Monday, September 12, 2011

Rights, Responsibilities and Extremes

I've noticed people tend to go to extreme assumptions in political debates and I wish there were a quick way around it that I could find. I believe, for example, that social security as a concept is an essential human right, just like health care or housing, etc., but the United States Social Security System is an unconstitutional Ponzi scheme and is destined to collapse. It's likely that it was instituted just to bolster the general funds of the US Treasury, just like Ponzi and Madoff were using it to fatten their wallets, with the end goal of increasing the federal government's power, covertly, over the population of the country by playing on their fears and selling a "solution" to them. It's a very, very, very old trick. That being said nobody wants children and old people to starve. I just believe that there are more sustainable and cost effective ways to do these things without leaving us susceptible to the potential whims of a tyrant or the inefficiencies of an uncaring and wasteful bureaucracy.

Yes, I know there are some people out there who are screaming at me now because I just said health care and housing are essential human rights. The point is there is nothing anywhere that says the government is or should be the best or only method of maintaining your rights. Providing defense for us as a country so that we can maintain our own rights is their more proper function of a federal government. Think of this, do you want to be beholden to the government to maintain your health and home? I would think not. Do you want the government to be able to confirm or deny your health care or home? I would hope not.

I often wonder where this idea comes from that the government (also known as taxpayers in this case) has to provide the funding to pay for our rights. Shouldn’t it be our individual responsibility if it is our rights? How on Earth could an individual not be responsible for the fiscal maintenance of his house and still consider it to be his; let alone think that somehow it's helping him with his right to have one? If it’s the government making the payments isn’t it theirs to take or give at their own whim? How could you as an individual even force an organization with the power of the United States government to make the payments to the bank if they decide not to?

The only way we can have our rights is to take responsibility for them on an individual basis. That’s what makes them individual rights in the first place! Government sponsored health care is not the giving or support of our rights as human beings, it is an infringement upon them by using the force of law to intervene in our health care decisions, which should be our own individual responsibility and nobody else’s. It’s not anybody else’s right or responsibility to maintain your body, it’s yours!

Yes, I think there are a lot of things that are human rights. To me that only means that the government should stay out of them. That is a distinctly different thing than wanting old people and children to be homeless and starving without the benefit of health care, housing or food.

No comments:

Post a Comment