Social Housing Policy

Social Housing Policy In their article ‘Welfare Safety Net or Tenure of Choice? The Dilemma Facing Social Housing Policy In England, Fitzpatrick and Pawson (2007) explain and reflect upon the changing environment of social housing in England. This essay will provide a summary of the article before analysing the position of social housing in Scotland compared to that described in England. Key similarities and differences between the two countries with regard to social housing will be provided with evidence from the current literature. Finally, the conclusion will attempt to assess if the positions of social housing are really that different in Scotland and England. The key questions asked by Fitzpatrick and Pawson (2007) are: who and what is social housing for? Through an analysis of the past 30 years and a description of the current social housing policy in England, the article explores the question of access. The underlying paradox of future policy and therefore access to social housing in England is explained as the â€Å"continuing commitment to the ‘safety net role† emphasised in the 2000 Housing Green Paper and the â€Å"explicit ambition† to provide a more mixed ‘tenure of choice thus widening the possible market. Fitzpatrick and Pawson refer to the work of Stephens et al to define the key element of social housing as a question of access â€Å"determined on the basis of ‘administrative criteria rather than just ‘pricing rationing. They then go on to describe the changing environment of social housing in England, housing associations increasing share of stock, the falling number of rented properties in general and the change of age structure within the sector as important factors. The history of the ‘needs-based allocation systems using the development of objective point scoring prioritisation is explained as the progressive orthodoxy of the 20th Century which still remains prevalent in todays legislation and guidance. A concise case against needs-based allocation is then provided with the key points including residualisation and the coercive nature of such a system leading to points chasing behavior. This background provides an excellent backdrop for the changes that occurred in the late 1990s when â€Å"the standard ‘take it or leave it social housing allocations model became increasingly difficult to defend in light of rising aspirations and expectations of consumer choice† (Mullins Pawson, 2005, p138). Choice-Based Letting (CBL) Schemes are provided as current government response to develop and open up the sector by placing more emphasis on the customers choice, and as a means of encouragement for otherwise unsuitable or unwilling participants in social housing. Initial findings show that vulnerable groups are not being excluded by the new system although there are certainly questions around the suitability and impact of a more choice led approachs effects on the poorest. In considering the position of Social Housing in Scotland, the social housing sector in Britain has historically been centralised and therefore genuine variation in policy and practice has been limited. However, devolution and the enactment of legislation to set up the Scottish Parliament have led to the opportunity for divergence within both (Walker et al, 2003, p177). Let us now consider some of the similarities and differences within the Scottish and English social housing sector as described by Fitzpatrick and Pawson. It is important to mention here that it is impossible to detail all of the similarities and differences and therefore only the most clear and important have been chosen for this discussion. There has been a global move towards private housing provision in government policy and therefore it is unsurprising that there are clear similarities between the English context described by Fitzpatrick and Pawson and the Scottish context. An important similarity is that housing has risen on the agenda and has been revived in both England and Scotland (Stirling Smith, 2003), this may be due to its importance in addressing and meeting new evolving community needs in todays societies when so much emphasis is placed on home ownership and stability. Another similarity is that both Scotland and England are facing a crossroads (CIH, 2006) as the purposes of their social housing sector differ from those in the 20th Century. The CIH, (2007) describes this crossroads as a choice to either continue providing for the housing needs of the most vulnerable or diversify to meet some of the wider needs of the community with a range of tenure options. This is exactly the same situation described by Fitzpatrick and Pawson which resulted in the CBL schemes in England. Finally, and key to the need for an evaluation of housing policy, is the changing demographic whom it is serving. Fitzpatrick and Pawson state that in England more than a quarter of all council tenants in 2003/2004 were at least 70 years old whilst in Scotland, single pensioners are the most common type of household found in the sector (CIH, 2006). According to statistics, this will change in future years, as the next generation is largely a home owning population who will not need the support of social housing. Both sectors are facing an increase of younger people as the new entrants into social housing and with that come new needs and mobility patterns. Fitzpatrick and Pawson state that commonly older renters â€Å"will have lived in the sector their whole lives, their low propensity for mobility stabilizing their local neighborhoods and tenure as a whole†. This will change in both England and Scotland and the possibility of a more transient need in social housing as discussed by Fitzpatrick and Pawson (2007) will be applicable. This development has been criticised as a reinforcement of the view of social housing as solely for the poorest and most vulnerable groups and as a ‘last resort for housing (Glynn, 2007). Adding to this hollowing out of those participating in the sector in both England and Scotland, is th e Right to Buy policy which encourages and supports households who wish to purchase their homes through regulated schemes. The Right to Buy means that the economically able are moving away from social renting, resulting in the poorest and most vulnerable making up larger percentages of the social housing sector (Satsangi and Dunmore 2003, p202 and CIH, 2007, p7). With regard to differences in Scotlands social housing sector, Midwinter et al (1991) state that â€Å"there has been acceptance in Whitehall that Scotlands housing needs are both qualitatively and quantitatively different from Englands† (p92). This is perhaps more evident since the devolution of parliament and in the difference in policies that are now emerging. Only one difference has been selected for this discussion due to its significance. Although the tenant basis of both England and Scotland are changing in similar ways, the starkest difference lies in the allocation process in the social housing sector. In England, as already mentioned, the CBL scheme is being piloted and successes are being reported (Fitzpatrick and Pawson, 2007). However, Scotland is being much more cautious in its approach and is keeping to its rights based traditions (Stirling and Smith 2003, p156). The Homelessness Task Force explain we are concerned that (CBL schemes) do not operate in ways which deny homeless people the opportunity of participating, or in ways which restrict the stock of housing available for homeless people (CHI, 2002). One of the main purposes of CBL schemes is to introduce choice. The Scottish Government is enhancing applicant choice through Common Housing Registers (CHR) that will ensure people have fair and open access to housing lists and assessment processes whilst working with landlords to encourage choice, response to need and the use of stock in lettings (Stirling and Smith 2003, p151). At the same time, the Homelessness Act 2002 removes the duty of authorities in England to have a register at all (Stirling and Smith 2003, p156). Fitzpatrick and Pawson conclude that in England â€Å"whatever the governments ambitions, in high demand areas at least, social renting will remain a ‘safety net tenure catering mainly to those in greatest need.