Should food, clothing, and shelter be considered to be human rights?

[msc545]

Updates

+1 y

I am asking because in the city where I live people literally starve to death on the street and die of exposure to the cold in the winter.

[thenameless22]

It already is a right. Everyone has a right to buy food, clothing, and shelter. Everyone has a right to work hard and provide for themselves. Everyone has a right to provide for others if they choose. But I think what your asking is, "should the government provide these things to less fortunate people?" That question can be met with more questions.

• Where is the government procuring these resources?
• How much is it going to cost?
• How is the government going to fund these programs?

The answer almost always is through force. Redistribution I mean higher taxes on hard working citizens (thus lowering their standard of living) and giving to the poor through programs (thus raising their standard of living).

Then you also need to consider why those people are poor/homeless:

• Was there just an unfortunate series of events that lead to their demise? We have safety net programs to help these types of people.
• Or did some addiction lead to them forfeiting what they have to get that "fix"? Sure, give them a chance to clean up but don't waste resources on those who want a fix more than help.

[madhatters4]

only because there are people who earn so much that 1% of their wealth could feed all the homeless in a country, yes i think clothing, food and shelter should be a human right.

there simply shouldn't be people with more than they could ever use and those with nothing

[madhatters4]

thanks for MHO

[Alli39]

Yes. "Human rights" are basically what ever people need to survive and live with basic dignity, right? All the things you'd listed really are basic needs for survival in society and therefore are human rights in my book. Right to life means right to the things required to live.

[BoopBoopBeep]

Are YOU willing to work for free so they can be provided? Ultimately someone has to pay for those clothes you're manufacturing and food you are producing. Since we don't have labor camps like north korea, who is going to do that?

[msc545]

@BoopBoopBeep We are always going to pay taxes. We could divert some of that money to pay for the things some people cannot provide for themselves. I would rather that happen than have tax money paid to people who already have too much money.

[BoopBoopBeep]

@msc545
Fair enough.

[msc545]

@BoopBoopBeep 👍👍

[Alli39]

@BoopBoopBeep Have you ever heard of taxes and public welfare programs? We all "work for free" to some extent. (Unless you and the IRS have something y'all need to talk about?)

Also, it's called volunteer work, which I have done and am willing to do in the future.

[BoopBoopBeep]

@Alli39
I have. Not a fan of either of them. Thanks though :)

[Alli39]

@BoopBoopBeep I mean, I'm not sure that anyone is a fan of taxes, but it's kind of an inevitable reality if you want like public infrastructure, and people not starving to death in the streets, and any former of government service in generally really. Personally? I like roads. Roads are helpful so if the government says they want my money to give me roads then I'm going to help pay for the roads.

[BoopBoopBeep]

@Alli39 I'm a big fan of a national sales tax (not a VAT) or a flat tax. Income tax not so much. However it's obtained though, I think the government should be forced to take a 50% pay cut and then figure out what they're going to keep, same as you'd have to do if you went from dual income to single income. Sometimes a little crash and burn is good for society.

If the government actually said, give me money to get roads I think it would be funded. Most people like roads. If the federal budget was line item gofundme'd then stuff that's important to the people would be funded, or else it wouldn't exist. Then certain mandatory things (like printing money) could be funded through special tariff revenue. Our government existed for quite some time with no income tax. Giving half my earnings to state and federal doesn't leave a great taste in my mouth regardless what it goes to.

[msc545]

Agreed. There is too much money. It goes to pork barrels and corruption and bribes for me to feel real comfortable with all this. The way things are set up now if taxes weren't mandatory there would be a lot of people not paying them.

[Anonymous]

You have the right to work for food, work for clothing and work for shelter. If you are physically or mentally unable to work, then you should have a right to have these things taken care of for you by others.

[RealMarek]

If a service or good cannot be a right because it means one has a right to another’s labor, and that violates the rights of the producer. However, this does excuse what is happening in this country or make it acceptable in the least. The elites (may they be cleared out) use uncontrolled migration, offshoring, regulations favoring global corporations, and confiscatory inflation to massively transfer wealth from most people to the elite. Not all homeless people are lazy or insane and we don’t live in a free market where jobs that pay enough to keep up with the spiraling cost of housing and staples are plentiful. Many of the homeless are people ruined by these policies, which amount to theft in disguise. This will not be fixed with libertarian policies, which only work in a well-ordered, high-trust society. This will only be set right with a firm hand and radical reform.

[richardcory]

Yes, though I expect everyone to also contribute to society to the extent that they are able to.

Still, even people who simply refuse to work should have shelter, food, medical care and other necessities if for no other reason than to avoid having desperate people with nothing to lose on the streets

[OddBeMe]

Yes. But I would say “working” toward society’s human rights should be what we ask in return. Like what economist Nash wrote, “Do what’s best for you and the group.” The group is how we are able to secure human rights for everyone.

So if someone need a hand or some food, no prob. But should be expected to work towards society.

[DarkWinterNights]

No because they aren’t intrinsic. They require someone else’s actions to fulfill. Just because they’re needed by everyone doesn’t mean you can force other people to sacrifice their time, energy or product of labor.

[slatyb]

Wealthy countries should provide these for people in need.

[GoodGuyBreakingBad]

Yes, I think they should be considered human rights.

[Agape93]

Nope. You have every right to get them, but you have no right to automatically have it. People actually have to work and get those for you to just own for breathing.

[exitseven]

You don't work , you don't eat. If you are disabled that is a different story but there are plenty of jobs that need to be filled. Maybe they don't pay what you can get on welfare but there should be no free rides.

[msc545]

I find it appalling that you are more worried about "free rides" than you are about people dying.

[exitseven]

The instinct for self preservation is pretty strong. In the 70s people figured out how to survive without help from anyone.

[msc545]

Are you really this callous?

[exitseven]

I used to work in state government and I have seen a lot of these giveaway programs up close. Most of these programs are at best just a waste of money at worst they just encourage more bad behavior.

[msc545]

I disagree.

[exitseven]

@msc545 one of the things that is great about America at least for today.

[Dargil]

If any of those are a "human right", whose obligation is it to furnish them? Society?
Society is you and me. You can start by paying my rent.

[MementoMori777]

They should all he free 😂

[MementoMori777]

Be**

[DarkLegacy]

There is homeless in every country, here in the UK shelter is a human right as is social security, but not necessarily food and clothes.

[msc545]

So you basically want to shelter people who are going to die of either starvation or the cold or the heat? Or all of that correct?

[gothbxtch]

yes, absolutely

[OfMiceandMen]

Sounds good, maybe throw in some TP.

[gorydetails]

no they should not.

[Nemesis2k7]

Yes, as it is a right

[jahaims]

Nope

[msc545]

Why not?

[jahaims]

Because if those things are a right, then others have to provide those things to said people if they can't provide for themselves.

[msc545]

and that is somehow bad?

[jahaims]

It sure is. I am not obligated to take care of others. It is bad because that means few do the work while the majority get the benefits. I don't get down with that mentality.

[msc545]

Oh right. Do you pay taxes?

[jahaims]

Moral obligations and legal obligations are two different things.