The United States Constitution with Amendments [Foundation]: A Moral Reflection of Evolved American Values

Constitutional development was a result of competing ideas on societal governance related to group or “family” differences of cultural traditions. The basis of the Constitution recognizes the relative importance of religious beliefs and various interpretations. To accommodate differing perspectives and remain consistent with the duty of societal governance, the document emphasized the protective liberties and rights of every person within the U.S. authority; including flexibility of the people to live according to these belief systems without violating individual/personal rights and related freedoms of choice. These initial recognitions were based upon religious moral foundation recognition of all Human Value existing within humanity since Earth’s creation.

Freedoms and choice recognition established within the legal and social design creates the adaptability within societal governance for a coexisting population. However, maintaining respect for individual human rights free from exploitation is a requirement. These include the right to choose a relationship partner irrespective of ethnicity and relationship commitment procreation decision rights anywhere in United States of America. Humankind manipulations that violate rights [human simulation] to alter development determinations inconsistent with this legal rule basis of society should be considered illegal acts and crimes against humanity.

Evidence of these intended protective rights and liberties are evidenced in the created organizational systems structure of governance: Executive, Legislative, and Judicial government segments; Individual rights and human protections; Religious independence recognized in separation of church and state; Federal and State legal systems with Appellate system processes as a balanced check against bias and concentrated power/loyalty/”family” authority rule; historical economic industry development and regulatory legislation. 

Related?? - Fallible Individual Religious Design and Human Genetic Testing

In which dictionary is the "Family Values" definition? Social policy? Control? 

Which is more important: What you can physically see or what you cannot physically see? Do understanding the human genome and the ability to manipulate coincide with Acts of God?

National Institute of Health, Deoxyribonucleic [genetic/genealogy science], ["creation"? reproduction?]

Definition:

or·ches·trate -(v) 

To arrange or manipulate, esp. by means of clever or thorough planning or maneuvering.

also re: Coordinated Events Theory, Events Theory Participants, Alabama Files II, The System of Controls?

Personal Evidentiary Theory, Part I

“Family Values?” v. current (evolved) Constitutional Individual Rights, Protections, & Freedoms

The historical lessons taught to most Americans briefly focuses on early Egyptian, Greco-Roman, and European civilizations. Emphasis is placed on American history relative to the struggle for independence from the British Empire and some historical relationship of European exploration of the Americas. Unless students pursue the history in college courses or independently, little is known of the connections and evolutions among civilizations and will not notice the relevance to current life influence and experience. We marvel at the global cultural architecture and wonders of the world and should see the relevance to early American formation and development.

In earlier blog posts, I have referred to the records of early human civilizations; human and cultural evolution; and the concept of universal rights of man and existence (not a universal legal order counter to sovereignty and rights of humanity) applicable to religion, specifically Christianity. Following the historically taught paths of earthly civilizations, influence is evident in building designs;  organized municipal layouts; fraternal religious and social organizations; and disputable evolutionary paths of humanity learned from biological technology developments (DNA).  This combination of factors reveals the real commonality of humanity and the inter-relationships of many ethnicities. Also revealed is the strategic economic impact of the cumulative human racial - religious identity system for advantage. A system culminating into an American enterprise strategy used until after the major Wars. Although the country experienced many years of economic and social progress, the effect of such a system created alternative strategies relative to the values in the Declaration of Independence, the current US Constitution, and American civil laws elevating social formation of a “family values” ideology.

The definitions of family can be tailored for broad or narrow application as evident in the multiple defined listings and will reveal to some extent group social objective(s). I have been educated around various ethnic groups different than myself [Latino, Black, multi-ethnic, & White] most of my life and have been comfortable learning cultures, networking and socializing with the groups. I would also be comfortable welcoming into my definition of family. Conceptually, “family values” political strategies promote historical southern traditions built around segmented societies to preserve influence relative to concentrated resource accumulation. It fails to recognize the beneficial impact of the expanded economy upon accepted incorporation of expanded citizen civil rights legislation. The impact was an increased consumer base for the importantly recognized “small business” economic development contributions.  Aside from legal considerations, the “family” definition can limit participation and benefits. Particularly troubling with this ideological adoption is the limited distribution of acquired resources based upon global contributions. The “Family Values” recognition would now discount these contributions with exclusionary practices. Society and its current structure are based upon inclusive citizenship contribution with protections provided by legal rights reinforced and supported by the Central Government. If “family values” leaders were the principal regulators of morality, behavior, and rewards, would the judgments for all citizens reflect a consistent application? Compensation and  punitive actions for violation of individual (human) rights by seen and unseen “families” using systematic deception in an attempt to create obligation and increase the “family”? Would it recognize variability in individual understanding of the teachings of Jesus, or God of worship? “Family Values” conflict with the law and individual rights in a Constitutional Democracy.