† The social housing allocation policy may differ between England and Scotland but the outcomes here are the same; in essence, the safety net is still available for those who need it most. They further conclude that social renting performs different functions in different areas of England, with the delivery of choice being more successful in the North and Midlands and that this is the â€Å"congenial outcome of these policy endeavors† (Fitzpatrick and Pawson, 2007). Scotland is also being encouraged to diversify its social housing policy in order to widen the target population and bring regeneration to areas suffering from residualisation (Glynn, 2007) and that this will be more appropriate in some areas than in others. Therefore, in conclusion, this essay has attempted to summarise the Fitzpatrick and Pawson (2007) article regarding social housing policy in England, with some key similarities and differences given with regard to Scotland. Although there are significant differences in the social housing sector in England and Scotland, there are also significant similarities; most prominently and importantly is the desire to provide housing to the most vulnerable members of society. References Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) (2002) ‘Strategic Approaches to Homelessness: A Good Practice Briefing. (Coventry, CIH). Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) (2006) ‘The future for Social Renting in Scotland. (Coventry, CIH). Fitzpatrick, S. Pawson, H. (2007) ‘Welfare Safety Net or Tenure of Choice? The Dilemma Facing Social Housing Policy in England. Housing Studies, 22, (2) pp.163-182). Glynn, S. (2007) ‘Safe as Houses. Scottish Left Review, Issue 42. http://www.scottishleftreview.org/php/upload/slr-140-I42SG.htm Midwinter, A., Keating, M. Mitchell, J. (1991) Politics and Public Policy in Scotland (Basingstoke, Macmillan). Mullens, D. Pawson, H. (2005) ‘The Land That Time Forgot: reforming access to social housing in England. Policy Politics, 33, pp135-148). Satsangi, M. Dunmore, K. (2003) ‘The planning System and the Provision of Affordable Housing in Rural Britain: A Comparison of the Scottish and English Experience. Housing Studies, 18 (2), pp.201-217). Stephens, M., Burns, N. Mackay, L. (2002) ‘Social Market or Safety Net? British Social Rented Housing in a European Context (Bristol: The Policy Press). Stirling, T. Smith, R. (2003) ‘A Matter of Choice? Policy Divergence in Access to Social Housing Post-devolution. Housing Studies, 18 (2), pp.145-158). Walker, R., Mullins, D. Pawson, H. (2003) ‘Devolution and Housing Association in Great Britain; Enhancing Organizational Accountability Housing. Housing Studies, 18 (2), pp.177-199). Bibliography Chartered Institute of Housing (CHI) (2007) ‘The Future of the Social Housing Sector in Scotland in Delivering Successful, Mixed Communities: CIH in Scotland Position Paper. (Coventry, CIH). Jellinek, D. (2006) ‘Social Housing In Scotland: Tenant Participation and Community Cohesion. (Authority Forum Report, CIVICA).

The Differences Between Reward and Recognition

The Differences Between Reward and Recognition Whilst these terms are often used interchangeably, reward and recognition systems should be conceived individually. Employee reward systems pertain to programs arrange by a organization to reward performance and motivate employees on separate and/or team levels. Theyre generally conceived individual from pay but possibly pecuniary in nature or differently have a monetary value to the organization. Although antecedently believed the area of big companies, small business sector have also commenced hiring them as a instrument to entice top employees in a competitive job market as well as to increase employee performance. As observed, while employee acknowledgment programs are frequently aggregated with reward programs they hold a different aim altogether. Recognition programs are normally not pecuniary in nature although they may have a cost to the organiozation. What is Merit Pay? In contrast to bonuses and incentives, merit pay requires giving employees a permanent pay rise established on his/her past performance. Often the companys performance appraisal system (PAS) is used to check performance levels and the employees are granted a salary increase, such as a 10% increment in pay. One likely problem with merit pay is that employees come to expect pay increments. In companies that give yearly merit raises without a different raise for increments in cost of living, merit pay finishes up serving as a cost-of-living allowance and creates a feel of entitlement on the part of employees, with even low performers anticipating them. Therefore, making merit pay more effectual depends upon making it genuinely dependent on performance and designing a comparatively objective appraisal system. What are Compensation Factors that Management Should Consider? When management is setting salaries for thier employees there are numerous factors to consider. Their compensation should be decided by more than just whether they can do work for you or not? Management need to be sure that theyre looking at what compensation factors will impact those that work for them. Theyve to remember that employees are going to go where it will be of more benefit to them. That means that management require to be able to make a good offer if they want employees to work for them. listed below are few thoughts for compensation factors that management should consider. For each business sector there will be different applications, so not all of them are right for your choice of business. What type of business sector you own. If you are a sales outlet then commission will work great, but if you are a production company then sales will not impact many of your workers. The different sections and divisions within the business enterprise will also make a difference. The waitresses will be able to accumulate tips but the cooks arent out with the customers to be tipped. The list of duties and responsibilities that are anticipated of the employee. At the lowest of the food chain there will be less obligation, if the person that just got employed is making as is as the supervisor over them, but the duties are different, you may find youve few disturbed supervisors. As their job requisites increase there should be more compensation given. The time and exertion that has put into the job. Youll find that some employees have a driving force to do everything they can to give it their best. Other people will be more prepared to take the minimal workload and be through with work the moment the clock assures them its alright. For those employees that volunteer to do more and that give a distinguished effort, there should be more compensation for them. If youre anticipating committee members to set up a presentation, give them additional pay for the time they put into it. On that same note, youll find that some people are collecting the abate from those that are just there to do the lowest they can. For those that are accepting additional and doing all they can to compensate for those that do not care, there should be a reward. They should be acknowledged for their efforts and compensated in addition to their normal salaries. When an employee is employed, look at their education. If theyve an accounting degree and youre seeking a financial consultant or an accountant, then you should be conformable pay a little more for their knowledge. Youll have applicants that come in below and over qualified, be sure that youve adequate compensation budgeted that you are able to hire the person with the right knowledge for your company. Consider their work history. If theyve years of experience, they should be compensated. Those years help you to have that much more of an advantage, adding their education to their experience you may have someone that can make a big difference in your company. Also, if you are employing even for the least job, then you need to know that theyre going to be with you for at least a good amount of time. Its expensive to train, so if you are able to reward them for being at their preceding jobs for an extensive amount of time then you may find a patriotic employee. Remember that happy employees are the only way to keep a business running in the right direction. How to Motivate Employees