Wry Catcher
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #61
Bri pat is sooooooooo stupid he is on record saying things were better for man in the days of kings and queens.
he is as dumb as a box of round rocks
Spot on!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Bri pat is sooooooooo stupid he is on record saying things were better for man in the days of kings and queens.
he is as dumb as a box of round rocks
The myth of the social contract is the greatest con ever perpetrated on the human race. The idea that a few wealthy men 250 years ago created some document that obligates me in any way is utterly preposterous.
A valid contract has to be agreed to explicitly by all the parties involved. Your parents can't sign a contract that is binding on you in any way. This is basic legal theory, and it's based on indisputable logic. Allowing others to bind you to the terms of some contract is the road to tyranny, but that's precisely why libturds and every other form of statist is always waxing eloquently about the mythical "social contract."
The bottom line is that if you didn't personally and explicitly agree to it, you aren't bound by it.
Yeah, you're right. Those guys 250 years ago didn't create it:
Plato on the social contract
The first known exposition of social contract theory was made by Plato in his short dialogue Crito.[wp] In the dialogue, Socrates is jailed and about to be executed, but when offered a chance to be sprung from jail, refuses it by saying, essentially, "I made my bed and now I have to lie in it."
The dialogue contains this description of social contract theory, in which Socrates assumes the voice of "the Laws":
“”We further proclaim and give the right to every Athenian, that if he does not like us when he has come of age and has seen the ways of the city, and made our acquaintance, he may go where he pleases and take his goods with him; and none of us laws will forbid him or interfere with him. Any of you who does not like us and the city, and who wants to go to a colony or to any other city, may go where he likes, and take his goods with him. But he who has experience of the manner in which we order justice and administer the State, and still remains, has entered into an implied contract that he will do as we command him.
How does that prove that the social contract isn't a myth?
When did I agree to this so-called "contract?"
In the past, Republicans thought that the market ought to set wages, and that a combination of government devicesincluding the earned-income tax credit, housing subsidies, food stamps, Medicaid, and other social-welfare programscould fill in the gaps to make that social contract work, while also trying to remove disincentives from work via welfare reform.
The Moral and Economic Case for Raising the Minimum Wage
Three points to make here:
- How is it possible that the left is incapable of comprehending that if the minimum wage for flipping a burger goes up 20%, the cost of the burger goes up 20%, which means the cost of shipping that burger to each store goes up 20%, which means the cost of electricity goes up 20%, which means the minimum wage worker is no further ahead than they were before the minimum wage went up 20%? I'm literally astounded by the left's ignorant belief that every action occurs in a vacuum. This is basic stuff that even small children understand.
- The solution to the problem is pretty damn simple. Stop subsidizing the failure of the individual. If they can't put food on their table, there are 6 mechanisms of safety nets to ensure food gets there that do not include government. If 6 safety nets are not enough, well, then you were destined to go hungry. Just accept it and move on (and we all know that will NEVER happen with 6 safety nets, but that won't stop the liberals on USMB from making outrageous scenario's where those safety nets aren't enough).
- Once again we see the left literally make stuff up out of thin air. What "social contract"?!? I've never seen one. And I sure as hell never signed one.
great post and 100% accurate. I can't wait for bleeding heart libtards to weigh in and claim that "you just don't care about the "people". and "the govt owes everyone a 'living wage' "
liberalism is clearly a mental disease. the libs on USMB prove it every day
What did they disagree with? The social compact or revolution?Over 60% of the British Colonists disagreed with the FF.
Not so. Not in America. It's an agreement among the people. In the revolutionary era, conventions of the people ("townhalls") were commonplace. Such conventions were even placed at the national level, once in 1787.The contract works both ways, between the government and citizen.
When government is formed, yes. That is, when people create it. And then, yes, they decide among themselves the powers to impart to it.When a government is formed, people decide which powers they will give the government.
In the past, Republicans thought that the market ought to set wages, and that a combination of government devicesincluding the earned-income tax credit, housing subsidies, food stamps, Medicaid, and other social-welfare programscould fill in the gaps to make that social contract work, while also trying to remove disincentives from work via welfare reform.
The Moral and Economic Case for Raising the Minimum Wage
Three points to make here:
- How is it possible that the left is incapable of comprehending that if the minimum wage for flipping a burger goes up 20%, the cost of the burger goes up 20%, which means the cost of shipping that burger to each store goes up 20%, which means the cost of electricity goes up 20%, which means the minimum wage worker is no further ahead than they were before the minimum wage went up 20%? I'm literally astounded by the left's ignorant belief that every action occurs in a vacuum. This is basic stuff that even small children understand.
- The solution to the problem is pretty damn simple. Stop subsidizing the failure of the individual. If they can't put food on their table, there are 6 mechanisms of safety nets to ensure food gets there that do not include government. If 6 safety nets are not enough, well, then you were destined to go hungry. Just accept it and move on (and we all know that will NEVER happen with 6 safety nets, but that won't stop the liberals on USMB from making outrageous scenario's where those safety nets aren't enough).
