No, it doesn't... And it's all in the name of progress.

Realistically Capitalism necessitates a moral system to regulate behavior, in particular Capitalism relied on the Protestant work Ethic and the Christian view of the inherant dignity of each man.

The social contract, capitalism and the foundation of our nation were all based largely on the surreptitous coincidence of several christian ideals... as these are eroded so does what they are built on.

Its Ironic that business school is by my observation more religous then the humanities, I know we discussed religion far more in my Management classes then my friends who were doing Comparative religion and Anthropology. One of the best examples being that religous views are a very good bellweather of the business climate, in particular  there is a direct link between a societies belief in hell and the level of business corruption. Odd as it may seem there have been numerous studies to bear that out, the latest being by the federal reserve.

Didn't we have an almost identical thread a few weeks ago?


ETA - here it is (some really good stuff in there too):

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=265074

Thought you where talking about Rousseau by the title.

You can still make a decent wage and further your education, you just have to put effort into it.

I JUST got a new book by Jeremy Rifkin (the economist) which looks at how the "American Dream" has changed over the last couple of generations, and how it is (in some ways) disappearing.

He also compares it to what he calls the "European Dream" and looks at how the european model differs from the U.S. model.

I haven't had time to start reading it yet, but it sounds very interesting.


www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1585423459/qid=1093551825/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-8016624-4575258?v=glance&s=books

Here is part of a story about recent Census data that was just released

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The number of Americans living in poverty increased by 1.3 million last year, while the ranks of the uninsured swelled by 1.4 million, the Census Bureau reported Thursday.

It was the third straight annual increase for both categories. While not unexpected, it was a double dose of bad economic news during a tight re-election campaign for President Bush.

Approximately 35.8 million people lived below the poverty line in 2003, or about 12.5 percent of the population, according to the bureau. That was up from 34.5 million, or 12.1 percent in 2002.

The rise was more dramatic for children. There were 12.9 million living in poverty last year, or 17.6 percent of the under-18 population. That was an increase of about 800,000 from 2002, when 16.7 percent of all children were in poverty.

The Census Bureau's definition of poverty varies by the size of the household. For instance, the threshold for a family of four was $18,810, while for two people it was $12,015.

Nearly 45 million people lacked health insurance, or 15.6 percent of the population. That was up from 43.5 million in 2002, or 15.2 percent, but was a smaller increase than in the two previous years.

"social contract" is French socialist thinking. I'll stick with good old American/anglo-saxon concepts rooted in indiviual rights, thank you very much.

Those of you who want to enjoy the French Revolution or some Bolshevik variation can do so, just do it somewhere else.

force early retirement




try shit canned.  

Quoted: force early retirement try shit canned.

and just before you're 40 so there is no age discrimination*


*executive row is exempted, naturally

Quoted: What I noted is neither French, nor socialist. It was the way things used to be and what made our country great. Socialism is we all get the same no matter how little we do. That is where we are headed.

Locke had a social contract theory that described the relationship between the governors and the governed; Jean-Jacques Rousseau had a more encompassing theory that was between everyone, and which replaced natural rights. When one talks of social contract one automatically thinks of Rousseau's theory, which stands in counterpoint to the American concept of individual rights.

It is no accident that modern leftists invoke Rousseau's social contract to explain why we need further socialism.

I'll stick with the basic concepts of property rights, free markets, and individual rights in general thank you very much please.

Quoted: What is never reported in these stats is how people's own actions are primarily responsible for them living below the poverty line.  Teen pregnancy is still high, people in their 20s frequently live at home so they don't have to work full-time, and lots of alcohol and drug abuse (not to mention other crime) leave people with criminal records that make getting good jobs difficult.  Yet these reports make it seem that it is the president's fault, because holding anyone responsible for their own actions is not acceptable. -Troy

Of course, the fact that so many manufacturing jobs have gone to cheap labor in the far east, India, Pakistan, etc. wouldn't have much to do with it, or would it?

Quoted: "social contract" is French socialist thinking. I'll stick with good old American/anglo-saxon concepts rooted in indiviual rights, thank you very much. Those of you who want to enjoy the French Revolution or some Bolshevik variation can do so, just do it somewhere else.

Do you realize that part of the social contract is obeying the laws that keep people from killing you and taking everything you own?

Its not all about fear of being punished as very few robbers and murderers are actually caught. We live in a society and that does not mean we are french socialists. It means we all have social responsibilities.

If you would like to exempt yourself from the social contract and let people know it, please make sure you insurance coverage is adequet. As we all know, the cops aren't there to protect you.

The more things change, the more they stay the same!  From my perspective, a "social contract" is simply a handy label that is used to identify how a society expects businesses & individuals to interact.   As society (and the public's ) values/expectations change, so does the "social contract".  

Its a tug-of-war between parties with differeing interests... if you are a 22 year-old college grad with a Masters, you want to believe that IBM should pay you $150K a year cause you know more than old Joe.  Joe thinks what he has done for IBM for the last 18 years should buy him some respect & more than $150K.   IBM thinks if they don't make a profit, they are out of biz.  Society/consumers vote on who is right by the choice of products purchased and determining what kind of behavior is socially acceptable.

