Welfare State and Value of Humans.

In Scandinavia, all humans are provided with food, shelter, and medical care. In Canada, even lifetime prisoners, 97% of whom are guilty of murder are treated humanely. These are societies which recognize that all humans have paramount value and innate rights as G-d's creations.

The idea of universal welfare has existed within Judaism for 33 centuries, in Christianity for 20 centuries and in Islam for 14 centuries. George Washington believed that all humans are created equal. George Washington did not torture even the worst criminals who would have been hanged in chains in England or broken on the wheel in France.

In USA, the State provides little or nothing for people who need help. USA is a home to 44 million mentally disabled people and 10 million severely mentally disabled people. Many disabled people can not earn a living so they turn to drugs and crime. US prisons and jails house 356,268 inmates with severe mental illness in 2012.

Why do people who can not provide for themselves have no right to decent life and health care?

 

Wrong question. Its not about whether they have a right to something, but whether you have a right to take from me and give to them.

Do I have the right to decide whether its more important for my kids to go to college or to feed the hungry? Or should that be decided in a commitee?

 

The State has a right to tax anyone.

 

Moving the goalposts.

"Why do people who can not provide for themselves have no right to decent life and health care?" is a philosophical question, no?

Philosophically speaking, what right do they have to my resources? What obligates me to put their welfare beyond, or even equal with that of myself and my family?

 

These people have a right to State help. The State has a right to tax anyone to fulfill State obligations.

 

You asked why they DON'T have that right, and now proclaim that they do.

You need to figure out what the purpose of your OP is (and clarify it)... so we can actually debate something.

 

I believe that all humans have a right to food, housing, medical care.

 

The best societies do not tax innovators and the middle class to death to provide cradle to grave welfare for the weakest people. All the complexity in live is due to the survival of the fittest and if people turn to crime to steal what they can't earn I don't have a problem with imprisoning them. In my book rape or murder should be an immediate death sentence and armed robbery should be 20 years. Those people in prison made their choices and thats why they are there.

 

Why stop there? We can just declare that everyone has a right to a college education, internet, a car, a big screen TV and sex with supermodels. That doesnt mean we have the means to provide everyone with it.

Now, I'll agree that in the US we have the means to provide everyone with food and shelter. That would be easy. Currently, we could also provide medical care *most of the time*- I dont think its reasonable to presume that we could cover multi-million dollar cancer treatments (for example) to everyone.
But this creates a feedback effect in the market. By buying it for everyone, we eliminate supply and demand from the equation, and the suppliers have no realistic reason to keep prices or quality 'reasonable' because its being purxhased regardless of either (it has to be because its mandatory to provide it). The quality of care will go down, and the cost will go up until we can afford less and less and eventually none at all.

Its a fine value in the short term, but its very dangerous and reckless in the long term.

 

Why do you believe this? Does some hunter 20,000 years have have someone else work provide himself to food, housing and medical care even if he decides to not work? Forcing one person to give up some of his earning to provide for someone else is basically robbery and slavery.

 

I don't believe in natural rights other than self-defense.

that said, i believe its better for society to act as if all humans have a natural right to an education, food, shelter and medical care.

 

If you're mentally disabled in the USA you can get SSDI and/or SSI if you can't work. Get a social security disability lawyer. They are entitled to a cut of your initial back pay payout, and they don't get paid unless they win you disability. This process can take a few years so get help and file early.

 

Sadly, even though USA has the means to provide for everyone, there are still many people even in USA without adequate food, shelter, or medical care.

 

The State does tax everyone. The State should be the one supplying necessities to everyone. How do people deserve to be without adequate food, shelter, and medical care?

 

Agree 100%.

 

Cool. If I quit my job and decide to just go fishing every day, can I count on you to feed my family and pay my bills?

 

I would add 'education' to that mix, and remove or qualify 'food and housing'.

My reasoning is as follows: in the rich west, food and housing have long been readily available. We're well past needing to address hunger and shelter. Where we are at, is needing to address equality of access to the 'extras' .. that is, healthcare and education.

Once everyone is fed, housed, treated when ill, and educated to any level they choose - no one of sound mind and body can ever complain about being disadvantaged by external forces. Or at least ... anyone who does will immediately be seen to be a liar and an excuse maker. That's a good thing.

 

What you do call it when someone involuntarily works to enrich you? What I am saying is that from a moral perspective to take money from one person and give it to another is robbery and slavery. I am not saying that anyone deserves to be without food but that doesn't mean people should be forced to hand over their earnings so that poor people can live off of them. Societies improve the best when hard work and smart decisions are encouraged. If you are successful then you live a good life. If you are lazy or sub-par then you are going to have a tough life and may have to rely on family to help you out.

 

Sounds like Scandinavia and Canada are Awesome!

 

So your opposed in all cases using tax money to help those unfit to work enough to survive? I'm not a fan of welfare if one is disabled either you can't work or the rules are so complicated if you try to work its not worth trying and if you can work say 15 to 20 hours a week you can't get some help and work some and be at least as well off as being on the full benefits. In many countries such as the UK you can work some and they make up the difference with tax supported benefits and I suspect this is true is most nations your trying to compare us to in the US to other nations.

 

My issue is that if we try to devote our resources to providing for the weak it will be a big drag on progress. It seems like working people have to take care of everybody. Our children, our wives, our parents through social security, soldiers, government workers, the mentally disabled, the physically disabled, the poor, other countries, and prisoners. The list of takers just gets longer and longer and that is hampering economic growth. The best societies have as many producers as possible and as few takers as possible, preferably the ones actually giving something back like soldiers and teachers.

 

So basically you believe in slavery? No man should ever have to work to feed another man and his slacker family. That is not a right it is robbery and enslavement.
Plus now that you have lots of ' refugees ' fighting, raping stabbing your people to feed too your nation will implode.
Of course so has ours for the same reason.

 

By what moral measure?

When you proclaim this, you are saying you have the right/obligation to put a gun to your neighbors head in order to take his provisions and give to another neighbor.

I disagree vehemently.

 

Taxes are not slavery. Every State imposes taxes on their citizens.

 

.