Every human being inherently deserves safe food, clean water, and adequate medical care.
The greatest moral failure of capitalism is that it turned these necessities into commodities.
The greatest moral failure of capitalists is finding ways to justify withholding what we need to live while it is in abundance for the sake of profit.
Every human being inherently deserves safe food, clean water, and adequate medical care.
Excuse me maybe it’s just cultural different or the environment I grew up in but I think everyone from 18 to 65 MUST work to have food and water and lodging and medical care (except those who are disabled or unable to work because of their health)? And they must pay tax so their children can go to school for free and they themselves are taken care of when they retire?
I’m not talking about economic crisis when hundreds of people compete for a job, I’m talking about when there’re jobs out there and this healthy 30-year-old person just sits all day at home, then no one owe them food or water or anything.
Consider: A persons inability or unwillingness to produce an arbitrary amount of profit for corporations with their labor should not dictate whether they live or die.
Like, maybe it can dictate whether or not they can buy a new iphone or a macbook.
But WATER? Water shouldn’t be withheld from people because of their economic output.
I think everyone from 18 to 65 MUST work to have food and water and lodging and medical care (except those who are disabled or unable to work because of their health)
As I have said, if a person is unable to work, then they do not have to work. But if if they are UNWILLING to work (like they are lazy) then how can they expect to have food for free???
Because not fucking starving to death in a community with an abundance of food is a human right?
Even when they are able to but still refuse to work?
ITS A HUMAN RIGHT. So, YES.
hu·man right noun
- a right that is believed to belong justifiably to every person.
In fact, Article 25 of the UN’s Universal declaration of Human Rights reads “ (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.
(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.”So yes. You don’t revoke a person’s human rights because they don’t have a job.
“If you won’t work you deserve to die and it’s your own fault for being lazy.”
It such a horrifying attitude and made all the more chilling by how common it is. The US (and certain other “civilized” countries) have done a really good job of conditioning their populaces into believing they need to be “productive” in order to deserve to live and that anyone who isn’t “productive” (a word which, here, means “dedicating your entire life to laboring for others and whatever standards they and the government choose to impose upon you”) is just “lazy” and a “burden on society.”
As society “progresses” the cost of living skyrockets, but basic wages don’t, so you have to work even more hours just to scrape by and any failure to earn enough is entirely your fault. If you can’t afford to eat it’s your fault. If you can’t afford your rent, it’s your fault. If you can’t afford medical care, it’s your fault. It certainly isn’t the system that’s rigged against you because hey, if I can afford those things you can, too, ya lazy slacker. And if you can’t you should just hurry up and finish dying so you can stop leeching off the system that I have to pay for! I’m pretty sure that attitude is exactly why the Reps want to repeal affordable health care: they want the poor, the marginalized, the “unproductive” members of America to die. It means more money for them and as we all know, money is more important than human lives.
I won’t even get into how “work” and “labor” translates almost exclusively into 9-5 type jobs (or, y’know, 9-until-we-say-you-can-leave) rather than anything creative like art and writing. Most creative types have to work 40-100 hour weeks at their “real” jobs and then spend their copious free time with their cute little “hobby.”
I’m too tired for this argument. Too tired, too frustrated, and too sick of watching the same things being said over and over again (mostly by people much better with words than I am) only to have it all ignored because “Yeah, but if you don’t work then you haven’t earned the right to live” and “Why should I have to pay to keep total strangers alive when they’re too lazy to do it for themselves?”
But if people who are too lazy to work get free living conditions, then people who work for them would stole working because why work? It’s all free. I think people who can’t make enough income to live and eat and get good water should be given good food, water and housing because they are trying, but trying is the key word. There should be more programs to help people help themselves. Hell, maybe a program where you grow your own food and learn to build stuff. I’m pretty sure it already exists too. Things like that need support, not free everything everywhere. Society can’t support a whole bunch of free stuff, which is why it’s been ingrained to work for it, so everyone contributes.
You know that the vast majority people would like to live at a higher comfort level than “not literally starving to death right now”, correct? No one said free everything everywhere.” We said free “shit you need to live or you will literally die.”
Guess who decided that those that could not contribute to society did not deserve to live?
Hitler.
Published
ruby-dear archive 