Economic Growth
in the
United States
Economic growth can be defined as increases in per capita real GDP (gross domestic product) measured by its rate of change per year. Growth rates are very important because even a small change can make vast difference in the coming years. The knowledge of economic growth is also important because it can provide the means to allow us to gain valuable insights. According to Robert D. McTeer, president and chief executive officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, two factors determine the rate of economic growth: productivity increases (more output for the same amount of inputs), and labor (the number of hours worked).
Productivity in the United States, due to new innovations (that are coming together after years of investment), is growing to levels not seen since the 1960’s. For example: productivity growth has averaged 2.3 percent from 1996 to 1999, doubling the 1.1 percent average productivity growth from 1973 to 1995. At a rate of two percent from 1996 to 1999, labor has also increased, as unemployment fell and welfare recipients have gone to work. The economy has been growing at a rate of about 4.5 percent each year, due to this.
However, the increase in the workforce , or hours worked, limits labor growth. Again, according to McTeer, in the long run, productivity growth is the key to rising living standards.
On another note, there are many benefits that go along with the economic expansion we are experiencing. The current economic expansion has commonly been referred to by economists as "The 1990’s Economic Boom", because the current growth of the U.S. economy is the longest ever in peacetime. Economists observe that this expansion has benefited nearly every American. According to the reports of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, more than three out of every four jobs created from 1989 to 1995 were highly-paid professionals and managerial positions. The Council of Economic Advisers reported that in 1995 and 1996, more than half of new jobs created were in fields where the average wage ranked in the top third of all salaries. Another great benefit according to the Investor’s Business Daily January 19, 1999 publication, is that 1.67 million families left welfare rolls, and 1.74 million more single parents found jobs.
Though this economic expansion has been the longest since World War II (according to the New York Times, October 18, 1998), growth during the 1990’s has been weaker than during any growth cycle since the end of the war.
In the state of nature, equality creates a state of war amongst men. Hobbes’ believes that the cause of the state of war is the nature of man, perfect equality and self-preservation. The idea self-preservation in Hobbes’ state of nature consents to man to harming one another in the name of survival, because it is also in man’s nature. The definition of self-preservation and survival is different for each individual. No man in the state of nature has the authority to judge or question any individual’s acti...
of U.S. workers employed in manufacturing has dropped from 16.5% in 1987 to 10.8% today.
At the core of their theories, both Locke and Rousseau seek to explain the origin of civil society, and from there to critique it, and similarly both theorists begin with conceptions of a state of nature: a human existence predating civil society in which the individual does not find institutions or laws to guide or control one’s behaviour. Although both theorists begin with a state of nature, they do not both begin with the same one. The Lockean state of nature is populated by individuals with fully developed capacities for reason. Further, these individuals possess perfect freedom and equality, which Locke intends as granted by God. They go about their business rationally, acquiring possessions and appropriating property, but they soon realize the vulnerability of their person and property without any codified means to ensure their security...
Bone tissue engineering (BTE) plays an important role in treating bone diseases related to osteoporosis and other orthopedic treatments. Although several methods are used in orthopedic surgery, some bone transport methods such as autografting and allografting have a certain number of disadvantages. Both are expensive methods and they can be exposed to infections and diseases. Therefore, in stead of using these potential risky methods, bone tissue engineering process are used to treat in orthopedic treatments. In general, both tissue engineering and bone tissue engineering have major constituents including stem cells, scaffold, bioreactors and growth factors.
According to the Forbes article, America depends on economic expansion and an increase in population. Both are factors to how we are able to sustain the economy
John Locke and Jean Jacques Rousseau, following their predecessor Thomas Hobbes, both attempt to explain the development and dissolution of society and government. They begin, as Hobbes did, by defining the “state of nature”—a time before man found rational thought. In the Second Treatise[1] and the Discourse on Inequality[2], Locke and Rousseau, respectively, put forward very interesting and different accounts of the state of nature and the evolution of man, but the most astonishing difference between the two is their conceptions of property. Both correctly recognize the origin of property to be grounded in man’s natural desire to improve his life, but they differ in their description of the result of such a desire. Locke sees the need and purpose of society to protect property as something sacred to mankind, while Rousseau sees property as the cause of the corruption and eventual downfall of society. Although Rousseau raises interesting and applicable observations, Locke’s argument triumphs because he successfully shows the positive and essential effect of property on man.
