I find social contract theory inane.
This is the theory by which Elizabeth Warren and, more recently, President Obama, have used to justify saying that although entrepreneurs do some good work, they could not have done it without the help of government (i.e., teachers, roads, bridges, the Internet, et al.)
However, I will grant it as viable for the sake of a few arguments.
First, we need to stop conflating the idea of society and government. Government is NOT the fulfillment of society, it is a means to secure the individual rights of people, not to protect the people themselves. The purpose of government to me is clear, “and to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men.” Notice it is not, “and to secure men, governments grant them certain rights.”
Should society care for its poor? A wholehearted, "Yes!"
Should it be the job of government to enforce it? A resounding, "No!"
Second, where did the money come from to produce the schools, roads, bridges, and the Internet in the first place? The answer is of course, from the people who created before us and paid taxes to the government to fund it.
To listen to Warren and the President you would think government created all these things out of nothing by its sheer brilliance and altruism.
Third, I find it intriguing that the arguments of EW and BHO mention only a fairly limited government. If only, government were limited to roads, bridges and schools! In addition, with the exception of the Internet, there is little justification for the federal government to be involved in any of these concerns as they would better be served under local control.
Even granting social contract theory as true, the arguments for it are weak.