at Workplace? By Updating the Employee of the Month program: Besides placing their picture and alloting them a terrific parking zone, give them something they could actually enjoy, Something that will motivate your staff to be the best they can be. Commence by determining a goal for your staff: Getting them recognise what youd like do and allowing them help come up with a plan of action to accomplish that goal. And after that, inform them what their reward will be for finishing the task. Motivate employees with a free day: You can motivate employees by giving them a day off from work and a free pass to watch some movie or enjoy hi-tea etc. A day off with salary is something every employee wish to savor! It will surely motivate employees to work for those day offs with free passes. Family Day: How about planning a family day for the employees where they are invited along with their immediate familes to enjoy a fun-filled day. There could be various activities invloved for children and others to enjoy. Donuts Treat: Sometimes actions like as simple as buying donuts and coffee for your employees once a week and discussing something other than work for an hour or so will motivate employees also. You need to show your care to employees. Annual and Individual Bonuses: Annual Bonuses are basically one-time rewards that might be in result of some specific achievements of employees. For instance, an employee who accomplishes the quarterly goals set for his/her may be rewarded with a lump sum bonus. Employee motivation consequent from a bonus is normally related to the degree of advanced knowledge considering bonus particulars. Team Bonuses: There are certain situations in which employees should collaborate with one another and setting apart employee performance is harder, companies are progressively recurring to binding employee pay to team performance. E.g., in 2007, Wal-Mart gave incentives to around 80% of their associates based on overall store performance. If employees have a reasonable power to enhance their overall teams performance level, these programs can be handy. Organizational Examples: Following rewards and compensation benefits are seen in different renowned organizations around the globe. Wal-Mart Stores: Out of many factors that have resulted in the success of Wal-Mart is its happy employees. Wal-Mart has successfully managed to rtain happy bunch of employees through effective motivation. Motivation at Wal-Mart can be seen at all levels of positions and departments at Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart have various motivational techniques in order to prove that they not only care about profit they attain through their workforce, but employees personal b eing as well. Here are some other ways of motivation in palce at Wal-Mart Stores: Calling employess as associates onstead of employee Calling eachother by their first name from top management to hourly associates. Giving respect to each associate irrespective of their .position in the company. Health insurance for each associate and their immediate family members. By hiring a psycologist to give counseling to associates facing some problems. Mobilink GSM Pakistan Mobilink runs its business enterprise on the basis of its slogan that Our people are our greatest assets. We take great pride in admitting the contribution each one of us makes. Mobilink use the following motivational techniques to motivate their employees: Management by objectives Employee acknowledgment programs Employee engagement programs Variable salary programs Skill-based salary plans Compromising benefits. Nestle Pakistan Ltd. Specified contribution program: The Company engages a accredited provident fund for all its regular employees. Equal monthly shares are constituted to the fund both by the Company and the employees at the rate of 12% of the basic pay and cost of living allowance in addition to it. Nestle has clear plans for betterment of its employees, thus leaving employees with clear knowledge of how the organization is caring about its employees by providing sustainable resources in terms of health, insurance and incentives etc. Suggestions and ideas towards the betterment of any organizational processes are encourged. Other main facilities which Nestle grants to its employees to keep them motivated at workpalce are: Incremented salary Job Security and Integrity Annual Gratuity Annual Bonuses Old age benefits Residence facilities and Allownces Transportation Health and safety Telenor Pakistan Ltd. Below are different ways in which employees are motivated at Telenor Pakistan are: Solving everyday residence issues of employees including remodeling, repairs, house-sitting, etc. Supporting in any legal issues. Supporting in financial issues. Education plans for childrens. Health care. Tesco UK Staff training and devlopment programs Discount for staff purchases Club points system Flexibility Bonuses Free uniform Holidays/holiday vouchers Free Passes Open opportunities Unilever India Motivational techniques in place at Unilever India, includes Provident fund, off days. Pick and drop facility, training camps, health care, meternity care and pesion schemes. Flex Industries Limited   At Flex Industries Ltd, they have a generous incentive scheme, which has assisted them in increasing productiveness by 30-40% as well as minimizing wastage by 2-3 %. Bonuses are extended to all levels of employees. Ford Workplace safety Diversitification Professional Growth and devlopment Achievement rewards Trainings Remuneration and benefits Volvo A Learning and competitive Environment A Fair Wage Policy Regular Medical Examination of all employees Openness and Respect amongst co-workers Measuring Progress with effective performance appraisal system Rewards Diversity Volkswagen Attractive employment plans Job security Good working climate through leadership and cooperation payment in line with performance Personal development opportunities Coca Cola By furnishing competitive compensation and benefits, coca cola endeavor to motivate its employees though bounding employee turnover. Besides compensation and benefits, coca cola also extend several other programs for its employees that broaden beyond the workplace. For example, as part of its loyalty to youth development, Coca cola offer college scholarship opportunities to the children of its employees. coca cola also provide opportunities for employees to improve their educational standing.

mcdonald :: essays research papers

In January 2003, McDonald, for a company that has enjoyed sizzling growth for decades announced its first ever-quarterly loss--$343.8 million. One of the main reasons for this is because McDonald has expanded too much and too fast both locally and internationally. Because of their fast growth, they sacrificed their customer services and quality. McDonald, the company that had been opening 1,700 stores a year over the past decade is dramatically reducing their number of new sores openings worldwide. According to David Grainer’s (2003) Can McDonald’s cook again? An article taken from the Fortune 5 Hundred magazine stated, â€Å"McDonald’s-the company that once made its living on prompt, friendly service-has ranked at the bottom of the fast-food industry since 1994. It now sits below every single airline as well as the IRS† (Grainer, 2003, p.120). More significantly, in 1993 due to the frustrated franchisees the company allowed the restaurant national grading system to be eliminated which in affect was a bad leadership move. McDonald has let its services slip because they thought they could afford to, in return it shows the arrogance in the leadership until they were slapped in the face by their fast growing competitors such as Taco Bell, Pizza Huts and Kentucky Fried Chicken. In addition, there are more subway restaurants than McDonald’s in the U.S. (Grainer, 2003, p.129). Furthermore, the company was mostly focusing on the growth of their real estate than to their quality and service. With every franchise McDonald sold, the more profit that they gained from the rent. They concentrated more on the spread of the franchise than they did on the quality of their service. They should be aware that if this franchisee does not do well, in return it would affect on McDonald’s overall profits.

