Of course not. Nature aside, let's look at laws in society. You've got minimum wage in some countries and the right to register as an unemployed person where the employees of the state institution are responsible for searching a job for you, there are also laws in some countries that prioritize the right to inhabit a place before the right to own a property, which gives the advantage to squatters. As far as I know, there are no rules about the prices of the rent anywhere though.
So for example the reality of my city is this: Minimum wage is 750 € brutto, therefore 526,10 € netto. This of course only applies to regular full-time employees. The lowest rent I found is 410 € per month + deposit 1200 €. Average rent is around 700 € per month If I check regular job offers, I see wages like 1100 € per month, which is 861,01 € netto. Yay, if you're lucky and find rent for 500 €, it leaves you 361 € for food, transport, other things you need and leisure...amazing, right?
As a self-employed person you would have to pay minimum 313,93 € for the insurance and let's say pay 550 € for monthly rent, which is 863, 93 € every month. Yay, you'd better find solvent clients and good luck with that in a society where nobody wants to pay.
and the right to register as an unemployed person where the employees of the state institution are responsible for searching a job for you
That’s actually pretty cool. Here, the state gives you a certain amount of money, while you attempt to find another job (but they don’t help you in that search, you’re kind of on your own).
@bijouxbroussard In reality, most benefit from searching on their own and in general there are some strange things going on. For example I was sent to some employer and it felt really sketchy, the address was a private home and when I wrote to them they wrote back that they already had a person for that position but they didn't withdrew the offer. But of course, it wasn't the fault of the employment office, but the employer that sent the request to the office and didn't let them know they already filled the position and still acted as if they were searching for someone. Most unemployed people register because then they don't have to pay the healthcare insurance out of their pocket but prefer to search for work on their own. Another good thing is that if you're unemployed for more than a year, they offer a program where you could ask a non-profit organizations to give you a part-time work and the state will pay this organization for employing you.
@SkeetSkeet @SkeetSkeet There are no credible links to the idea that "capitalism breaks your brain" because it doesn't exist. Capitalism is a force of nature. It is a system of VOLUNTARY trade to mutual benefit. But if you'd like a credible link proving the value of capitalism and money, I can accommodate you. https://www.capitalismmagazine.com/2002/08/franciscos-money-speech/
“Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips, and guns–or dollars. Take your choice–there is no other–and your time is running out.”
I think you are referring to Responsibility and not Right. Yes, there is the resposibility to support household with whatever income.
Just that we are in a wrong monetary system promulgated by the Traders who ruled the world and have now outsourced it to governments. So the system is not supportive of households or Family.
@SunshineGirl You're missing a lot. You must be a confirmed communist, despite all the historical evidence that it has FAILED in every place in the world it was tried. Marx wanted to get rid of the family and the concept of PRIVATE PROPERTY. Communist countries were pretty good at accomplishing that, which is why they are all the GHETTOS of the world. And as far as child labor goes, your wonderful ELECTRIC CAR (that you liberals fawn over) can ONLY be made possible by cobalt mining, which is done by CHILD SLAVE LABOR.
@Reason10 No, the commies wouldn't take me, as I'm a chartered actuarist and pension fund adviser 😈
Marxism and communism are rather different things. Even communism takes on different forms (Marx predicted, with regret, that his philosophy would not work in China as it was insufficiently industrialised).
When discussing "our rights," it means that the gov't should not interfere.
Housing prices are dictating by the market. The gov't isn't preventing you from buying, so technically, you already have that right.
If you're implying that the gov't should make housing more affordable by implementing things like universal income, price controls, offering subsidies (or possibly a combination of these) - then gov't interference is in play by shifting the burden away from the home owner onto the tax payer - violating tax payer rights.
Absolutely not. The ability and resources to support yourself come from your education, the influence of your parents raising you, the teachings of what it takes to survive from your parents and schools along with your interests, physical and mental ability with experiences you had....all of that with a good paying job is how you will support your household and NOT a natural right with assist from our government.