- Once again we see the left literally make stuff up out of thin air. What "social contract"?!? I've never seen one. And I sure as hell never signed one.
great post and 100% accurate. I can't wait for bleeding heart libtards to weigh in and claim that "you just don't care about the "people". and "the govt owes everyone a 'living wage' "
liberalism is clearly a mental disease. the libs on USMB prove it every day
Not only do the price of burgers go up 20% but everyone else gets a 20% increase.
If I'm making $15 an hour and they increase min wage to $15 an hour then I get a wage increase because I'm NOT a min wage worker...As does everyone else...Whatever the min wage increase is I and others also get a wage increase. Nothing changes except the numbers.
Those working for min wage will only fall behind again because they are min wage workers. Educated people with job skills have worked hard to receive wage increases.
It only causes inflation...Everything goes up for everyone.
Min wage job should NOT be considered a career. It's supposed to be a 1st job to learn how to do a job.
99 weeks will easily get anyone an AA degree with job skills. Community College has 2 year programs that serve the community to fill jobs that need educated employees. They are good paying jobs. These programs often lead to a lifelong profession.
52 weeks without a job is a Clue that your job is Not coming back...Enroll in a Jobs program. I'm all for this being paid for instead of sitting around waiting for a check in the mail.
Social contract theory is actually a quite accurate description of society.
It's simple- we are born into it. It is what makes us decide to surrender certain rights to gain protections of government. (Basic minimal- we agree not to kill anyone so that we ourselves may not be killed)
The contract works both ways, between the government and citizen.
It's actually, the way it was intended by Rousseau, a very small-government philosophy.
When a government is formed, people decide which powers they will give the government. The government will naturally want to expand and the social contract prevents this unless the expansion is the direct will of the people.
Because if a government violates the contract, it's considered illegitimate and should be dismantled/altered.
Good, then there are many countries in Africa who are eager to grant you citizenship.
Don't mind the bullets flying. Civil wars are commonplace, as many as 15-20 going on at one time.
What is your imbecile babbling supposed to prove? What does the fact that there are plenty of shitty places in the world to live prove? How does that prove the existence of some mythical contract I supposedly agreed to?
Do you have the time to understand and vote on every issue that ever comes up?
Suppose all levels of Civil governing ended, would you actually be able to attend to EVERY matter that came up that would even remotely affect you?
Good, then there are many countries in Africa who are eager to grant you citizenship.
Don't mind the bullets flying. Civil wars are commonplace, as many as 15-20 going on at one time. [/B]
What is your imbecile babbling supposed to prove? What does the fact that there are plenty of shitty places in the world to live prove? How does that prove the existence of some mythical contract I supposedly agreed to?
I responded to your comment that you are an anarchist.
The Socratic Method is the way in which law schools teach their students to become lawyers in this country, and Socrates first introduced the concept of the social contract.
I suggest you at least get off your fat lazy ass and Google the social compact/contract and then you may not look so fucking stupid on this thread.....and all the others, too.
Bri pat is sooooooooo stupid he is on record saying things were better for man in the days of kings and queens.
he is as dumb as a box of round rocks
The "social contract" that does exist
social contract or social compact
1. (Philosophy) (in the theories of Locke, Hobbes, Rousseau, and others) an agreement, entered into by individuals, that results in the formation of the state or of organized society, the prime motive being the desire for protection, which entails the surrender of some or all personal liberties
Social contract theory - definition of Social contract theory by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
In the past, Republicans thought that the market ought to set wages, and that a combination of government devicesincluding the earned-income tax credit, housing subsidies, food stamps, Medicaid, and other social-welfare programscould fill in the gaps to make that social contract work, while also trying to remove disincentives from work via welfare reform.
The Moral and Economic Case for Raising the Minimum Wage
Three points to make here:
- How is it possible that the left is incapable of comprehending that if the minimum wage for flipping a burger goes up 20%, the cost of the burger goes up 20%, which means the cost of shipping that burger to each store goes up 20%, which means the cost of electricity goes up 20%, which means the minimum wage worker is no further ahead than they were before the minimum wage went up 20%? I'm literally astounded by the left's ignorant belief that every action occurs in a vacuum. This is basic stuff that even small children understand.
- The solution to the problem is pretty damn simple. Stop subsidizing the failure of the individual. If they can't put food on their table, there are 6 mechanisms of safety nets to ensure food gets there that do not include government. If 6 safety nets are not enough, well, then you were destined to go hungry. Just accept it and move on (and we all know that will NEVER happen with 6 safety nets, but that won't stop the liberals on USMB from making outrageous scenario's where those safety nets aren't enough).
- Once again we see the left literally make stuff up out of thin air. What "social contract"?!? I've never seen one. And I sure as hell never signed one.
Bri pat is sooooooooo stupid he is on record saying things were better for man in the days of kings and queens.
he is as dumb as a box of round rocks
I said government was less oppressive in those days. That doesn't mean everything was better, douchebag.
I would argue that social contracts do exist. Certainly in theory, and in some measure in practice.The "social contract" that does exist
social contract or social compact
1. (Philosophy) (in the theories of Locke, Hobbes, Rousseau, and others) an agreement, entered into by individuals, that results in the formation of the state or of organized society, the prime motive being the desire for protection, which entails the surrender of some or all personal liberties
Social contract theory - definition of Social contract theory by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
So where is it, Fakey?
