No Libertarian claims you have a right to have a material thing provided to you. There is no contradiction.
Please read the post you quoted. It in the very same post.
So guns should be handed to us?
How do you get "guns should be handed to us" from "no Libertarian claims you have a right to have a material thing provided to you"? That is . . . baffling.
It's not libertarians who are confusing; it's just you who are confused.
Surfing the net, I came across this.
The Right to a job | Socialist Equality Party
Interesting point of view. What do you think? Is having a job a right?
Adding the poll right now. Answers will be yes, no and I don't know.
No, mainstream libertarians are clearly confused if they think "right to a job" automatically has to mean government handout but "right to guns" does not.
I think people should have a right to earn an income.
You're making no sense whatsoever. Which "libertarians" think a "right to a job" means a "government handout"? None that I am conscious of.
Anyone that believes everyone has a 'right' to a job should pool their resources to ensure those people also have a 'right' to a 'paycheck'. Typically...this argument always flows from those that wont be footing the bill for their ideological nonsense.Surfing the net, I came across this.
The Right to a job | Socialist Equality Party
Interesting point of view. What do you think? Is having a job a right?
Adding the poll right now. Answers will be yes, no and I don't know.
No...you have a Constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms. You do not have a right to have one provided for you. And of course...the key in your argument would be a 'right' that actually has a basis or foundation. The Constitution guarantees certain rights to US citizens...but ONLY to US citizens.Guns are a good. Do we not have a right to guns?
The very reason why they oppose the idea that we have a "right to jobs" is because they think it means government involvement. :roll:
Against mass unemployment, layoffs and workplace shutdowns, the working class must defend unconditionally the right to a job. Every worker who is laid off and all those entering the workforce must be guaranteed paid job training and employment.
No...you have a Constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms. You do not have a right to have one provided for you.
And of course...the key in your argument would be a 'right' that actually has a basis or foundation. The Constitution guarantees certain rights to US citizens...but ONLY to US citizens.
Check out the citizen's dividend. An idea proposed by classical liberal (ie libertarian) Thomas Paine.
When someone ELSE uses "right to jobs" to mean a government guarantee/involvement, such as in the OP:
Obviously libertarians oppose this. I cannot help how others use the term. If I say "right to a job" as I view it, which I actually never do without someone else saying it first, I would be referring to the liberty to seek and find employment.
Which I happen to agree with. I just find it ironic that we say "right to bear arms" but say "no right to a job." When it comes to those with Statist mindsets, we need to clarify what exactly what a "right" means.
So how is it we act that "right to a job" means government handout, but "right to a gun" does not? Seems like a contradiction to me.
Hmm. Interesting. I do think its wrong for wealthy interests to rake in bank on limited and finite natural resources. Currently oil on public land requires the oil companies to pay a percentage of the profits to be developed but it all goes to Congress to spend, and not the American people (other than Alaska). I wonder what the fallout would be if the American people got to share profits form oil on public land instead of it all going to the government.
Then, is it also fair to ask radio, TV and satellite radio and TV companies to pay us for their use of the airways or airlines for using the sky that they don't own but profit from to pay a little to the public? I think one difference is the air and sky aren't being used up. Oil will eventually run out.
As far as I know, a job is a legal right.eace
Whether it be guns, jobs, pot or anything else the government should not have power to restrict you from having it. But that does not mean that you are entitled to receive it for free or without earning it.
you have a right to seek employment, but you dont have a right to a job.
a right would mean a guarantee of a job
Dude, seriously. It's all about context. It's not difficult to understand.
Its all about using the correct definitions. I know libertarians obsess over definitions.
Neo-libertarians could at least be consistent.
Guns are a good. Do we not have a right to guns?
Exactly.
And here is where it gets confusing again. A "right" does not mean that you are guaranteed to receive that particular thing. It just means you are free to pursue it. Do you say you have a "right" to a gun?
A guarantee of a job by the government would be a privilege.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?