Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A “Human Right” to Other People’s Money ^ | January 30, 2014 | Derek Hunter

Posted on 01/30/2014 5:57:17 AM PST by Kaslin

One of the many differences between advocates of freedom and supporters of statism is how they view “rights.”

Libertarians, along with many conservatives, believe in the right to be left alone and not molested by government. This is sometimes referred to in the literature as “negative liberty,” which is just another way of saying “the absence of coercive constraint on the individual.”

Statists, by contrast, believe in “positive liberty.” This means that you have a “right” to things that the government will give you (as explained here by America’s second-worst President). Which means, of course, that the government has an obligation to take things from somebody else. How else, after all, will the government satisfy your supposed right to a job, education, healthcare, housing, etc.

Sometimes, the statists become very creative in their definition of rights.

You may laugh at these examples, particularly the ones that focus on seemingly trivial issues.

But don’t laugh too hard, because our friends on the left are busy with very grandiose plans for more “positive liberty.”

The EU Observer reports on efforts in Europe to create expanded rights to other people’s money.

Austerity programmes agreed with the troika of international lenders (the European Commission, European Central Bank and International Monetary Fund) are in breach of the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights, according to a German legal expert. …under the EU charter of fundamental rights, a legal text which became binding for member states in 2009, several austerity measures enshrined in the MoUs can be fought in courts. …His study highlights that the MoUs “have seriously limited the autonomy of employers and trade unions to negotiate wages.” …Education and health care reforms prescribed in the memorandums are also questionable because they are focusing too much on cutting budgets, he said. …He noted that the concept of “financial stability” was put above all other considerations. “But financial stability cannot be achieved without social stability,” he said.

But it’s not just one oddball academic making these claims.

…the Council of Europe’s social rights committee noted that public policies since 2009 have been unable to stem a generalised increase in poverty on the continent. The committee identified some 180 violations of European Social Charter provisions on access to health and social protection across 38 European countries. In the bailed-out countries, the committee found several breaches – particularly in terms of wages and social benefits. Ireland was found in breach of the social charter for not ensuring the minimum levels of sickness, unemployment, survivor’s, employment injury and invalidity benefits. Greece and Cyprus have “inadequate” minimum unemployment, sickness, maternity and old age benefits, as well as a restrictive social security system. Spain also pays too little to workers on sick leave.

This crazy thinking also exists in the United States. A former Carter Administration official, now a law professor at Georgetown, has written thatcountries with good policy must change their systems in order to enable more tax revenue in nations with bad policy.

Do states like Switzerland, which provide a tax haven for wealthy citizens of developing countries, violate internationally recognized human rights? …bank secrecy has a significant human rights impact if governments of developing countries are deprived of resources needed to meet basic economic rights guaranteed by the United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. …The Covenant explicitly recognizes individual rights to adequate food, clothing, and housing (Article 11); health care, clean water, and sanitation (Article 12); and education (Article 13). The Covenant also imposes obligations on member states to implement these rights.

And the right to redistribution isn’t just part of the U.N. mission.

There’s also a European set of Maastricht Principles which supposedly obligates nations to help each expand the burden of government.

Articles 19 and 20 of The Maastricht Principles call on states to “refrain from conduct which nullifies or impairs the enjoyment and exercise of economic . . . rights of persons outside their territories . . . or which impairs the ability of another State to comply with that State’s . . . obligations as regards economic rights.” …recognizing the fact that secrecy for offshore accounts makes it difficult for developing countries to implement Covenant obligations. It therefore seems indisputable that offshore accounts impede the fulfillment of internationally recognized human rights.

You may be thinking that all this sounds crazy. And you’re right.

You may be thinking that it’s insane to push global schemes for bigger government at the very point when the welfare state is collapsing. And you’re right.

You may be thinking that it’s absurd to trample national sovereignty in pursuit of bad policy. And you’re right.

And you may be thinking this is a complete bastardization of what America’s Founding Fathers had in mind. And you’re right.

But you probably don’t understand that this already is happening. The IRS’s awful FATCA legislation, for instance, is basically designed for exactly the purpose of coercing other nations into enforcing bad American tax policy.

Even more worrisome is the OECD’s Orwellian Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters, which is best viewed as a poisonous acorn that will grow into a deadly World Tax Organization oak tree.

P.S. And the Obama Administration already is pushing policies to satisfy the OECD’s statist regime. The IRS recently pushed through a regulation that says American banks have to put foreign tax law above U.S. tax law.

P.P.S. Statists may be evil, but they’re not stupid. They understand that tax havens and tax competition are a threat to big government.

TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial

1 posted on 01/30/2014 5:57:17 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I’ve got a concise definition of what is a right and what isn’t a right...

If it requires the involuntary burden on another person it is not a right.

2 posted on 01/30/2014 6:01:55 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

If it must be provided by the labor of others, it is not a right.

3 posted on 01/30/2014 6:22:58 AM PST by Blood of Tyrants (Haven't you lost enough freedoms? Support an end to the WOD now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

4 posted on 01/30/2014 6:24:02 AM PST by Travis McGee (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Across Europe, a satellite dish is now a human right.

