Why does the right want to deny basic human rights to US Citizens?

[Bullseye]

Do you seriously expect to get African Americans to support you by spreading bold faced lies in an attempt to trash our nations first African American President?

WHAT boldfaced lie? Do YOU seriously state that blacks are so stupid they won't be able to see their improved employment and financial situations and stay on the Democratic Plantation?

 

[Lord of Planar]

The document uses the word entitled, but does say a person is entitled to what the OP apparently believes.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

 

[American]

A 3% unemployment rate.

Still too high?

There are never too many illegals for liberal cities.

 

[Bullseye]

So anytime anyone hits hard times it's because they are not self-reliant enough?

So when tens of millions of Americans lost their jobs, businesses, and homes in this last recession over the course of just a few months, it was because they all suddenly decided to become lazy and stupid? They and their whole family should have been left to die on the streets until they just learned to work harder?

How in God's name do you come up with this ****? NOBODY is saying it's ok for those things to happen and no one but you has mentioned laziness and stupidity.

 

[Carjosse]

I'm going to ignore your moving of the goal posts; and let you explain the other things which are irrelevant.

I am not moving the goal posts I am simply asking you to show proof that manufacturing jobs are moving back in any significant way.

 

[Bullseye]

News Flash! The United States of America was set up to depend on slavery, too. A major human rights violation. You and Vance can't cherry-pick history.

And we fought a bloody war to get rid of it. And NO it wasn't "set up to depend on slavery". From almost the very first day there were serious efforts to limit and/or abolish slavery. And yes some compromises had to be made to establish and hold together the republic

 

[Lord of Planar]

I am not moving the goal posts I am simply asking you to show proof that manufacturing jobs are moving back in any significant way.

It will take time, and the faith that the next administration won't pull the rug out on them again.

It took several years to, lose the jobs we did. It will take several years to get them back.

Why is the left so impatient?

What is it with the "I want it Now!" mentality?

 

[Lord of Planar]

None. What does that have to do with gutting formal programs to protect orphaned children?

It's called putting your money where your mouth is. In this case, practice what you preach.

 

[Bullseye]

Yeah. That's because Obama fixed Bush's mess, and Trump is still riding on his coattails. It's just a continuation of the trends under Obama.

View attachment 67257569



But the effects of the new Trump policies are just now starting to kick in.

Morgan Stanley sees recession on the horizon if trade war escalates

Obama got lucky. Like the surfer that finds himself at the crest of a fifty-foot way, he took office just as the economy was turning and rode the swell. To claim he fixed anything would be like the surfer claiming he caused the wave. Once the initial comeback was over, Obama's economy sputtered along at barely a 2% rate.

 

[Bullseye]

An orphaned child can't pursue jack if he doesn't have clean water, a basic education, or other basic human rights. Any citizen should have such basic human rights protected before they can pursue anything.

How many orphaned children are out on their own? We have systems to help them get those things.

 

[American]

I am not moving the goal posts I am simply asking you to show proof that manufacturing jobs are moving back in any significant way.

I don't have to show that, only that jobs are returning. Looks like you don't even have a dog in the fight. :lamo

 

[Bullseye]

Yes, it's interesting that the United States was the country that spearheaded the Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, and since then has gotten just about every country to sign it. And now it's one of the only countries where the ideas in it are under siege.

Sad.

They are in no way "under siege". Someone's been lying to you.

 

[Bullseye]

Wait, I thought it was rural America that voted for Trump because they had an out-of-hand drug addiction problem.

You "thought"? Working without tools again, eh?
"

 

[Serenity]

First, to be clear, I'm referring to the long-established UN Declaration of Human Rights, which the US (up until now) has been pressing other countries to accept.

Article 25.

(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.

Why have conservatives and libertarians been so dead set against this? Allowing Americans to live so far below the poverty level hurts both the economy and national security. To make it happen for the sake of a tax cut is completely and utterly stupid.

My views on this are already consistently well documented here. I can't imagine that changing anytime soon.

I side with Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.


Yes.

 

[TurtleDude]

Because they are oligarchs, protectors of property and wealth and hostile to democratic ideals.

You can see it everywhere.

That's hilarious. The constitution was designed to protect property and liberty-which is why the radical left hates it

 

[trixare4kids]

Nonsense, the left is hostile to democratic ideals, they embrace collectivism ideals.

Except for collectivism has proven to be a nightmare and not an ideal after it's all said and done, when the state runs out of everybody's money.

 

[Crystal]

Every able bodied person should work for what they want. The working do not owe the non working anything.

 

[DifferentDrummr]

The idea that courts should be able to order the public to pay child (or entire family?) support on behalf of any person is moronic. Letting deadbeat a parent (or parents) directly benefit from such a court order is insane. Let's go back to my question - is it beyond one's control (if not disabled or elderly) to work to support themselves and their dependents? In other words: can anyone, at any time just decide they'd like to live in San Francisco, CA, Austin, TX or Washington DC and move their family there fully expecting to be provided with housing, food, clothing, medical care and other (unnamed?) necessary "social services" under UN rule #25?

How is it "insane?" Doesn't the public support orphanages already? I'll address your (new) question after we've established that.

 

[DifferentDrummr]

Slavery was over in 1865, get a clue.

You were talking about when the nation was founded, however. You seem to have lost that clue.

 

[DifferentDrummr]

Having the right to something does not mean it is an entitlement.

Read article 26. It has a right to education, specifying in more detail.

Article 26 has the right to participate in cultural life. That doesn't mean the person has to.

My God man.

Wake up.

It can't be an entitlement if it's a right, can it?

And by the way, Article 26 doesn't exactly bolster your cause. It says that primary education must be compulsory.

I'm awake enough to read. And not be influenced by confirmation bias.

 

[Fishking]

First, to be clear, I'm referring to the long-established UN Declaration of Human Rights, which the US (up until now) has been pressing other countries to accept.

Why have conservatives and libertarians been so dead set against this? Allowing Americans to live so far below the poverty level hurts both the economy and national security. To make it happen for the sake of a tax cut is completely and utterly stupid.

True rights don't take from others.

 

[TurtleDude]

True rights don't take from others.

bingo--a right is a just claim to act in a certain way, without being harmed by the government or others. A right does not impose an affirmative duty on others-other than not to harm you. When the welfare socialists howl about the right to this or that-it always involves coercive force being used on others to provide that "right".

Bottom line-existing does not give you a claim on someone else's property, labor, or time.

 

[DifferentDrummr]

True rights don't take from others.

Then I hope you've figured out how to run a nation without collecting any taxes.

 

[ttwtt78640]

How is it "insane?" Doesn't the public support orphanages already? I'll address your (new) question after we've established that.

Removing the children to orphanages is not the norm under our "safety net" system and you know it. Far too often the deadbeat parent(s) gets rewarded via public subsidies for heading a "needy household".

 

[washunut]

It will take time, and the faith that the next administration won't pull the rug out on them again.

It took several years to, lose the jobs we did. It will take several years to get them back.

Why is the left so impatient?

What is it with the "I want it Now!" mentality?

Thus with the 2020 elections up in the air Democrats are insuring jobs will not return by promising to raise corporate tax rates.

Party over country should be their slogan. And to think that many long time democrats joined the party because at one time they were "for the working man".