Both Hobbes and Rousseau have different even opposing views on the topic of the natural state of man. These views play a major role on their beliefs and reasoning for why man needs society and government. These beliefs can be easily summarized with Hobbes believing in an inherent selfishness and competition in man, whereas Rousseau’s views on things is far more positive, believing that man is far happier in his natural state, and the root of his corruption is the result of his entrance into society. Rousseau’s theory is based on a state prior to the formation of society and any form of government. Thomas Hobbes, the founding father of political philosophy and who was in great opposition to the natural state of man, emphasizes that all people are selfish and evil; the lack of governmental structure is what results in a state of chaos, only to be resolved by an authority figure. Hobbes’s initial argument of natural state, in human nature, proves how society is in a constant state of destruction, mentally and physically, if not under controlled or command. Although Hobbes’s opinion was morally correct, Rousseau believes that all people are born in a state of emptiness, somewhat of a blank state and it is life experiences that determine their nature, society being a major driving force for people’s ill-will and lack of moral sensibilities. Hobbes, overall, is proven correct because all people need to be directed in order for society to properly function.
It was said that once-in-a-century advances in technology are transforming our economy. The computer chip is doing for today's knowledge economy what electricity did for our industrial economy a century ago. Synergies in technology are driving acceleration in productivity growth that enables us to grow faster with less inflation. Economic progress is speeding up; the speed limit is rising. “Real GDP growth has averaged 4 percent for the past four years, with declining inflation. This almost doubles the 2 percent to 2.5 percent not long ago considered the maximum noninflationary potential. But we've been growing faster than potential and sustaining the unsustainable for four years and counting. Sounds odd, doesn't it? Our faster output growth is based primarily on faster productivity growth and secondarily on faster labor force growth”. Productivity growth now appears to be at least 2.5 percent and rising. An increase from 1 percent to 2.5 percent is an increase of 150 percent, a huge jump with profound implications if sustained. Last year was encouraging. Productivity raised over 3 percent for the year and over 5 percent in the second half. It was said that the United States entered the 21st century with its economy on a roll. GDP growth averaged more than 3 percent a year in the 1990s. The country created 17 million jobs, driving unemployment down to a 30-year low of 4.1 percent. In the 1999-2000 the economy wasn’t doing so bad the unemployment rate was down, there were more jobs available, and production was doing well. When 2001 stated and even before then the economy was going down, many people were being laid off and so on. Then it happened the September 11th attack on the US, this attack has left the
Hobbes’ Leviathan and Locke’s Second Treatise of Government comprise critical works in the lexicon of political science theory. Both works expound on the origins and purpose of civil society and government. Hobbes’ and Locke’s writings center on the definition of the “state of nature” and the best means by which a society develops a systemic format from this beginning. The authors hold opposing views as to how man fits into the state of nature and the means by which a government should be formed and what type of government constitutes the best. This difference arises from different conceptions about human nature and “the state of nature”, a condition in which the human race finds itself prior to uniting into civil society. Hobbes’ Leviathan goes on to propose a system of power that rests with an absolute or omnipotent sovereign, while Locke, in his Treatise, provides for a government responsible to its citizenry with limitations on the ruler’s powers.
Even Hines acknowledges that “there was plenty of ‘em that didn’t fare as we did.” (Hines) Furthermore, she touches on this when she recalls how other white people refer to Pressman as a “nigger lover” (Hines). Hines views him more as a leader than an owner. From a slave 's perspective, 'owner ' has an extremely negative connotation. Slaves usually fear their masters and overseers; they do not love and respect their master like Hines loves and respects Pressman. This is because she views him as a leader, a man worthy of admiration. Throughout the interview, Hines shows respect to Pressman by referring to him as Master, which she uses almost like an intimate family name. She could just as easily have referred to him as Master Pressman, Master James, or just master. However, her choice of capitalization clearly shows the great amount of respect she has for him. Legally he does own her, but she believes that there is more to their relationship aside from ownership. In a way, he is a part of her family; he is the patriarchal figure of her overarching plantation
The opening line of Jean-Jacques Rousseau's influential work 'The Social Contract' (1762), is 'man is born free, and he is everywhere in chains. Those who think themselves masters of others are indeed greater slaves than they'. These are not physical chains, but psychological and means that all men are constraints of the laws they are subjected to, and that they are forced into a false liberty, irrespective of class. This goes against Rousseau's theory of general will which is at the heart of his philosophy. In his Social Contract, Rousseau describes the transition from a state of of nature, where men are naturally free, to a state where they have to relinquish their naturalistic freedom. In this state, and by giving up their natural rights, individuals communise their rights to a state or body politic. Rousseau thinks by entering this social contract, where individuals unite their power and freedom, they can then gain civic freedom which enables them to remain free as the were before. In this essay, I will endeavour to provide arguments and examples to conclude if Rousseau provides a viable solution to what he calls the 'fundamental problem' posed in the essay title.