Comparing the Role of Women in Indian Camp and Shiloh Essay -- compari

Role of Women in Indian Camp and Shiloh  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚   The women of "Indian Camp" experience a life much different from the woman in "Shiloh." Ernest Hemingway wrote "Indian Camp" giving the women a definite role in their families while Bobbi Ann Mason wrote "Shiloh" leaving the woman’s definite family role ambiguous. Because they are responsible for the birth of the babies, the Native American women of the preceding story are the nurturers as opposed to the men. The women accept their roles and partake in their duties without any protest. On the other hand, Norma Jean’s role is not as traditional compared to the other women’s since she and Leroy have no children, she basically lives alone, and she maintains a job. While the Native American women and Norma Jean live different lives, they share the same problem of enduring the men’s ignorance to their needs. However, as the story progresses, Norma Jean realizes she wants to move on in her life, so she does not accept her situation. The Native Ameri can women continue their lifestyle not because they choose to be submissive, but because they know no other way. The women of the two stories lead totally different lives in that the Native American women accept their situation, assume submissive behavior, and endure the ignorance of men, while Norma Jean does not accept her situation, assumes assertive behavior, and does not put up with the ignorance of her husband. Not being exposed to Norma Jean’s independent way of life, the Native American women accept their lives of nurturing and care taking. The doctor’s visit to the Indian camp shows only women helping with the delivery of the baby. As they help the doctor, the men sit up the road away from all the commotion. No signs of resent... ...ver the period of his absence, Norma Jean develops into a stronger person from being on her own. Having Leroy home makes her realize she needs to move on and employs her assertiveness to get out of the situation. Although they remain loyal to their duties through all of the drudgery, the Native American women are strong because they lead a very important role in the family. Norma Jean also proves herself to be strong as she leaves her husband to move on to achieve more in her life. The women share different experiences, but they all exhibit strength in being the way they want to be. Works Cited Hemingway, Ernest. "Indian Camp." In Out Time. New York, Scribner’s, 1955. 16,17. Mason, Bobbi Ann. "Shiloh." Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. Sixth edition. Eds. X.J. Kennedy and Dana Gioia. New York: Harper Collins, 1995. 495, 496, 500. Comparing the Role of Women in Indian Camp and Shiloh Essay -- compari Role of Women in Indian Camp and Shiloh  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚   The women of "Indian Camp" experience a life much different from the woman in "Shiloh." Ernest Hemingway wrote "Indian Camp" giving the women a definite role in their families while Bobbi Ann Mason wrote "Shiloh" leaving the woman’s definite family role ambiguous. Because they are responsible for the birth of the babies, the Native American women of the preceding story are the nurturers as opposed to the men. The women accept their roles and partake in their duties without any protest. On the other hand, Norma Jean’s role is not as traditional compared to the other women’s since she and Leroy have no children, she basically lives alone, and she maintains a job. While the Native American women and Norma Jean live different lives, they share the same problem of enduring the men’s ignorance to their needs. However, as the story progresses, Norma Jean realizes she wants to move on in her life, so she does not accept her situation. The Native Ameri can women continue their lifestyle not because they choose to be submissive, but because they know no other way. The women of the two stories lead totally different lives in that the Native American women accept their situation, assume submissive behavior, and endure the ignorance of men, while Norma Jean does not accept her situation, assumes assertive behavior, and does not put up with the ignorance of her husband. Not being exposed to Norma Jean’s independent way of life, the Native American women accept their lives of nurturing and care taking. The doctor’s visit to the Indian camp shows only women helping with the delivery of the baby. As they help the doctor, the men sit up the road away from all the commotion. No signs of resent... ...ver the period of his absence, Norma Jean develops into a stronger person from being on her own. Having Leroy home makes her realize she needs to move on and employs her assertiveness to get out of the situation. Although they remain loyal to their duties through all of the drudgery, the Native American women are strong because they lead a very important role in the family. Norma Jean also proves herself to be strong as she leaves her husband to move on to achieve more in her life. The women share different experiences, but they all exhibit strength in being the way they want to be. Works Cited Hemingway, Ernest. "Indian Camp." In Out Time. New York, Scribner’s, 1955. 16,17. Mason, Bobbi Ann. "Shiloh." Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. Sixth edition. Eds. X.J. Kennedy and Dana Gioia. New York: Harper Collins, 1995. 495, 496, 500.

“White Man’s Burden” Essay -- Literary Analysis

Rudyard Kipling’s 1899 poem â€Å"The White Man’s Burden† epitomizes the European man’s view on imperialism, Euro-centrism and social Darwinism. Four centuries before 1899, such ideas were briefly hinted in the letter from Christopher Columbus to King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, however by 1899 these attitudes strengthened and developed fully into their complete meaning. The U.S and Europe’s imperialism in the nineteenth century were the most influential ever in the history of human civilization. The immense motive for imperialism came from social factors including religion and Social Darwinism. Missionaries frequently rushed to Africa and Asia to convert its people to Christianity. On the other hand, social Darwinism argued the survival of the fittest- applying science to racism, which fed ideas of European racial superiority. After landing on the African continent, Europeans felt they had a duty to civilize Africa, which is explicitly indicated by â€Å"The White Man’s Burden.† When white men invaded countries in Africa, they saw a new group of people who wore very little clothing and lived in simple buildings. This gave the Europeans the idea and need to help these people become more developed and evolve socially (Bentley and Ziegler 912). Rudyard Kipling’s "The White Man's Burden" encouraged the United States to impose colonial rule in the Philippines. Stanzas like â€Å"To wait in heavy harness,†¨ On fluttered folk and wild – Your new-caught, sullen peoples, †¨Half-devil and half-child†, indicates that Kipling believed main taining oversea colonies was a burden for the colonial empire because the empire was responsible for the inferior people. His reference to Filipinos as being both half devil and half child explicitly means that new ca... ...entley, J. H., Ziegler, H. F. Traditions & Encounters: A Global Perspective on the Past. Vol II – From 1500 to the Present. Fourth Edition. McGraw Hill, 2007. 2. Reilly, K. Worlds of History: A Comparative Reader. Third Edition. Bedford / St. Martin’s, 2007. 3. â€Å"Napoleonic Wars (1799-1815).† History of War. 2000. Dugdale-Pointont. 27 April, 2008 . 4. â€Å"Convention Revising the General Act of Berlin, February 26,1885, and the General Act and Declaration of Brussels, July 2,1890.† American Journal of International Law. 1921, 15(4), 314-321. 5. â€Å"Social Darwinism.† Explore the World of Replicators. 2000. Think Quest. 27 April, 2008 . 6. â€Å"Age of Discovery.† HCS-OSU. 1992. OSU. 27 April 2008 .