Quoted: There was a time... A man worked hard for a company or employer and they took care of him. Today when he is 2/3 through his life with 20-30 years invested they force early retirement on him so they can hire some new guy at base pay with non of the retirees benefits who can work twice as hard because he still has hit youth. People raised their children properly because they were wise enough to know that only responsible children will be filial and take care of them in kind when they can no longer take care of themselves. Today parents indulge their children and produce a spawn who only thinks of themselves and what they can gain from others. Their children view society in a predatory manner and pose a genuine threat to society at large. A man who was of limited means could work harder than most people and could afford to send his children to higher education so that they would not have to labor as their father did. Today the guy who breaks his back is only handed more work and does the work of 3 for one check. And even if he was paid for the work of 3 the cost of a college education remains beyond his means in most cases. And finally there was a time when people considered their actions and wether or not they were intruding upon the lives of others. And IF they were, just as they would not want someone else to intrude on their lives, they would respect others. Seems like yet another fading tradition...

I'm surprised you haven't been tarred & feathered yet
 

Quoted: There was a time... A man worked hard for a company or employer and they took care of him. Today when he is 2/3 through his life with 20-30 years invested they force early retirement on him so they can hire some new guy at base pay with non of the retirees benefits who can work twice as hard because he still has hit youth. People raised their children properly because they were wise enough to know that only responsible children will be filial and take care of them in kind when they can no longer take care of themselves. Today parents indulge their children and produce a spawn who only thinks of themselves and what they can gain from others. Their children view society in a predatory manner and pose a genuine threat to society at large. A man who was of limited means could work harder than most people and could afford to send his children to higher education so that they would not have to labor as their father did. Today the guy who breaks his back is only handed more work and does the work of 3 for one check. And even if he was paid for the work of 3 the cost of a college education remains beyond his means in most cases. And finally there was a time when people considered their actions and wether or not they were intruding upon the lives of others. And IF they were, just as they would not want someone else to intrude on their lives, they would respect others. Seems like yet another fading tradition...

No, Read Peter Drucker about the changing paradigm and the Fortume magazine article on "The new deal at work".

There was one time after WWII that there was security and stability in America. Because, for the most part, the world blew itself up.  But since we've rebuilt, there is no such thing as security. Security is an illusion. We are no longer insulated...global communication, education, the internet and competition has made the old deal obsolete.

There are incredibly smart people all over the world and we have to compete with them. Why? Our, that's right, OUR innovations (the telephone, the internet) in communications have defeated the barrier of distance and allowed these super intelligentsia to come. Since distance is no longer a barrier, those ultra smart people, who, for the past 40 years, have not been softened by potato chips and MTV, who have been learning matrix algebra, and whose parents have been pushing Calculus down into Junior High School, are ready to take their leadership positions in the world.

Your value is dictated by what you know and what skills you have, not who you know. The question comes..."what have you done for me lately?" No more laying back on your laurels cause you got 20 years of seniority. Those organizations are dissappearing fast. It is your responsibility to market yourself. Get educated and go out there and compete.

Quoted: ...Yet these reports make it seem that it is the president's fault, because holding anyone responsible for their own actions is not acceptable. -Troy

If this is true then we could not credit a President (the present one or any other) with being responsible for a decrease in poverty or any improvement in the business climate.  We would all, as a nation, be equally responsible for good and bad.

How about an 85 year old who never believed in the Social Contract? (my so-called father)

They (sociopaths/psychopaths/narcissists) have been around always, just there seem to be a lot more now.

I think it's because no one ever laid a good smack-down on them when they were young. Getting the shit stomped out of you by a stranger after you do them wrong seems to be an effective attitude adjuster.

Quoted: I JUST got a new book by Jeremy Rifkin (the economist) which looks at how the "American Dream" has changed over the last couple of generations, and how it is (in some ways) disappearing. He also compares it to what he calls the "European Dream" and looks at how the european model differs from the U.S. model. I haven't had time to start reading it yet, but it sounds very interesting. www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1585423459/qid=1093551825/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-8016624-4575258?v=glance&s=books

I haven't read the book by him, but the European Dream is pretty stultifying if you are not a team player, and want to go your own way.

My wife's relatives in England and Germany complain to me about crime, taxes, bureaucratic bungling and corruption and the sagging health care systems of both countries so much, that I don't think Massachusetts is all that bad, in comparison....

The latter run their own businesses in Germany (home interior furnishings and woodworking) and spend much of their workday trying to comply with work, tax, environment and labor rules, so much so that they have not all that much time to go seek new orders and customers.

My sister-in-law was a banker in England, now wants to be a private school teacher because she is sick of having to deal with tax laws and bureaucracy. She refuses to put her child in public school, or take her to an NHS (gov. healthcare) doctor or hospital for her eczema- she says the good docs all go into private practice. She had to take her daughter to a private clinic in France, to finally get good help for the girl's condition.

Neither system is perfect, but dealing with public life in Germany, for me, when I used to live there, esp. when going to the doctor, or moving from town to town, or getting a job, was like dealing with the DMV on a daily basis- excruciating in its procedure and in degradation of the customer's dignity.

Sorta like a guy trying to get a Class 3 License in a certain county in Missouri...