...ons on what kind of government should prevail within a society in order for it to function properly. Each dismissed the divine right theory and needed to start from a clean slate. The two authors agree that before men came to govern themselves, they all existed in a state of nature, which lacked society and structure. In addition, the two political philosophers developed differing versions of the social contract. In Hobbes’ system, the people did little more than choose who would have absolute rule over them. This is a system that can only be derived from a place where no system exists at all. It is the lesser of two evils. People under this state have no participation in the decision making process, only to obey what is decided. While not perfect, the Rousseau state allows for the people under the state to participate in the decision making process. Rousseau’s idea of government is more of a utopian idea and not really executable in the real world. Neither state, however, describes what a government or sovereign should expect from its citizens or members, but both agree on the notion that certain freedoms must be surrendered in order to improve the way of life for all humankind.
Rousseau presumes that in the beginning, humans were living in a peaceful state of nature and lived in equality, but as civilization progressed it began to change man as challenges became more elaborate, lives became more complicated, development of the possession of property began, and habitually more comparisons were made amongst us. The first law of nature also contributed to our sense of ownership. The first law of nature recognized by Rousseau is self-preservation; we care about ourselves then society and this law is used to defend or prove our own independence. As a result or this change of civility, we shifted to a state of nature that was far from grace, where we desired the suffering of others, only cared about ourselves, and developed the meaning of inequalities. People realized that their natural rights could no longer coexist with their freedom in the state of nature and also that they would perish if they did not leave the state of nature. Therefore, the state of nature no longer became desirable and society restored that motive; in this new societal environment we develop morals to handle conflicts and help preserve ourselves. Locke believes that while in our natural state we all have morals, though Rousseau challenges that belief by claiming that society generates a moral character within us. Rousseau insists that everyone can be free and live
The current state of the economy in the United States has been slow in recent months. While the economy is not currently in a recession, we may eventually fall victim to the first recession we’ve had in nearly ten years. The economy in general is showing growth, just not much. It will be difficult to predict what exactly will happen to the US economy in the future. Many economists do not agree on what will become of the economy. Some feel that we will begin a recession over the next year, and some feel that there is significant policy implementation that will allow us to dodge a recession and regain our economic strength. There are many factors that make up the US economy. The means in which I will discuss the overall growth and current status of the economy is by analyzing the Gross Domestic Product, and discuss the factors that cause it to rise and fall.
When Jean Jacques Rousseau wrote the Social Contract, the concepts of liberty and freedom were not new ideas. Many political theorists such as Thomas Hobbes and John Locke had already developed their own interpretations of liberty, and in fact Locke had already published his views on the social contract. What Rousseau did was to revolutionize the concepts encompassed by such weighty words, and introduce us to another approach to the social contract dilemma. What would bring man to leave the state of nature, and enter into an organized society? Liberals believed it was the guarantee of protection - liberty to them signified being free from harm towards one’s property. Rousseau’s notion of freedom was completely different than that of traditional liberals. To him, liberty meant a voice, and participation. It wasn’t enough to be simply protected under the shield of a sovereign, Rousseau believed that to elevate ourselves out of the state of nature, man must participate in the process of being the sovereign that provided the protection. The differences between Rousseau’s theories and those of the liberals of his time, begin with different interpretations of the state of nature. Thomas Hobbes described the state of nature as an unsafe place, where the threat of harm to one’s property was always present. He felt that man could have no liberty in such a setting, as fear of persecution and enslavement would control his every action. From this dismal setting, Hobbes proposed that man would necessarily rise and enter into a social contract.