Human Rights

[Cypress]

Every now and then I hear a Con claim that the United States does not recognize a right to health care, nor a right to a minimum level of economic security and justice (housing, social services, food, etc).

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United States and other member states of the United Nations, indicates otherwise:

Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 25.
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

 

[red states rule]

Every now and then I hear a Con claim that the United States does not recognize a right to health care, nor a right to a minimum level of economic security and justice (housing, social services, food, etc).

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United States and other member states of the United Nations, indicates otherwise:

It is not a RIGHT. It is something one has to go out and earn

I am fed up with libs wanting me to finance someones elses wants and desires

Libs has flushed $9 trillion down the toilet in social programs, and all they say is that more money is needed

 

[Topspin]

Cypress is morphing into Castro, he once worked for an oil company and is now guilt ridden by his enourmus wealth and is a card carrying limosine liberal.

 

[Battleborne]

And you....

Cypress is morphing into Castro, he once worked for an oil company and is now guilt ridden by his enourmus wealth and is a card carrying limosine liberal.

Are way too involved in the 'Bath Houses' of SF...get a grip dude...we are not all fools in the real world! Not that I agree with Cypress on very much..but hey Top...ya are over the edge!...sorry but real world experience tells me so..LOL

 

[red states rule]

Are way too involved in the 'Bath Houses' of SF...get a grip dude...we are not all fools in the real world! Not that I agree with Cypress on very much..but hey Top...ya are over the edge!...sorry but real world experience tells me so..LOL

It is unreal that after the libs have taken $9 trillion from the producers and gave it to the non producers - they say the need is still there and taxpayers need to fork more of their money over

$9 trillion has been spent on the libs War on Poverty - and like spoiled ball players they say they want more money

 

[uscitizen]

And bush has boosted the national debt by how many trillions ?

 

[red states rule]

And bush has boosted the national debt by how many trillions ?

It was Congress - the President cannot spend any taxpayer money

What libs hate to have out in the open is the Bush tax cuts have provided RECORD revenues to the government and the annual budget deficit has been shrinking for the last four years

Libs are scratching their pointy heads trying to understand how tax CUTS and INCREASE revenues

 

[AnyOldIron]

I am fed up with libs wanting me to finance someones elses wants and desires

Basic healthcare and other essential needs such as housing and enough food to survive aren't wants and desires, they are basic requirments of life.

If you insist on social freedoms such as property rights, it is hypocritical that you wouldn't apply social freedoms such as basic healthcare and essential needs.

 

[red states rule]

I am fed up with libs wanting me to finance someones elses wants and desires

Basic healthcare and other essential needs such as housing and enough food to survive aren't wants and desires, they are basic requirments of life.

If you insist on social freedoms such as property rights, it is hypocritical that you wouldn't apply social freedoms such as basic healthcare and essential needs.

Let them go EARN them

There has over $9 trillion in wealth transfers to save the poor, and it has only made the problem worse (according to the left)

 

[AnyOldIron]

Let them go EARN them

There has over $9 trillion in wealth transfers to save the poor, and it has only made the problem worse (according to the left)

Such social Darwinism only works if a. All men are born equal (which they aren't) and b. you don't mind existing in a society where poverty, disease etc are rife.

We had a similar social Darwinist approach in the UK prior to the creation of the welfare state and NHS. This lifted millions out of the cycle of poverty, disease, ill education etc.

Social welfare need not be uneffective. Consider the Nordic example, where welfare isn't used to create dependency but allows people to educate themselves and work out of poverty.

If you have a problem with the manner in which welfare is administered in the US, fair enough, but that doesn't negate the notion itself, any more than a botched military campaign negates the idea of having defence forces.

 

[red states rule]

Let them go EARN them

There has over $9 trillion in wealth transfers to save the poor, and it has only made the problem worse (according to the left)

Such social Darwinism only works if a. All men are born equal (which they aren't) and b. you don't mind existing in a society where poverty, disease etc are rife.

We had a similar social Darwinist approach in the UK prior to the creation of the welfare state and NHS. This lifted millions out of the cycle of poverty, disease, ill education etc.

Social welfare need not be uneffective. Consider the Nordic example, where welfare isn't used to create dependency but allows people to educate themselves and work out of poverty.

If you have a problem with the manner in which welfare is administered in the US, fair enough, but that doesn't negate the notion itself, any more than a botched military campaign negates the idea of having defence forces.

I find it funny when the left talks about poverty

Being poor in America is not that bad

Forty-six percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
Seventy-six percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)
Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars.
Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
Seventy-three percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg1713.cfm

 

[AnyOldIron]

Yeah, there is a difference between the poverty experienced in the US compared to those living, for example, in Africa.

But poverty is about the ability to survive day to day, not about whether you own a DVD or microwave, both of which can be purchased for about £20 ($40). What are the figures for those living hand to mouth in the US? Does poverty in the US have to drop to the level of Africa before it is something to be concerned with?

