Crude Attempt At Summing It Up

[Annie]

Via: Instapundit » Blog Archive » SEEN ON FACEBOOK: “The social contract exists so that everyone doesn’t have to squat in the dust ho…

October 22, 2011

SEEN ON FACEBOOK: “The social contract exists so that everyone doesn’t have to squat in the dust holding a spear to protect his woman and his meat all day every day. It does not exist so that the government can take your spear, your meat, and your woman because it knows better what to do with them.”

 

[The T]

Via: Instapundit » Blog Archive » SEEN ON FACEBOOK: “The social contract exists so that everyone doesn’t have to squat in the dust ho…

October 22, 2011

SEEN ON FACEBOOK: “The social contract exists so that everyone doesn’t have to squat in the dust holding a spear to protect his woman and his meat all day every day. It does not exist so that the government can take your spear, your meat, and your woman because it knows better what to do with them.”

Pretty much sums up liberty doesn't it? I like it!

 

[Old Rocks]

But you are the very people attempting to destroy that social contract. Not that you fools can see it or will admit it.

 

[Katzndogz]

The entire concept of the left is that YOU don't really own your spear, your meat or your woman. The tribe owns it all and can take or give at whim. Not government, The tribe.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Social contract is protection of personal property, wealth and individual freedom with provision for a collective safety net.

Not a hammock.

You will never stand on your own in a hammock.

 

[Katzndogz]

That's the problem isn't it. The social safety net. How much of a social safety net? The very sick, the very old and the very young. The merely lazy do not get the benefit of the social safety net. No matter how sick they pretend to be. Twinkles up!

 

[editec]

The social contract used to be generally based on traditions of the tribe, and those traditions developed over time based on what worked best for the overall tribe.

When civilization developed the social contract came to be whatever the power structure of that particualr society dictated it to be.

Now here in our complex social environment, as power manfiests in the form of politics, our social contract is in as much a state of flux as the power struggles in politics dictates.

In fact the real struggle in this society today is all about what that social contract really means.

We see the differences between expectations for being a member of this society playing out every day on this board.

But however the social contracts might be different depending on culture and nation, the social contract is the informal social values, and the written expectations (read: laws) regarding the rights of the individual versus the rights of the society as a whole.

 

[Wry Catcher]

That's the problem isn't it. The social safety net. How much of a social safety net? The very sick, the very old and the very young. The merely lazy do not get the benefit of the social safety net. No matter how sick they pretend to be. Twinkles up!

Social Contract Theory*[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

Take a couple of days, read and reread these articles, and then come to an understanding. An understanding not feed to you by the LMS (lame stream media).

If you like the primary source of most of the authors cited are in your public library (if it has not been bulldozed by your local elected officials who could find no authority in the Constitution to maintain one).

 

[WatertheTree]

That's the problem isn't it. The social safety net. How much of a social safety net? The very sick, the very old and the very young. The merely lazy do not get the benefit of the social safety net. No matter how sick they pretend to be. Twinkles up!

No! It is not the social safety net. Attacking the safety net or promoting it is not the way to solve the problem of poor and poverty! What is causing it needs to be addressed. If we want to get the protestors off of the street then we need to start talking about why people dont think its worthwhile to work!

Clearly they see no hope down that direction, they see no reward. No future. Better to sit at home broke on the social net then to work 40 hours a week making someone else rich, and still be broke, just not on the social net.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

THIS society never believed that the Government should take care of people. Not until after 70 YEARS of the Democrats claiming otherwise. Not until after 50 years of the Democrats claiming no one was to blame for their own actions or inaction. Not until 50 years of the left breeding the notion of a helpless hopeless subsection of the society dependent on hand outs and Government support.

Before the 1970's the black community had one of the strongest work ethics of any group in this society. Now after 50 years of being called victims, being told they could not work on their own, being told to live off the Government, being told they are not responsible for their own lives or actions we have a subset of people that depend on the Government for everything. Their family values destroyed, their work ethic destroyed, their sense of worth gone.

 

[Full-Auto]

But you are the very people attempting to destroy that social contract. Not that you fools can see it or will admit it.

Lets be clear you are the fool.

Why you think robbing someone for your instant gratification is justified, proves how fucked up an individual you are.

 

[The T]

That's the problem isn't it. The social safety net. How much of a social safety net? The very sick, the very old and the very young. The merely lazy do not get the benefit of the social safety net. No matter how sick they pretend to be. Twinkles up!

It's one thing to have a safety net...hand ups. When the safety net becomes a hammock for others? That is where I draw the line.

 

[The T]

But you are the very people attempting to destroy that social contract. Not that you fools can see it or will admit it.

What Social contract? The one where Government's purpose was to defend liberty? Liberty not only to succeed...but also to fail.

And within that contract the government was to stay out of the way and create the environment so you could start all over again without interference.

Seems they have created interference by making an environment to where people have become too comfy with living off the backs of the taxpayers, (the safety net), and making it equally more difficult to get out of that net by becoming entangled within it. The net becomes a hammock.

Why is it government's responsibility to become a charity? Is it in the Constitution somewhere?