unintended consequences. And, you would hope that in the face of severe opposition, that they would still have the courage of their convictions to stand up and be heard.
The courage aspect has been lacking in our leaders. They may follow this third moral philosophy of virtue ethics, which I consider the toughest of the three to follow, but, without the virtue of courage, the philosophy loses its effectiveness. And without an effective third philosophy, the remaining two moral philosophies, much easier to follow, expand to take its place.