New Heritage Doll Essay

This paper summarizes recent studies in behavioral finance—particularly regarding market anomalies and investor behavior—that are not reconciled with the traditional finance paradigms. This paper differs from previous survey literature in several aspects. We introduce more recent papers in the field, more literature on behavioral corporate finance, and provide statistics on the recent trends that are explored in behavioral finance papers. We expand the research scope to studies on Korean financial markets, introduce specific funds using behavioral finance techniques, and discuss the challenges facing behavioral finance. Keywords: Behavioral finance, Market anomalies, Market efficiency, Survey of literature *  Hyoyoun Park: Credit Analyst, Euler Hermes Hong Kong Services Limited, Suites 403-11, 4/F Cityplaza 4, 12 Taikoo Wan Road, Taikoo Shing, Hong Kong; phone: +852-3665-8934; e-mail: karen.park@eulerhermes.com. **  Wook Sohn (Corresponding author): Professor, KDI School of Public Policy and Management, 87 Hoegiro, Seoul 130-868, Korea; phone: +82-2-3299-1062; e-mail: wooksohn@ kdischool.ac.kr. 4 Seoul Journal of Business INTRODUCTION Although Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT) and the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH), which represent standard finance, are successful, the alternative approach of behavioral finance includes psychological and sociological issues when investigating market anomalies and individual investor behavior. In the financial markets, we often observe some phenomena which cannot be explained rationally. For example, we do not have any logical evidences on random walk in the stock price movement while many fund managers use several behavioral concepts in their investment strategy. In corporate perspectives, company owners and managers do not rely only on logical elements to make critical decisions on mergers and acquisitions and new investment. Two of the key topics discussed in behavioral finance are the behavioral finance macro, which recognizes â€Å"anomalies† in the EMH that behavioral models can explain, and the behavioral finance micro, which recognizes individual investor behavior, or biases that are not explained by the traditional models incorporating rational behavior. In particular, we employ the behavioral finance micro because it explains a number of important financing and investment patterns by using a behavioral approach, which expands on the research in the behavioral corporate finance field. This paper summarizes these two major topics in behavioral finance, which include behavioral corporate finance, and introduces evidence that adopts behavioral concepts in the actual financial market. It also describes challenges to behavioral finance by reviewing recent studies and surveys. Recently acknowledged theories in academic finance are called standard or traditional finance theories. Based on the standard finance paradigm, scholars have sought to understand financial markets using models that presume that investors are rational. MPT and the EMH form the basis of traditional finance models1). How1) Harry Markowitz introduced MPT in 1952,  and he illustrated relationships between portfolio choices and beliefs in terms of the â€Å"expected returns–variance of returns† rule. Ricciardi and Simon (2000) defined MPT as an expected return, while standard deviations of particular securities or portfolios are correlated with the other securities or mutual funds held within one portfolio. Another major concept is known as the EMH, which states that investors cannot consistently  ever, if researchers only use the MPT and EMH, individual investor behavior is not easily understood. In contrast, behavioral finance is a relatively new concept in the financial markets, and is not employed within standard finance models; it replaces traditional finance models, and it offers a better model for human behavior. Although MPT and the EMH are considered as successful in financial market analysis, the behavioral finance model has been developed as one of the alternative theories for standard finance. Behavioral finance examines the impact of psychology on market participants’ behavior and the resulting outcomes in markets, focusing on how individual investors make decisions: in particular, how they interpret and act on specific information. Investors do not always have rational and predictable reactions when examined through the lens of quantitative models, which means that investors’ decision-making processes also include cognitive biases and affective (emotional) aspects. The behavioral finance model emphasizes investor behavior, leading to various market anomalies and inefficiencies. This new concept for finance explains individual behavior and group behavior by integrating the fields of sociology, psychology, and other behavioral sciences. It also predicts financial markets. Research in behavioral corporate finance studies highlights investors’ and managers’ irrationality, and shows nonstandard preferences, and judgmental biases in managerial decisions. Currently, many companies apply behavioral approaches to determine important finance and investment patterns. Several theories under the banner of traditional finance develop specific models by assuming the EMH and they explain  phenomena in markets; however, in the real financial market, many problems and cases cannot easily be explained via those standardized  models. In the cases involving managers or investors, unbiased forecasts about future events need to be developed and used to make decisions that best serve their own interests. In this type of situation, we need to entertain more realistic behavioral aspects, as there is evidence for irrational behavior patterns that cannot be explained by the traditional or standard financial theories. To be specific, Shefrin (2009) pointed out that the root cause of the global  achieve an excessive return over market returns on a risk-adjusted basis because all publicly available information is already reflected in a security’s market price, and the current security price is its fair value. Financial crisis of 2008 was a psychological, not fundamental phenomenon. Risk-seeking behaviors were evident in the loss-dominant markets, while excessive optimism and confirmation bias acted as driving factors behind the crisis, and not fundamental factors such as terrorism, skyrocketing oil prices, or disruptive changes in the weather. We can understand, identify, and address psychological distortions in judgments and decisions by considering behavioral concepts, and then we can integrate both traditional and behavioral factors to be better prepared for dealing with any psychological challenges. As mentioned, managerial decisions are strongly affected by cognitive biases and emotional aspects in real financial markets, as human beings are not machines. Additionally, evidence of  mispricing and market anomalies that cannot be fully explained by traditional models, is prevalent. Thus, we would like to propose behavioral finance in this paper to clearly explain a number of important financing and investment patterns, aiding  investors in understanding several abnormal phenomena by integrating behavioral concepts with existing. Ricciardi and Simon (2000) defined behavioral finance in the following manner: â€Å"Behavioral finance attempts to explain and increase understanding of the reasoning patterns of investors, including the emotional processes involved and the degree to which they influence the decision-making process. Essentially, behavioral finance attempts to explain the what, why, and how of finance and investment, from a human perspective† (Page 2) (See figure 1). Shefrin (2000), however, mentioned the difference between cognitive and affective (emotional) factors: â€Å"cognitive aspects concern the way people organize their information, while the emotional aspects deal with the way people feel as they register information† (Page 29). We understand that there are several survey literatures on behavioral finance. However, this paper differs from the literature in several aspects. We introduce more recent papers in the field and expand the research scope to studies on Korean financial markets. We introduce more literature on behavioral corporate finance, provide statistics on the recent trends that are evident in behavioral finance papers, introduce the specific funds that are using behavioral finance techniques, and discuss the challenges of the behavioral finance model. Source: Ricciardi and Simon (2000)  particularly regarding market anomalies and investor behavior, which cannot  be explained by traditional finance paradigms. In section 2, we introduce two topics in behavioral finance: cognitive biases and the limits of arbitrage. In section 3, we summarize the research on behavioral corporate finance. In section 4, we examine behavioral applications via two routes: evidence from real investments and specific evidence from the Korean financial market. In section 5, we analyze the recent developments in behavioral finance publications. Section 6 discusses several challenges to behavioral finance and ends with suggestions for future research. TWO TOPICS IN BEHAVIORAL FINANCE Behavioral finance is a study that combines psychology and economics, and it tries to explain various events that take place in financial markets. For example, from the behavioral finance  perspective, some individuals’ limitations and problems are shown in the expected utility theory and in arbitrage assumptions. In particular, there are two representative topics in behavioral finance: cognitive psychology and the limits of arbitrage.2) Cognitive Biases Under the traditional and standard financial theories, investors are viewed as being rational. Basically, a rational economic person is an individual who tries to achieve discretely specified goals in the most comprehensive and consistent way while minimizing any economic costs. A rational economic person’s choices are determined by his or her utility function.

