• SkyeStarfall
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Food should be a basic right. So, yes. I would argue that it should be the government’s job.

    In fact, I would argue that all the basic survival needs should just be provided to us free of charge. Leave money and income and working as such for earning yourself luxuries.

    Anything less and you’re just forcing people to work under the threat of starvation and homelessness. And is that right?

    …also were talking about literal children here. It’s not like they have a choice exactly.

    • Colonel Panic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would LOVE if we could get to that system.

      Everything paid for, you can sit at home all day if you want, but that will be with no luxuries.

      You want Netflix and games and hobbies and whatever? Get a job to earn luxury income.

      And it wouldn’t even be hard to do. We would simply have to not have fucking BILLIONAIRES. That’s about it.

    • thebrownhaze@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      100% wrong. Anything that can run out can never be a “right”. Freedom of speech can be, freedom from unjust search and seizure can be.

      What happens when the money, or the food, or the houses run out?

      I’m in the UK. It doesn’t matter that we have an NHS (which I am a huge fan of btw), I have zero hope of being able to use it in anything like a timely manner because it’s falling to bits. Not even healthcare can be a “right”

      • Bloodyhog@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        NHS is a government service you explicitly pay for (unless you are exempt from NI). It is not a right, it is something you purchase. You can be exempt from paying due to your personal circumstances, but if all is well - you pay. The fact that our beloved government does not deliver what you pay for is another topic, but it certainly should.

          • Bloodyhog@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Thin ice. I believe there must be a balance between free capitalism and a moderately strong government with a safety net. People do fail in life, that should not necessarily lead to death. Children in particular are hungry not because they failed, but because their parents did. And there is a role for the government to support the children in need. This was a role of a tribe in the early days, or community slightly later; then governments took over. This safety net has to exist for other categories of people in need, the extent of this support is to be debated in a healthy society. Personally I do see a merit even in the universal income. Not because this is everyone’s birthright, but because it may soon become a necessity.

    • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree. We need a federal lawsuit to enforce this. The federal government has been completely ignoring homelessness and the complete lack of a social safety net throughout the US and it’s just killing the country.