The UN declaration on rights has resulted in millions of people getting educated, housed, fed and their medical needs looked after, so what’s wrong with that?
In response to the expectations of the people who elected them governments provided education, housing, food subsidies, medical care, etc. for those who could not afford them on their own. To pay for these things, governments took money from those who had more. Because the beneficiaries were in the majority who elected the governments this system tended to be self-perpetuating and has grown. However, true human rights maintain that a person has a right to security of his/her property, including money. Therefore, a government may not simply take what it needs from whomever it chooses, not even if it is the will of the majority. The common practice by governments of disregarding the right of the individual to security of his money, to solely control what he owns and to choose his associates, under the insufficient authority of the will of the majority is what is wrong with the UN’s declared social and economic rights.
In a nation structured on true human rights there are entitlements of every citizen to actual payments from the exploitation of natural resources and from the profits of the government’s enterprises. In addition, income from employment would be related to the value of whatever the worker created and therefore would be more just. Higher income to every man and woman would enable them to pay for their needs.
Filed under: Uncategorized | December 5th, 2012