A Second Bill of Rights?

[Foxfyre]

At the big union bash this summer, AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka plans to roll out, what they are calling, “the Second Bill of Rights” including but not restricted to:

•Your right to full employment
•Your right to a living wage
•Your right to a healthy future

(There's a lot of other stuff but those are the three primary components.)

So what do you think? Are you with Trumka and the AFL-CIO and agree these should be rights? Or do you see a problem with this?

 

[Alan Stallion]

Forcing somebody to contribute money or goods (theft) and labor (slavery) for the benefit of somebody else cannot be considered a right.

The original Bill of Rights limits encroachment by the government against the people. This labor union proposal empowers the government against the people.

 

[Foxfyre]

Forcing somebody to contribute money or goods (theft) and labor (slavery) for the benefit of somebody else cannot be considered a right.

The original Bill of Rights limits encroachment by the government against the people. This labor union proposal empowers the government against the people.

But don't you think eerybody should have the right to a job? A means of supporting themselves? And if we give everybody the right to a living wage, wouldn't that eliminate welfare as we know it?

 

[Bfgrn]

FDR'S WORDS 60 YEARS AGO CONTINUE TO INSPIRE TODAY!

On January 11, 1944, in the midst of World War II, President Roosevelt spoke forcefully and eloquently about the greater meaning and higher purpose of American security in a post-war America. The principles and ideas conveyed by FDR's words matter as much now as they did over sixty years ago, and the Franklin D. Roosevelt American Heritage Center is proud to reprint a selection of FDR's vision for the security and economic liberty of the American people in war and peace.

“The Economic Bill of Rights”

Excerpt from President Roosevelt's January 11, 1944 message to the Congress of the United States on the State of the Union

It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth—is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.

This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.

As our nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens.

Source: The Public Papers & Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt (Samuel Rosenman, ed.), Vol XIII (NY: Harper, 1950), 40-42

Franklin D. Roosevelt - American Heritage Center, Inc.

 

[Katzndogz]

It was wrong when FDR said it, and it is wrong today.

 

[Alan Stallion]

But don't you think eerybody should have the right to a job? A means of supporting themselves?

They have a right to seek employment. They do not have a right to force somebody to keep them employed.

And if we give everybody the right to a living wage, wouldn't that eliminate welfare as we know it?

No. The cost of everything goes up, thus negating perceived benefits of increased pay. If people don't want to pay $15 for a hamburger, then a hamburger business will less likely survive. People above the so-called living wage will be majorly affected and be even more frugal.

At my first job, I started at minimum wage. Then I got a quarter-cent raise. Then the minimum wage went up past my existing wage and I no longer was a quarter-cent above the minimum, I was back at the bottom. Then of course prices had to rise to offset the increased amount of money for the workers, and then customers are less likely to shell out extra money. So to avoid decifits, you end up cutting workers, putting more people on unemployment.

And we don't live in a society where slavery is legal. People willingly work for the pay given. People will quit jobs if they no longer lilke their jobs or if they can find better-wage jobs. That's how it works in a free society. Governmental dictates, while sounding nice and beneficial, tend to backfire.

 

[Katzndogz]

I remember when $7.00 an hour was executive pay. I was making 50 cents an hour. I did okay too! So what's a living wage?

 

[signelect]

I agree with the right to have an opportunity to achieve those things but they require effort. If you are not will to put forth the effort you are going to achieve them. It is not the taxpers job to make you happy. Get off your butt and go to work. Just get a job and work your way up as far as your contributions will get you.

 

[Foxfyre]

I remember when $7.00 an hour was executive pay. I was making 50 cents an hour. I did okay too! So what's a living wage?

A living wage is sufficient income to put a decent roof over your head, feed, clothe, provide healthcare, educate, and transport yourself and your family, if any, as ncessary and perhaps a little left over for fun? Some would include a retirement in there somewhere.

And you don't think it is your right to have these things? Most especially if they come via a job which is also your right to have?

 

[boedicca]

That's not a Bill of Rights, it's a list of Demands for Entitlements to be Paid For By Somebody Else.

I'd like to see two amendments to the current bill of rights:

1. The right to keep and protect one's property.
2. The right to privacy.

 

[Foxfyre]

That's not a Bill of Rights, it's a list of Demands for Entitlements to be Paid For By Somebody Else.

I'd like to see two amendments to the current bill of rights:

1. The right to keep and protect one's property.
2. The right to privacy.

The right to property was such a fundamental concept of unalienable rights closely held by the Founders that they saw it included in the Preamble, and the 3rd, 5th, and 9th amendments. But given incidents like Kelo, and the erosion of concepts of unalienable rights, perhaps we do need an amendment to tighten up our ability to control and utilize our own property and reaffirm our rights in that area.