Science has provided knowledge of human commonality although a cursory analysis of the US social structure reflects the historical past of attempted integration of separate design. Religious institutions mostly organized under the recognition of Christianity with exceptions of varying traditional philosophies created through evolved belief systems. This structure further incorporates “fraternal” organizations built around the historical commonality of beliefs and developed leadership structures of the Order concept. Application of the Order conceptual psychology is evident in municipal design layouts and also reflects the structured logic of mathematics and scientific advancements. Fraternal organizations and “family values” adoption follows this pattern without recognition of the various human personalities similarly identified in the work of Briggs, Myers, and other psychologists. The strict and literal application of the Order definition related to hierarchal ranking (particularly one based upon race) does not reflect the variety of human perspectives and personalities. Furthermore, this type of application limits personal contributions, the potential economic return on abilities, legal and social protections, and freedoms. What would a literal interpretation of human and humankind [man and mankind] reveal?

Given this brief elaboration of the “family values” and Order impacts, the appearance of unconstitutionality is evident unless individually accepted without deception of obligations and conditions. Notwithstanding is the political Oath of office upon election which requires the affirmation and support of the Constitutional basis establishing freedoms, protections, and rights of humanity. This acceptance is of such importance that it is a required incorporation of the US education system and immigrant newcomers are required to learn it as part of the naturalization process to citizenship. The Order definition people identify when using the term is to follow the accepted and system approved laws. Appropriate complexity is incurred with the levels of legal authority given the system of Federal, State, and Municipal laws and ordinances.

 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Supplemental Document update][8/2014]

Corporations and Social Value

 

Social Value - Larger concept which includes social capital as well as the subjective aspects of the citizens' well-being, such as their ability to participate in making decisions that affect them.

 

Governments around the globe have multiple performance measures employed to monitor and manage society for peaceful, stable and progressive improvement. Corporations are entities used for the efficient employment of resources in addition to government efforts. At one time, natural resources were thought to be public property of the “state” and access sold to individuals or groups of individuals who would best utilize the resources for the benefit of the society by providing adequate return of investments. Risk of loss has always been part of the assessment and contributed to the creation and development of the insurance industry. Assessments include but are not limited to the best utilization of human capital (education & employment); purpose and uses of the identified natural resources; economic development of the society in which the enterprise would operate to convert the natural resource. Other areas for consideration include government regulatory and safety concerns. However, I will not focus on these in lieu of a larger point to be made.

Expanding economic activity can lead social development around bonded communities requiring greater inclusion for successful, diversified, and balanced growth. Much effort was provided by government actions through laws and customs (old and new) to counter corporate self-interested, monopolistic control. The mechanism used to counter these actions was the creation of increased competition. Early U.S. economic competition was more direct by definition after Theodore Roosevelt’s anti-trust legislative initiatives. Increased competition introduced more product differentiation, greater technical product utility, and created new services which extended industries.Wikipedia definition:

Competition in economics is a term that encompasses the notion of individuals and firms striving for a greater share of a market to sell or buy goods and services. Merriam-Webster defines competition in business as "the effort of two or more parties acting independently to secure the business of a third party by offering the most favorable terms."^[1] Competition, according to the theory, causes commercial firms to develop new products, services and technologies, which would give consumers greater selection and better products. The greater selection typically causes lower prices for the products, compared to what the price would be if there was no competition (monopoly) or little competition (oligopoly).

The increased competitive environment required more corporate efficiency due to the limitations on pricing power with lower market share and greater product alternatives. The efficiency focus can also be extended to human capital and requires corporate leadership to emphasize the resource values of the corporation. Natural resource material requirements are easily identified and pricing controlled within a specified range of competitive demand. However, the extension and growth of the corporation and industry is the result of investment in human capital and social collaboration (skills, education, leadership training, knowledge sharing, & shared responsibility) to create new ideas, products, uses, and other related opportunities. Such requirements make valuation of the (human capital) resource more difficult because usually it is the created environment that produces and develops the creativity. Your employees are the consumer market of other industries, if not your own. Cost cutting efforts among the human capital to achieve increasing profitability disrupt the environment by reducing longer-term future value in exchange for increased administrative productivity gains and short-term profitability. However, from a social perspective the lower profitability is acceptable compared to higher unemployment and lower levels of skill development. Capitalistic principles of obsolescence work when there is continuing investment and development of technologies creating new opportunities. So, what is expected from a “public” company? How does society balance between the emphasis of the two interests (public investment and private returns)?