Political Philosophy and Human Beings Essay

Freedom is generally term we use to talk about politics in our society nowadays. Eudaimonia is not a freedom but it betrays a more general difference in the way Aristotle approaches different societies. Eduaimonia is a biological concept with â€Å"your life going well† With your naturally attributes being fully developed. It is not a matter of your mood. If you ask if someone is flourishing it is more than if they are happy it is are they becoming everything they can be. Are they exercising all of their abilities? Freedom doesn’t have anyting to do with success. Freedoms for Aristotle is part of eudaimonia. Eudaimonia is a collection of goods. You need material things and good luck and freedom and food and water. Pg. 258 Aristotle says eudaimonia is a STATE OF ACTIVITY. VERY IMPORTANT. It is not just well being but also well doing. You’re a Eudaimonistic person only if you enact the activities of a eudaimonistic person. You cant be a good citizen or a happy citizen if you just have rights. You have to exercise these rights. Some kind of activity. Different activities in different cities because different cities have different rules and constitutions. Citizenship is a kind of doing. Citizens have function. The activity of citizens is that which supports the constitution of the city or state or polis which they are apart. The point of the polis is not just living but to have a good life. A good life that combines the success of the individual with the success of a whole. It is always in motion and an activity. Book 3 chapter 9 a polis is not the same thing as an alliance. You cant take any political agreement between 2 or 3 cities and make them one city. Only human beings because they have language Aristotle says can make moral judgments. Not like animals judge where the food is but more complex judgments. Page 10 and 11. Our language is capable of making distinctions that aren’t only physical. Aristotle claims animals don’t make moral judgments. Language and justice are immediately linked to the function of the polis. Our capacity to speak to one another is what makes us political. It is one function of the polis to define good and evil. To come to collective understanding of what is good and what is bad. Human beings have the capacity to debate and judge differently which also means judge badly and judge well. This judging is a kind of activity. It is the business of cities. Even households do in their choosing how to live together. Aristotles discussion of households and cities. Human beings in two principle ways. The member of a lesser whole the household and the member of a larger whole which is the polis Both having ruling parts and ruled parts. Polis Definition of a citizen :one who shares in the administration of justice in the holding of office. He doesn’t say what the office is to incorporate all the states in the Greek world. Some monarchies where people who don’t hold office who are still considered citizens. NOW-A citizen is someone who is a legal candidate for office even if they don’t hold an office at that specific time. Aristotle says if you have that one person who is qualified to be king either you have to make him king or get rid of him. When Aristotle gives the best govt he says different kinds of government are beter for some circumstances. If city is under attack it may be smarter to give control to one person to make all the decisions so there is no confusion. The circumstance of the not so rich not so poor with some allies and some opponents. BEST THING in this situation is to have a middle class that can alternate from ruling and being ruled. He means people who aren’t to rich and aren’t to poor. The poor are to desperate and greedy so they don’t want to consider what is good for everyone. The rich just want to boss everyone around and want charge. The polis is the one compound that can be self-concious about its situation and a ruled and a ruling element. If were ruling we might enjoy it to much so this could be a problem. If we are part of the ruled we might resent being ordered around. Human organization is like animal organization but it also has a special problem and a special solution. The best thing is someone who can understand both ruling and being ruled. That is why the middle class would be best for the position. They understand both sides. Aristotle thinks even in a family they are not totally conscious of their situation. A bee hive has a quen bee but the bee doesn’t know she is in charge and the other bees don’t mind not being in charge it just is what it is. Polity like the Athenian system is best because everyone takes a share in ruling and being ruled. They drew names out of a hat for rule and you were part of ruling if you were pulled in the hat. The city was small enough so over the course of your lifetime almost everyone could be assured to be the ruler of the city. Most of your life you were in the other position of being ruled. This is the best in most condition or the average condition. If one person comes along and seem the best to rule and will give eudaimonia for everyone then they should rule but it happens very rarely. HOUSEHOLD AND SLAVERY The household for Aristotle is another form of social compound like the polis but on a smaller scale. Will have a ruling and a ruled element. Aristotle knows in advance because there is always a ruling and a ruled element he knows what to look for so it is not surprising when he looks in a household he finds these two things. Aristotle’s perspective the adult male in a household rules and everyone else is subordinate to that position. All of the households Aristotle could see were dominated by men and for the most part were slave holding. Some period when individuals are not best in charge of their own lives. (children) Discussion 2/7/14 Aristotle is more concerned with the practical sort of things plato was thinking about how it should be. Aristotle sees the ruler and ruled everywhere. Phone- Sound and voice or pleasure and pain which pertains to animals like a cat screeching or a wolf howling. Logos- is speech and reason and judgment and language. Language and judgment go hand in hand. This is A PART OF BEING HUMAN. 4/10/14 Lecture Notes Hobbes considered by many to be first modern political theorist. Hobbes in politics in conservative for his time and place but his methods are very very radical. HOBBES AND ARISTOTLE Hobbes is opposite of Aristotle. Aristotle learned about politics through observation. He observed nature and looked at how it was replicated towards ourselves. Aristotle thinks all natural beings have a telos which is a natural end. A TELOS is something you are destined for not just death. Hobbes participated in scientific debate when he moved to paris. Attempt like aristotles to approach politics through nature. HOBBES IDEA of what nature is and how you study are so different from aristotles. The state is an artificial animal says hobbes. What you learn about the natural world will not tell you everything and not the most important things about politics and state. The art of man is like the art of god. Look on the political world as a creation but as a human creation making an artificial animal. Study human beings alongside other animals. To Hobbes the state is something radically different from animal congregations and it DOESN’T HAVE TO BE MADE unlike animals. If it is unmade it is chaos and war. Like the England he had to run away from because of civil war. States are not a part of nature. Aristotle says the state is a natural formation and is suppose to be there. For Hobbes this is not true. WHEN HUMAN BEINGS ENTER INTO A STATE NATURE IS WHAT WE LEAVE BEHIND. Human beings were in an unpolitical state before the state which to Hobbes is the state of nature. We were in a previous condition before the state which is nature to hobbes. To Aristotle everything is nature and human beings are always part of the natural world. Aristotles method is human beings are natural and politics and states were natural so he was going around to all different ones to figure out what they had in common. This makes no sense to Hobbes. No state of any kind is natural to Hobbes. Human beings Hobbes says clearly are made by nature and have natural characteristics that human beings have. To Hobbes the people inside the artificial state still have those natural characteristics. You cant leave your body behind to make the state. If states are artificial we can make them how we want. Not aristotles naturally idea of 3-6 types. Hobbes’s theory is sort of liberating but also terrifying. No guarantee we are safe. We are not born into a natural order. If there isn’t an order that we make we wont make it very long. Hobbes’s modern science including distrust of the senses. Hobbes is skeptical of our sensory perception and the ability of our senses to tell us the truth. Sensations clearly come from the natural world but we don’t know exactly where it is coming from. If we know our senses deceive us in some cases we cant be sure they don’t always deceive us. PLATO ALSO DISTRUSTED THE SENSES AND ALSO LIKED GEOMETRY LIKE HOBBES AND EUCLIDIAN GEOMETRY. Plato thinks we can reach some sort of reason and perceive it correctly. Hobbes is not