 

[red states rule]

Yeah, there is a difference between the poverty experienced in the US compared to those living, for example, in Africa.

But poverty is about the ability to survive day to day, not about whether you own a DVD or microwave, both of which can be purchased for about £20 ($40). What are the figures for those living hand to mouth in the US? Does poverty in the US have to drop to the level of Africa before it is something to be concerned with?

The "poor" have it pretty damn good in Amercia

If you want people out of "poverty" give them the help wanted ads

 

[AnyOldIron]

The "poor" have it pretty damn good in Amercia

If you want people out of "poverty" give them the help wanted ads

That might work if the great majority of manual jobs hadn't been moved to cheaper labour commodity sources. In this situation, a huge public spend on education is needed, to allow those stuck in the poverty cycle to educate themselves to take up the 'work smarter' positions that apparently we are told arrives to fill the gap of manual positions.

I work for the Department of Work and Pensions in the UK, and whilst there are a small number (and growing smaller) of people who refuse to work, the majority are stuck in traps of poor education, which bars them from many jobs. The traditional jobs taken by such people have either been outsourced overseas or have been taken at barely subsistance wages by influxes of cheap labour from Eastern Europe brought in by the flexibility of labour that capitalism demands.

Your solution is too simplistic, and assumes that it is laziness that brings about poverty, something demonstrated false in the Victorian era.

 

[red states rule]

The "poor" have it pretty damn good in Amercia

If you want people out of "poverty" give them the help wanted ads

That might work if the great majority of manual jobs hadn't been moved to cheaper labour commodity sources. In this situation, a huge public spend on education is needed, to allow those stuck in the poverty cycle to educate themselves to take up the 'work smarter' positions that apparently we are told arrives to fill the gap of manual positions.

I work for the Department of Work and Pensions in the UK, and whilst there are a small number (and growing smaller) of people who refuse to work, the majority are stuck in traps of poor education, which bars them from many jobs. The traditional jobs taken by such people have either been outsourced overseas or have been taken at barely subsistance wages by influxes of cheap labour from Eastern Europe brought in by the flexibility of labour that capitalism demands.

Your solution is too simplistic, and assumes that it is laziness that brings about poverty, something demonstrated false in the Victorian era.

The US enjoys an unemployment rate of 4.5%

Wages are going up, and the US economy is growing

Yes, my soultion is simple and based on common sense - something libs are devoid of

They would rather have people dependent on the government

 

[AnyOldIron]

The UK has a similar rate of unemployment

But that doesn't mean there isn't a problem that needs addressing it. Like an STD, if you ignore it, it won't go away.

You're approach is one taken by the Torys in the UK during the 1980's, Norman Tebbitt once told the unemployed to 'get on their bike' and find a job.

But if you have a skills shortage, an education shortage, then those getting on their bikes won't have much of a chance. Unskilled work is/has flooded away to the third world, the only way countries like the US and UK can maintain their current SoL is to go for comparative advantage.

Ever heard the adage 'teach a man to fish'? Addressing the education shortfall is simply teaching a man to fish.

 

[AnyOldIron]

As for common sense, that is a highly dubitable thing. It is a simplistic method of saying 'it's bloody obvious', when mostly situations aren't as simplistic as described.

 

[red states rule]

As for common sense, that is a highly dubitable thing. It is a simplistic method of saying 'it's bloody obvious', when mostly situations aren't as simplistic as described.

Yea, why would a lib think payng people to do nothing would inspire them to go out and do something?

 

[AnyOldIron]

Yea, why would a lib think payng people to do nothing would inspire them to go out and do something?

You pay them to do nothing in the US?

In the UK, for the first six months, you have to report every two weeks and demonstrate what you have done to find work. If you don't, benefit is stopped.

If you are unemployed after six months you enter a strict regime, where you are sent on courses if your basic skills need improving, you are sent on work trials arranged by the jobcentre and the regime for accounting for what you have been doing becomes far stricter.

You are encouraged, pushed, into retraining or re-educating, making you more useful to the labour market when you re-enter it.

I'd be surprised if a similar situation doesn't occur in the US.

Once again, you're slipping up by taking too simplistic an approach (common sense for you).

 

[red states rule]

Yea, why would a lib think payng people to do nothing would inspire them to go out and do something?

You pay them to do nothing in the US?

In the UK, for the first six months, you have to report every two weeks and demonstrate what you have done to find work. If you don't, benefit is stopped.

If you are unemployed after six months you enter a strict regime, where you are sent on courses if your basic skills need improving, you are sent on work trials arranged by the jobcentre and the regime for accounting for what you have been doing becomes far stricter.

You are encouraged, pushed, into retraining or re-educating, making you more useful to the labour market when you re-enter it.

I'd be surprised if a similar situation doesn't occur in the US.

Once again, you're slipping up by taking too simplistic an approach (common sense for you).

Welfare reform (passed by the Republicans) took millions off welfare and back to work

Libs are trying to add as many people as possible to the welfare rolls - the last thing they want is for people not to depend on government