07-03-2017, 04:13 PM
Warren has a point, now that I understand his meaning of "positive rights." Ted Kennedy, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and other Democrats and Greens, speak of health care as a "right." It's not one of the Amendments in the Bill of Rights.
But it is alluded to, at least, in the Declaration of Independence, as the right to "life." And the preamble to the Constitution says the republic was established to promote the general welfare.
Progressives like me and others want to establish health care as a right. FDR's Four Freedoms also included Freedom from Want. So, we want "progress." It may be that these rights and freedoms are not spelled out in the Constitution. But the fact is that we can not always provide for the things we need by ourselves. The libertarian-economics meme of self-reliance insists anyway that there is no alternative.
We disagree, that's all. We think that the government of the people together has the right to require that it "take from others" (those who are rich enough to pay taxes) to give to those who need it and can't get it themselves, at least not right now. This way, a few people don't have to provide all the charity and the social infrastructure that benefits us all, while others don't provide any. And concentration of wealth and consequent power is lessened by taxes on the wealthy. And having social insurance means that help is there if I should ever need it. We are "stronger together."
So, the contest continues.
But it is alluded to, at least, in the Declaration of Independence, as the right to "life." And the preamble to the Constitution says the republic was established to promote the general welfare.
Progressives like me and others want to establish health care as a right. FDR's Four Freedoms also included Freedom from Want. So, we want "progress." It may be that these rights and freedoms are not spelled out in the Constitution. But the fact is that we can not always provide for the things we need by ourselves. The libertarian-economics meme of self-reliance insists anyway that there is no alternative.
We disagree, that's all. We think that the government of the people together has the right to require that it "take from others" (those who are rich enough to pay taxes) to give to those who need it and can't get it themselves, at least not right now. This way, a few people don't have to provide all the charity and the social infrastructure that benefits us all, while others don't provide any. And concentration of wealth and consequent power is lessened by taxes on the wealthy. And having social insurance means that help is there if I should ever need it. We are "stronger together."
So, the contest continues.