interested in this. Pg. 4(chapter 1) Deviathlon Information we get through introspection can be trusted. Whoever looks into himself and considers what he does when he thinks of reasons hopes and fear. The only way to know humans and to have secure knowledge is to look into yourself. What you find when you look into yourself is good information to everybody else. When I understanding what im doing when I hope then I understand what youre doing when you hope even if they are different hopes. Same thing with fear. THAT FOR HOBBES IS SECURE STARTING POINT FOR SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE TO START POLITICS. Chapter 11-No Telos meaning no teleology don’t study human beings or any part of nature by postulating there is some final ending for them and thinking we can find a way to get them there. Hobbes sees once you get something you want you find something else you want and so on and so on. Like calicles. (from another reading calicles is) Hobbes found this through his own introspection. Hobbes knows his desires are different others but he knows their desire for those things are the same. And he knows that he isn’t satisfied when he gets what he wants so he knows others are the same way. Hobbes doesn’t mean human beings all seek political power but like calicles the power to get what you want. Being able to arrange the world the way you like it. This for hobbes is what is natural. Not a natural ending but a natural beginning. Putting things into motion. Sees it as a physicist. Putting the world into motion. Hobbes says individuals have desires those desires set them in motion and once they are set in motion they don’t tend to stop. Humans are particles seeking what they want with other particles (people) in the way not always getting what we want. Its not just politics to Hobbes that are artificial. Many other things are artificial that aristotles thought was natural. MOST IMPORTANTLY IS SPEECH. (ARISTOTLE SAID SPEECH WAS THE DEFINING NATURAL CHARECTERISITC OF HUMAN BEINGS. HUMANS ARE THE ANIMALS WITH THE NATURAL QUALITY OF SPEAKING AND REASON FOR ARISTOTLE. ) Just about everything except our desires are artificial to Hobbes. Speech is an invention. Hobbes says almost every moral conclusion you want to make you will make it through speech which human beings made up so it doesn’t tell us anything. Chapter 4. All moral truths from Hobbes sense are well constructed senses. We have arranged the terms to lineup. The definition the words line up and make sense so it is true and we can define it. CHAPTER 6- GOOD AND EVIL People disagree not because they make mistakes about reasoning which plato would say they disagree because they have different preferences. They see good and evil through their own preferences. You nor I will worship to persuade each other to what we see fit. What does this mean for politics? Calicles who also thought good and evil were words that people made up. Calicles also thought people were better than others. He thought letting nature work itself out was letting the powerful people dominate the weak. HOBBES THINKS PEOPLE ARE NATURALLY EQUALLY. That doesn’t mean they are equally smart or large or strong or weak. We don’t have equal desires wehave different desires. All Hobbes means by natural equality is that everyone of us is vulnerable to being killed by others. No human being is strong enough by themselves to secure themselves physically to secure themselves from others. WE ARE PHYSICALLY VULNERABLE MOST ESPECIALLY TO ONE ANOTHER. Human beings are born with physical desires and need power and security to help you get your desires. We live in a world with no system we are destined to be apart of like Aristotle thought. We don’t settle our differences by appealing to a natural order or moral principles through reason that plato thought we could all agree on. Moral conceptual political conflicts make the world a dangerous place because if you want catholocism you want it for others not just like chocolate which is for you. Fundamentally human beings are bodies in motion. We will not stop unless we come up against counterveiling force. The state of nature is the war of everyman against everyman. Chaos terror and war. We cannot look to nature to solve our problems because nature is the problem. We are each born with set of desires which are not in agreement with others. THIS IS POLITICAL PROBLEM WHAT IS THE SOLUTION. Reason and justice are just words we need a counter force. Something to bring order to a naturally chaotic system. We need something to make all the particles move in the same direction. The sword signifies the power of the state for Hobbes. There is a solution that has to be imposed just because we are so different. Hobbes understand just how different everyone is and that is a problem. How can you handle the individuality of everyone and make them stop killing eachother when they are left in their natural condition. MUST SET UP A RULE AND GET THEM TO OBEY. We need an incentive that is greater than our natural impulsion of our own desires. Everyone should have their greatest desire being staying alive. So we can enjoy the chocolate or vanilla. We will never enjoy anything in this world unless we are alive. LECTURE 2/12/14 Hobbes In nature there is a lack of agreement, trust and language. Life at the state of nature is solitary or nasty brutish and short to hobbes. The problem is fear and the solution is fear. We fear our own death that is good because then we all know we have that in common. It is rational to want to cooperate with other people but you can be tricked or betrayed. We also fear that other people wont perform their contracts. The solution will have to be some sort of unity. Pg. 132 chapter 17 You want to do whats right and you want to agree with other people but they may not cooperate. If you fear other people the leader will take that fear away and make you fear him. You will know everyone equally fears the sovereign and the consequences for non-agreement so they all have reason to agree. Now you fear death from the sovereign but maybe not as much from other people so now you can make agreements with one another. The sword hangs over all your covenants with one another. No conflilct for hobbes about being afraid and being free. You are in a position to be liberated from the fear of fellow human beings and the state of nature by entering the commonwealth or the artificial state. All you have to do is give up your will to one man or one group of men. Hobbes thinks its more efficient to have one man do it but it can be a group. Where there is disagreement there is distrust and when there is distrust there is violence and war. By all of us agreeing to let one person speak then when he speaks that’s it he has spoken for all of us. Even if we have disagreements it doesn’t matter politically he has spoken and that is it. The existence of the leviathan allows us to make deals and agreements with one another about property etc†¦ We need a form of agreement that ends the problem so we can live in a fundamentally functioning artificial state. We can create an object of mutual equal simultaneous fear. If you can create a state that equally and simultaneously threatens everyone with terrible penalties when they break the law you create the possibility of law which doesn’t exist in the state of nature. It is not a social covenant that protects your rights. It is about a govt protecting your body and your life. Not your rights. You fear govt because it has tremendous power but you are glad it does because it keeps everyone else in line and for yourself you know what to do. If you are a good person in the first place nothing is necessarily being taken away. Yes there is a sword over your head but it brings a situation you wanted anyway. Pg. 170 â€Å"liberty of the subject lies in the silence of the laws† In nature you had the right to anything as far as hobbes was concerned. By placing everybody’s rights in one central place you get back security. Law for hobbes is prohibition. Thou, shall, not kill steal etc†¦ Law and rights are opposite. The more rights you have the less law the more law the less rights. Punishments don’t need to be frequent and laws don’t need to be harsh. Whatever the leviathan does not prohibit you are as free as the state of nature to do what you want to do. The sovereign needs to equally enforce in fear the violation of the law across a wide range of territory. The sovereign does need to be absolute. Pg. 132 ch. 17 – If the sovereign is not absolute the problem is not solved. Without a unity of will the problem isn’t solved that’s why the sovereign needs to make all the laws. Also the sovereign needs to control all doctrines. Leviathan doesn’t care what you think or believe it only cares what you say because it gets them riled up and people think they know whats right which leads them to cause problems. Is it bad to have gov’t control whats printed and distributed? Hobbes thinks its better than civil war. Hobbes thought everyone who had experienced the terror of civil war and everyman against everyman would take the leviathan. The foundation of this is the fact that we all want to live. What threatens leviathan? Competition, diffidence and glory. Diffidence is hobbes word for distrust. Glory