Prove it exists.
Yeah, you're right. Those guys 250 years ago didn't create it:
Plato on the social contract
The first known exposition of social contract theory was made by Plato in his short dialogue Crito.[wp] In the dialogue, Socrates is jailed and about to be executed, but when offered a chance to be sprung from jail, refuses it by saying, essentially, "I made my bed and now I have to lie in it."
The dialogue contains this description of social contract theory, in which Socrates assumes the voice of "the Laws":
“”We further proclaim and give the right to every Athenian, that if he does not like us when he has come of age and has seen the ways of the city, and made our acquaintance, he may go where he pleases and take his goods with him; and none of us laws will forbid him or interfere with him. Any of you who does not like us and the city, and who wants to go to a colony or to any other city, may go where he likes, and take his goods with him. But he who has experience of the manner in which we order justice and administer the State, and still remains, has entered into an implied contract that he will do as we command him.
How does that prove that the social contract isn't a myth?
When did I agree to this so-called "contract?"
By one theory, each time you obey a law, each time you vote, when you exercise you right to rant against the government and when you safely leave you home and arrive at your destination aided by traffic laws, DOT rules and controls agreed upon by civilized citizens (speed limits, stop signs and other rules of the road).
Since there are a very few (albeit many loud) Libertarians, and they have been around as a political party since the 1970's and never won a national election, why do you think 'your' ideas will ever win the battle of ideas. Our system of governance has been around for more than two centuries.
What makes you think you know better than the generations of Americans who preceded you?
Nothing you have ever posted suggests you're well educated or intelligent enough to make an argument credible for anyone but the few others like you to believe.
Prove me wrong.
Bri pat is sooooooooo stupid he is on record saying things were better for man in the days of kings and queens.
he is as dumb as a box of round rocks
Spot on!
What did they disagree with? The social compact or revolution?Over 60% of the British Colonists disagreed with the FF.
In the 1770s, the Americans were Whigs (the Tories were either emigrating or keeping silent). They were Enlightenment thinkers who were witnessing the erosion of liberties in England only decades after the Glorious Revolution (when much of the king's authority was stripped from him and bestowed on the Parliament). They were excited about establishing their own republics, and began seating their own legislatures in the 1770s. The federation seated its first legislature in 1774. IOW, they were dismissing the Parliament; overwhelmingly, they wanted to govern themselves.
They may not have been overwhelmingly in favor of war, but when they dismissed the king in 1776, they knew that the shots fired a year earlier in Lexington sent a very clear message: war was on.
So since 1776, being completely independent and students of the Scriptures, history, and the natural law, they changed the very definition of social compact. No longer was it an agreement between the magistracy and the people, or the rulers and the ruled. It was now an agreement among individuals. That is, constitutions are creations of the people.
The Articles of Confederation, and later, the Constitution, were created as results of conventions of the people. Not legislators or aristocratic heirs. And, on a national level, since we haven't had such a convention since the Philadelphia Convention, we have no agreement with each other regarding such issues as minimum wage, welfare, and other liberal policies. Our social compact doesn't include these things. These liberal laws are illegitimate.
Not so. Not in America. It's an agreement among the people. In the revolutionary era, conventions of the people ("townhalls") were commonplace. Such conventions were even placed at the national level, once in 1787.The contract works both ways, between the government and citizen.
When government is formed, yes. That is, when people create it. And then, yes, they decide among themselves the powers to impart to it.When a government is formed, people decide which powers they will give the government.
In the past, Republicans thought that the market ought to set wages, and that a combination of government devicesincluding the earned-income tax credit, housing subsidies, food stamps, Medicaid, and other social-welfare programscould fill in the gaps to make that social contract work, while also trying to remove disincentives from work via welfare reform.
The Moral and Economic Case for Raising the Minimum Wage
Three points to make here:
- How is it possible that the left is incapable of comprehending that if the minimum wage for flipping a burger goes up 20%, the cost of the burger goes up 20%, which means the cost of shipping that burger to each store goes up 20%, which means the cost of electricity goes up 20%, which means the minimum wage worker is no further ahead than they were before the minimum wage went up 20%? I'm literally astounded by the left's ignorant belief that every action occurs in a vacuum. This is basic stuff that even small children understand.
- The solution to the problem is pretty damn simple. Stop subsidizing the failure of the individual. If they can't put food on their table, there are 6 mechanisms of safety nets to ensure food gets there that do not include government. If 6 safety nets are not enough, well, then you were destined to go hungry. Just accept it and move on (and we all know that will NEVER happen with 6 safety nets, but that won't stop the liberals on USMB from making outrageous scenario's where those safety nets aren't enough).
- Once again we see the left literally make stuff up out of thin air. What "social contract"?!? I've never seen one. And I sure as hell never signed one.
great post and 100% accurate. I can't wait for bleeding heart libtards to weigh in and claim that "you just don't care about the "people". and "the govt owes everyone a 'living wage' "
liberalism is clearly a mental disease. the libs on USMB prove it every day