As for the right of privacy, that one is tougher. To live my life lawfully and without infringing on the rights of others without being watched, of course. but should we as a society have the right to privacy to the extent we could build a nuclear weapon with impunity in our basement? Or have the right to negotiate invasion or attack plans with terrorists who would take out somebody or some place or some entity that was offensive to us or would target our country in general? So there are some gray areas in there that have to be very vary carefully thought through.

As for a list of demands for entitlements, that one is pretty easy to deal with. So you don't think somebody should have to furnish you a job just because you don't have one?

 

[boedicca]

A right to privacy is not the right to commit crimes. If somebody is doing something that can justify a search warrant, due process has been satisfied.

 

[Darkwind]

At the big union bash this summer, AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka plans to roll out, what they are calling, “the Second Bill of Rights” including but not restricted to:

•Your right to full employment
•Your right to a living wage
•Your right to a healthy future

(There's a lot of other stuff but those are the three primary components.)

So what do you think? Are you with Trumka and the AFL-CIO and agree these should be rights? Or do you see a problem with this?

People already have the right to 'pursue' these things.

 

[Darkwind]

I remember when $7.00 an hour was executive pay. I was making 50 cents an hour. I did okay too! So what's a living wage?

A living wage is sufficient income to put a decent roof over your head, feed, clothe, provide healthcare, educate, and transport yourself and your family, if any, as ncessary and perhaps a little left over for fun? Some would include a retirement in there somewhere.

And you don't think it is your right to have these things? Most especially if they come via a job which is also your right to have?

No, it is not your right to have these things. It is your right to acquire these things through your own diligence and merits. Nothing more.

 

[Katzndogz]

I remember when $7.00 an hour was executive pay. I was making 50 cents an hour. I did okay too! So what's a living wage?

A living wage is sufficient income to put a decent roof over your head, feed, clothe, provide healthcare, educate, and transport yourself and your family, if any, as ncessary and perhaps a little left over for fun? Some would include a retirement in there somewhere.

And you don't think it is your right to have these things? Most especially if they come via a job which is also your right to have?

It is my right to have anything I am willing to work for, sacrifice for and pay for.

 

[Foxfyre]

I remember when $7.00 an hour was executive pay. I was making 50 cents an hour. I did okay too! So what's a living wage?

A living wage is sufficient income to put a decent roof over your head, feed, clothe, provide healthcare, educate, and transport yourself and your family, if any, as ncessary and perhaps a little left over for fun? Some would include a retirement in there somewhere.

And you don't think it is your right to have these things? Most especially if they come via a job which is also your right to have?

It is my right to have anything I am willing to work for, sacrifice for and pay for.

But despite your willingness, you have the right to demand that I offer you employment or sell you a job?

 

[Katzndogz]

A living wage is sufficient income to put a decent roof over your head, feed, clothe, provide healthcare, educate, and transport yourself and your family, if any, as ncessary and perhaps a little left over for fun? Some would include a retirement in there somewhere.

And you don't think it is your right to have these things? Most especially if they come via a job which is also your right to have?

It is my right to have anything I am willing to work for, sacrifice for and pay for.

But despite your willingness, you have the right to demand that I offer you employment or sell you a job?

No.

I reserve the right to enter into a competing enterprise and put your ass out of business.

 

[eflatminor]

At the big union bash this summer, AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka plans to roll out, what they are calling, “the Second Bill of Rights” including but not restricted to:

•Your right to full employment
•Your right to a living wage
•Your right to a healthy future

(There's a lot of other stuff but those are the three primary components.)

So what do you think? Are you with Trumka and the AFL-CIO and agree these should be rights? Or do you see a problem with this?

Toss in the right to toilet paper and you're pretty close to full on Communism...and we know how well that always works out...

 

[Foxfyre]

It is my right to have anything I am willing to work for, sacrifice for and pay for.

But despite your willingness, you have the right to demand that I offer you employment or sell you a job?

No.

I reserve the right to enter into a competing enterprise and put your ass out of business.

LOL. Bring it on.

I would say that you should have every right to apply for whatever jobs I might have to offer and for which you believe you are qualified. And IF, and that is only IF, I have advertised the job openings as an equal opportunity employer, you have every right to expect to be offered a job for the specified hours, rate of pay, and any benefits if your experience, qualifications, references, and skill set are superior to all others who appy.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Ah.............the abbreviated version of the communist manifesto

Workers of the World, Unite !!!