@SunshineGirl I think if you were raised properly and have the ability and education to make a descent income, you will be able to support yourself. But that can be questioned with the increase cost of living today.
Thomas Jefferson’s eloquence in the Declaration of Independence summed it up well:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
We can quibble with certain words as expressed in the social context of 1776 as well as Jefferson and other Founding Fathers being slaveowners, but it clearly says that people have a right to freedom to pursue happiness in whatever form they choose, but not the right to any specific outcome.
Depends upon how hard you're willing to work and having at least 100 IQ you should be able to become a plumber or an electrician making between 75 and 200,000 a year doesn't even require a college degree. Now you could have a really high IQ but have a college degree that isn't worth shit then no you need to get out and do something productive that society games worthy of a living wage. All minimum wage is meant to do is give you time to get an education whether it be trade school college or something of a useful skill so you can make better money.
@dale74 If we all train as electricians and plumbers, labour supply will outstrip labour demand and wages will fall. Skilled electricians and plumbers will be under-employed and their their labour inefficiently used. We need a good mix of skills and interests and we need state intervention in important areas of the economy where the free market clearly does not work. Nursing and teaching are generally under-priced by the market, notwithstanding recruitment shortages.
@SunshineGirl great way to miss the point there's lots of jobs you can be a trash man you can be a ditch digger with an excavator you can be a plumber and electrician you can be a roofer there's a whole mess of stuff you can even pump septic systems if you want there are jobs out there that pay well but most of them are in the trade not a college degree see you back around the 90s they said if you don't have a college degree you're a nobody and so everybody got college degrees which makes college degrees practically worthless and when someone tells me they've got a college degree and they're young nowadays I've seen some of the work they put in the colleges and I'd rather have someone that ace high school and was honor roll student and outstanding citizen throughout his community then a college graduate.
@GuyWithOpinions @GuyWithOpinions That is certainly true in Communist and Socialist countries. The average person there is a SLAVE to the state. Here in America, the opposite is true.
No, as things stand there is not. There would be nothing "natural" about it in any case; in nature the stronger or more aggressive tend to prevail. Should a civilized society see to it that everyone at least has what they need to not be homeless, starving or ill ? Yes, personally I believe that it should. But in some countries, based upon the cost of living, it would not be possible for some households to subsist on one person’s earnings (depending on the size of the household and amount of said earnings) without help. That help should indeed be available.
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".
We have the right to our government of the people doing its job and ensuring that profitable investment leading to gainful employment is the only kind that's allowed.
We have the right to a government that opposses predatory, monopolistic, and business practices that are destroyed by political trials so that wage slavery is not just difficult, but impossible to keep getting worse.
@Muthafukajones In the United States, it’s rare now that one person earns enough to be the sole breadwinner, unless they have an especially high-paying position. And more women have careers now rather than just "jobs".
@Muthafukajones Not necessarily. I’m just not assuming you live where I do, based upon what you’re saying. When I was married, I earned more than my husband. We split the household chores and care of our son. And that was many years ago. No offense was intended.
@BlueGreenGrey Hmm . . I'm not sure too many people aspire to 20 babies 🤔 In the UK, universal credit (social security for the poorest families), is limited to the first two children.
@KingFeeder 🤔well to be fair i do think human right is an issue if you cope with a single wage all well and good but with out goings being high one wage cannot always make ends meet sadly
I don't think it is possible if you are not upper class in the USA I am not sure what you mean by "natural human right" what would an " unnatural human right" look like to contrast it to?
@BlueGreenGrey Religion is an antiquated way of understanding the world. God answered the question 'why?' before we had science. I do think that the early practitioners did believe though it's impossible to verify. It has also been used as a mechanism for social control.
Occasionally, it's been used for the opposite reasons n. Like liberation theology in Latin America.