The American system was designed to allow entrepreneurial access to capital that would expand an opportunity to effectively employ capital for increased productivity and profitability by matching private interest with public resources. Under these terms, are the investors in mutual funds and savings instruments receiving enough compensation for the successful business endeavors and economic expansion relative to money managers (salary and bonus) and entrepreneurs / primary shareholders (business controlling interest)? Granted the business owner created the business and also received in many cases 500 to 1,000 times the initial investment leveraging the use of public money. The original savers through pensions, mutual funds, and other bank deposit instruments receive returns anywhere from 5% to 500% (.05 to 5 times investment) which effectively transfers public money into private profits and bonuses. This scenario is even more pronounced within hedge fund activity where the greater returns are accumulated by the financial institutions over business owners and stakeholders. I do not disparage the capitalist system; let’s just accurately identify what is taking place. Where exactly is the risk of economic loss in the system relative to the individual returns? Should economic risk and computerized financial system risk be compensated similarly? Is the risk in the stock market pricing and valuation techniques or with the actual longer term company performance?

The American government has always taken a varied clandestine and active participant role in businesses and industries deemed vital to the nation’s security interest (i.e. petroleum and computing technologies/internet). The largest financial market in the world is not and should not be an exception. The refocus on investment, productive uses of funds, and proper identification of risk and related return is a good thing for the American society and the global leadership influence.

Lineage and Cultural Diversity

There is grand diversity in American history including Black American history other than Africa. Take a look at my maternal genetic lines. It has a connection to the American ethnic (race) perspective that does not get highlighted in discussions. If you think about how the American culture considers race and ethnicity it mirrors the business marketing relative to product identification. Simple messaging to convey a targeted and directed idea. Not all issues are resolved with simple reasoning. Complexity requires deep, considerable multi-variant thought and the answers are not simple (simple=meaning one certain or separate outcome). Embrace the human Diversity!

Do not use or manipulate photos without authorization! There will be no authorization!

Free Choice, Commitment, and Due Process

In a free democratic society, individuals have rights guaranteed by law along with their preferred religious practices governing how people live their lives. Much is made in America regarding race and relationships and it gets a great deal of attention. So much that fraternal agreements and understandings regulate initiation rituals to reinforce separation. During the creation of American society, recognition of some humans as property was allowed and through enlightenment and years of legal evolution the framework was amended to grant freedoms to all. Given this development, how could any ethnic group claim ownership or violation of property rights with an interracial relationship? Even further to the point within a given racial or ethnic group? Not even the heavily referred Bible recognizes adultery without a prior marriage commitment. Neither the constitution nor the Bible identifies these relations as violating the law. Any attempts to carry out punishment or restriction are themselves liable improper judgments. Trying to keep separate 300 million people is just not practical nor socially & economically desirable. Neither is the idea of genetically re-engineering an American Black race.

My experience has revealed that the admittance of liability or wrongdoing is very hard to achieve from some groups or people. Primarily, the accused or guilty party tries to mitigate the financial punishment for such actions without establishing a legal precedent. Regarding relationships, I look for compatible personalities, matching of values and goals, and partnership more than I do race or ethnicity. I do not regard matching within your own ethnicity nor pre-arranged relationships as a personal responsibility which contradicts the values I embrace as American. History is important but not determinant. There are many groups in society that make “racial solidarity” their cause and path toward success. However, separation solidarity is neither the American history lesson nor the direction of a progressing democratic society. Choices are made when people are comfortable understanding the agreement with some future predictability of the outcome. There are common interests within ethnic groups and they do not limit choices and freedoms. Community commitment and free choice are not mutually exclusive ideals.