and what hobbes sometimes calls vain glory is different because it pertains to a different type of good. Some materially desires can be solved without much difficulty like air and water. If we all want land that is a bit of a problem. We can solve that problem with a law telling us what land we get. It is a clear solution it solves the problem if we have a sword that is good enough. Being famous, being important, being well known, being socially eminent and prominent. Those are things that cannot easily be settled by law. Although laws can help them. Land food water air can be distributed but winning cant be distributed. Only one person can win. Only one person can be prime minister etc†¦ Not everyone can be a movie star because if everyone was nobody would be. Most people are happy with air water and food and land but some people want to be special and these for hobbes are the most dangerous people because some want glory so bad they will risk their lives for it. Some people want what they want even to the point of death. Antigone is someone who cares about something to the point where she is willing to give up her life for it. The antigones to hobbes are the most dangerous people. They are dangerous and make all of us insecure because the point of his threat was not to induce the fear in the law abiding person but to get you to understand everyone else in the state will abide and will be trustworthy. If the threat is not going to deter all then the system is going to break down. That’s what Hobbes thought happened in the English civil war about religion. Leviathan is a plea for rationality. The rational caculation to value your own life above all other things. There is no natural cure for nature. Letting people do their own thing will not turn into some spontaneous social agreement mostly because they cannot trust each other even if it is in both of their interest to do so. A common fear is a sharing experience. You also experience ruling and being ruled at the same time. There is also a sense that the sovereign is all of us. (a bunch of little bodies that make up the leviathan) Hobbes is serious when he says it is a unity. Yes you give up in your rights to the sovereign but you also partake in the sovereign. The sovereign did not exist until you and I agree to give in and make it so. The body of the sovereign is our collective bodies. For hobbes our bodies are what we have in common. We are free to disagree about everything so long as we don’t have a single person to speak for us. The sword is a dictionary or a set of meanings that are legal and illegal not right and wrong. The sword hangs over our head but in our hand we get a dictionary which tells us whit is legal and illegal. Leviathan is also a solution to the moral and linguistic chaos in the state of nature where we don’t agree on anything We can also have freedom and liberty as hobbes understands these terms. Not rights. Rights are what you have to give up to have the practice and experience of liberty. Febraury 19th, 2014 ROUSSEAU – THE SOCIAL CONTRACT Often appointed to a reason for the French Revolution. Pg. 53 on slavery- We are not going to look anymore at gov’t nature but we are going to assume all people are equal in nature. Force can create something but it cant create anything right. If there is going to be something in charge it has to be a covenant. (similar to Hobbes) Gov’t remains with ROUSSEAU something artificial. Rosseau hates hobbes and Aristotle because they are theorists of slavery. Rosseau says there cannot be any such thing as legitimate slavery. If politics isn’t going to have a moral function for Rosseau than it isn’t worth talking or arguing about. Aristotle theorized a natural slavery but for rosseau hobbes theorized an artificial slavery. Slavery under the sovereign. Rosseau says human beings would never consent to slavery by contract. Government has to be by consent and government has to n some sense respect the equality of every person. How to we avoid Hobbes problem of individuals having problems with everyone? Rosseau is not interested in devising a science of politics. Rosseau resembles plato because he wants to work directly in the language of reason. The book is full of historical examples. Comparative lessons on political institutions that have worked in the past. Human beings have a special moral capacity which is another reason why slavery is intolerable to him. HOW IS ROSSEAU GOING TO CREATE A SOCIAL CONTRACT THAT IS MORAL AND IS BASED ON CONSENT? Pg. 60 – if each of us takes individual rights against the state then we will end up back in a state of nature. Rosseau says the only thing that can work is the total alienation of every individual. The alienation of ones rights to the whole community. Hobbes said one gave himself to one man or an assembly of men. A contract that is completely neutral. We are all equal before and after but the nature of our equality has changed. After we are equal beings in this community or new being and we all remain as equal as we are before. The difficulty with this is how does anyone decide what to do. We haven’t solved the problem of how we decide. Pg. 69- beginning of book 2 – If we are going to give everything up to the community rosseau thinks there must be a reason to do it. â€Å"common interest† or the general will. It is not just a series of desires that we happen to share. When there is no love there is no family. Love sustains a family. Even though ‘families’ go through the motions and confide with legal forms there is no love so there is a difference. The general will is to the state what love is to the family. The animating spirit that sustains it and creates and and without it there can be no such thing as a state. Being a member of a family doesn’t mean you don’t have your own opinions or interests that may conflict with other members of the family. But being members with a real loving family there is a time you set those interests and opinions to one side because you care about the fundamental well being of the others in your family so you set those things aside. The development of your reason and your realization of your common interest go together naturally as proto human animals what you lack is not a set of interest but a rational capacity to understand the overlap of your interest with everybody else’s. Our interest don’t change but we realize those interests can be realized beter collectively than they can be singly. The general will exists so long as we continue to believe and support and develop these common interests in the same way the family continues to exist as they believe and support and develop the common view of that family. When you think you are better off without another person it is over even if you go through the motions for a decade after this thought. (likewise for rosseau with a state if we are not committed to them it will not exist even if there is parliament it will be an empty form with no general will. ) Standing behind the social contract is an animated spirit that makes the contract possible but it is only possible for a human being. Animals cannot share in a general will because they don’t have language and cannot reason together. The general will is meant to be at one in the same time a product of reason and a product of some kind of spirit. You cant see it like love in a family you just kind of know that it is there. Rosseau tended to idealize smaller communities. This kind of political community he is proposing is not well suiting for larger states. Rosseau thinks this is what it takes to actually have a state in which people remain free. You do what you need to do because you are happy to be a member of that organization. No one is holding a gun to your head. Even if you are not thrilled to perform the task when you want to do it you understand the non-performance would be letting down your fellows in the community and you don’t want tthat to happen because you value the community and the members in that community. All of us have some communities in which we are willingly apart. The only way a community of equals can be governed is if it is governed by the general will. It will be governed by voting by a community that rosseau imagines. It is very different from majority rule. There is in rosseaus republic majority decision making but not majority rule. The point of the assembly is to discover what the general will is to rosseau. You agree to be bound by the majority because it is the only practical decision role. You go along with the decision of the majority because you think they share the same interest of the common good. When you lose that feeling that you are all there for the common purpose then the state is gone and then you don’t have a good reason to go along with the majority anymore. The shared purpose is gone and you are back to the state of nature where shared individuals have nothing in common. States can fall apart because people don’t have common interest they can also fall apart because there is not constant interaction. Liberty is what you get when you have the general will in place. The general will is not the same thing as love or patriotism but it is similar to it. The spirit that animates you as you act as a citizen as oppose to a private individual.