The use of fraternal, religious organizations to create career liabilities and family hardships for anyone that does not conform to someone’s ethnic definition is a liability increasing social costs burdening the state. It limits earning potential (tax revenues to government), committed family development, and reinforces ethnic stereotypes. An even greater threat to the democracy is the delay of due process to protect the organized, fraternal violations of law in an attempt to replace with a subjugated group belonging. So, does the American democratic experiment continue to grow or do we fall victim to the separate, (prophetic) group commitments creating its own rules difficult to globally enforce and adjudicate within the legal system of equal justice?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
update: December 2013

Assets and Values

Governments and Corporations have as an objective to increase asset value to benefit stakeholders working to nurture and create future value and performance. The U.S. Constitution with Amendments set forth that the value to the country is its free citizens. The document identifies managing principles of citizens’ freedoms, rights, and protections. This recognition created the foundational understanding for the Separation of Church and State, Civil Rights, public education, Medicare/Medicaid, and now Healthcare. It also provided the way for infrastructure investment beneficial to all without regard to means. The importance of Separation of Church and State is evident in the current financial crisis as explained by the founders: Religious freedom to practice and prevention of corruption of the Church; and protection against discriminatory influences on the State. Current public furor would be directed at the Church if it was responsible for financial legislation and deregulation of controls that protect savings and retirement funds at the expense of executive bonuses.

This original structure has come to provide a base level of subsistence for American life and a high level of economic productivity, as measured by GDP, with comparatively broader levels of earnings distribution. However, what still exists are the varying levels of importance and priority placed upon input capital and resources (assets) that are deterministic of individual economic outcomes. The emphasis upon “tribes” and fraternal affiliations (social and religious) establishes informal groupthink criterion of morality and loyalty tests in order to access capitalistic factors of enterprise. In reality, native tribes were more integrated than presently credited. These exclusionary practices not only limit economic production for competitive protective purposes, but they are also destructive to social values increasing the burden on the state to provide benefits for the maintenance of a harmonious society (limiting crime, unemployment, and human exploitation). Moreover, the practices directly contradict the individual - conservative “boot-strap” ideology and substitute control through “social” organizations. As a youth in Alabama from Massachusetts, the systematic separation was apparent even after the days of George C. Wallace’s political grandstanding. Violations [interracial or non-traditional relationships] meant limited access with exceptions only to the extent of religious affiliation. The order was maintained by both Black and White racial groups further revealed in conversational dialogue of the Black American community regarding an unofficial “oppression grading” by skin tone to psychologically justify success through “family” (race) commitment [unconstitutional Southern moral code violating civil rights]. Moral liability (real or fabricated) has been historically used for leverage to maintain systemic order and control of capital at a high social cost (inequality) for progressive economic advancement of a UNITED humanity, society, and Country.

The individual – conservative identification is an observational label personally used to create an understanding of the Religion and Preferences for Social Insurance graphic presentation in my Social Spending and GDP blog post. To better understand and interpret the graphic data, I applied quadrants to the Least Squared Sum regression describing the relationship by country between Social Spending in % GDP and the average reported importance of God in a person’s life. The quadrants were identified by a personal definition of two distinguishing factors of varying adaptability: (1) governing philosophy related to rights and benefits of its citizens [Social or Individual]. Social meaning a shared responsibility of community to ensure care for the human condition; and, (2) the religious perspective of the society and its belief of impact on daily life [Conservative or Liberal]. The countries were further listed by quadrant and respective economic performance compared. It is important to note that the countries of comparison are primarily of Europe and European origin (includes U.S., Australia, & Canada) plus Japan.

Comparing the Per Capita GDP of the countries without the benefit of statistical testing to measure and control the factors of country size (geographic and population), natural resources, and location, the United States is a leader in economic production and greatly influences results. Luxembourg and Norway have greater per capita GDPs, but are too small in size and population to have much influence. It is only because of the United States that the Individual-conservative governing ideology leads in productivity. When the U.S. is excluded, not much difference is reflected in the productivity of the personally defined governing ideologies. But, the Social and Liberal economies are slightly better performing. I want to reiterate that this is not a scientific study with rigorous testing. It is based upon observation and personal ordering to provide some understanding of the information and graphic presented in the Religion and Preferences for Social Insurance paper referenced in my Social Spending and GDP blog post.

The performance of the United States is reflective of the corporate focus, size advantage, and effective employment of resources. However, comparing the GDP to Per Capita Earnings reveals another aspect of U.S. capital management. Traditional factors of production include land, labor, and capital goods. Updates have added ecosystems with land, human capital (education & skills), and financial capital (money, equity). The income data reflects the beneficial impact of ownership (equity) in the corporate structure and disguises (at least until the financial crisis and high unemployment rates) the downside of placing a priority on maximizing one or two factors of production (return on capital and return on equity). Corporations have been focused like laser beams to reduce cost, improve profitability, and grow earnings. Social impacts are not included in any of these objectives and become an issue for the state and federal governments. Reducing taxes further increases the problem by limiting the ability of government to assist its citizens. A quick summary of the systemic problem provides the following: Corporations focused performance improvement on stockholders at the expense of all other stakeholders (employees, suppliers, communities, & government). To improve return to stockholders, costs throughout the supply chain have to be reduced. Labor must be more productive or found cheaper in a less restrictive environment which means layoffs and relocation of assembly operations. Suppliers reduce cost at the expense of profitability lessening their ability to invest in innovation which would also benefit the OEM. In addition to these actions, tax policy is attacked to lower rates which have no other purpose than to lower money provided to government entities and retain earnings within the corporate treasury.

This blog post may provide an opportunity for critique and claims of anti-business sentiments. However, I am a true capitalist that considers the long-term implications and sustainability of such a narrowly focused economic philosophy in light of the high-technology era of competitiveness we are entering. An example of this evolution is evident in the history of the television. The focus on financial capital (return to stockholders) and technical measures employed indicated that the solid state technology was declining in profitability. After all cost reduction attempts, profitability was difficult to maintain. Present Value analysis increased management pressure by indicating the sale of the business to maximize return of capital. Semiconductors, microchip, and nanotechnologies were not foreseen or were factored as risky incorporations too far in the future. Thus, technology is transferred to Asia; improved with chip technology and product expansion into flat screens, computer monitors, automobile GPS, and etc…. The point is that the social costs of business decisions should be incorporated into strategic, financial decision-making at some level within the organization.

Ultimately, the question will come down to if there is a God advantage to economic performance and social spending? I have a perspective, but will reserve the right to hold my opinion and leave the proposition unanswered for now.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GDP and Social Policy Graphic Analysis

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8-29-2013

Integrative Social and Economic Systems

Societal behavioral norms have been shaped over time through the civilization cycles. Early civilizations were not very sexually inhibitive as evidenced in the ancient artifacts currently displayed in museums around the world. In these early Egyptian, Greek, and Roman cultures women were expected to be dedicated to their husbands. While male sexual promiscuity was acceptable behavior resulting from dominance based upon physical strength and fighting abilities.

The evolution of democratic societies as currently reflected in the U.S. has given women equal rights as men. Advanced technologies and machinery have replaced the required “brute” physical strength to accomplish tasks and placed a premium on mental and intellectual abilities. Equal recognition of ability and responsibility has progressed and eventually equal opportunity and compensation will follow. Marriage is no less important to American values than any other culture. However, the arrangement is becoming as much an economic decision as one of moral expectation. The marriage commitment comes with an expectation consistent with the politically expressed American Dream of a house with backyard and kids. The conservative social structure I briefly identify in blog posts Judgments and Character and Gatekeepers and Modes of Incorporation attempt to maintain historical segments within the society. Just for the sake of declaration, I do not belong nor do I intend to become part of the socially promoted segmented fraternal structure (particularly, any supported by Southern influenced frat collaborations with other “family” values separatists). If the objective is to create and maintain stability in society through committed marital unions, then placing restrictive boundaries and conditional exclusions are not warranted. The segmented social philosophy is a remnant of the early civil rights’ struggles and creates current day relationship obstacles.

Slides:  Married Couples in United States 2006, Updated                          2008 Per Capita Mean Income Analysis (Race and Gender)

Comparatively, the U.S. economic system is a more dynamic, evolved, and inclusive environment with substantial measurements of integrated success. Capitalist markets operate on the assumption of capital allocated to its best and most productive usage with limited restrictions. The system allows capital to flow freely around the world through all cultures and communities to find the best match of opportunities and goals successfully uniting supply with demand. So, in a segmented social group where one gender outnumbers another (more supply over demand), what should happen with the excess “supply”? Could these imposed barriers be the cause of unwanted behaviors? When women outnumber men within a segment more time is spent “rent seeking” a partner and as competition increases within the segment, male promiscuity most likely increases.

The philosophical capitalist (free market) social model allows more freedom to cross boundaries for better balancing of match opportunities for stronger, intimate commitments. Adding to the issue of segmentation are the subjective individual moral behavior judgments affecting opportunities. The impacts are somewhat reflected in national employment rates and other factors further compounding imbalances. Removing social barriers (stigmas) and allowing a free, open market for marriage selection (true natural selection) could increase the desired goal believed to create a more stable society of commitment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[update August 2014]