Actually, that is a little closer to a right. It allows you to put up your own dish on your property or property you rent without having the government or landlord prohibiting it. I'm a little less vehement about the landlord, but if you do no damage to the property I don't see why he should be allowed to prevent it. Some apartment complexes here have tried to force people to take the landlords overpriced cable service by not allowing dishes or access to the local utility cable service.

5 posted on 01/30/2014 6:24:03 AM PST by KarlInOhio (Republican amnesty supporters don't care whether their own homes are called mansions or haciendas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

It used to be that if you wanted a better standard of living, you worked for it. Now, you vote Democrat. It works for a while, then you have a big, bloody mess with all the Democrat politicians saying they had no idea this would happen.

6 posted on 01/30/2014 6:59:29 AM PST by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
My husband and I grew up dirt poor. Both our dad and moms worked a full time job plus second and third jobs (at Christmas) or as much overtime as they could get. My husband joined the navy because he is a patriot and to get free schooling. While most of his friends partied, he used the GI bill plus our money to get his bachelors and when he inherited $6000 from grandmother he used it all, plus our money to get his masters. He worked full time while going to school and graduated with 3.8 or higher. He worked a second job teaching college to get all our bills paid off and to get us into a good school district for our kids and out of our neighborhood that was blocks from subsidized housing and going downhill fast. My husband worked at STATCOM DOD and part time teaching college. Because he had little time with our three boys he tried to make up for it by doing more for them when money started coming. We live comfortably and help our kids with extras (like paying for hunting trips they could not afford and nice Christmas and birthday gifts). We pay for our grand kids extra curricular activists like hockey, gymnastics, music lessons, dance, swim lessons,....

My husband worked so hard all his life so obama could give it to those who don't work hard. Don't get me wrong, we want to and do help those who truly are unable to work; the widow, orphan,... But we have high school friends who partied to the point of destroying there body and mind, and know many people who just don't want to work. Obama want to talk justice. Where is the justice for people like my husband?

7 posted on 01/30/2014 7:01:09 AM PST by Linda Frances (Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Given that two of the Ten Commandments directly protect property (to forbid theft and coveting), and the Commandment that forbids lying, socialism is built on values that God cannot bless or even allow.

This raises the issue that people who otherwise claim to know, obey and love God cannot support socialism. I would also suggest that when people arrange their financial affairs so as to deliberately become dependant upon the proceeds of socialist coveting and theft, they have put themselves in the same position as someone who conspires with a thief.

Theft that uses government to make it legal is still not moral.

But the moral framework for institutionalizing coveting and theft is to provide for the needy. God addressed this by making charity and concern for the poor an aspect of being righteous. But as with marriage and having one day of rest each week, charity is something that is a personal religious value and not something that we should involve the state in.

If we have separation of church and state, we must also have separation of marriage and the state as well as separation of charity and the state.

Secular government has substantially usurped charity in the provision for the needs of the poor. In areas where a tax on incomes is imposed, we could just as easily give a full tax credit for monies that are donated to sustain the poor. The net cash difference should be zero and the true needs of the poor could be addressed by competing charities, but that would not give politicians and bureaucrats any power of all of us.

Things could be different and better for all, if we could return government to its proper role and revoke its power to intrude in areas of our lives where it is not proper nor even moral to be.

8 posted on 01/30/2014 7:07:05 AM PST by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

A right is something all human beings are endowed with by the Creator. Everything else is privilege, wishes, etc. as we agree upon together.

9 posted on 01/30/2014 7:10:39 AM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat

When the left threw out our individual responsibility to God in the 5th, 6th, and 7th commandments,

they also threw out the individual responsibility to God to care for the poor, widows, and orphans.

This made the 8th and 10th subject to violation through government, and violation of the 9th “necessary” in order to do so.

10 posted on 01/30/2014 7:30:01 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Remember back in the Clinton Admin when one of his appointees (Cisineros) declared AIR CONDITIONING was a Constitutional Right?

11 posted on 01/30/2014 7:43:02 AM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar (Sometimes you need 7+ more ammo. LOTS MORE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs; GOPJ; Just mythoughts; Grampa Dave; Libloather; Telepathic Intruder; justiceseeker93; ..
As Freeper Telepathic Intruder insightfully posed: all this guy does is makeup executive orders to bypass the constitution. He was a constitutional law professor (so he said) so knows the president is not supposed to make laws.

He's clearly shown his disdain for the Constitution, calling it a flawed document containing only negative liberties. That is, constitutional liberties given to the people.....not to the government.

12 posted on 01/30/2014 8:09:22 AM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

This makes absolutely no sense, until you remember that the folks doing the redistribution not only get power out of it, but get a cut of the loot they redistribute.

13 posted on 01/30/2014 8:15:37 AM PST by Little Ray (How did I end up in this hand-basket, and why is it getting so hot?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Scariest moment in US history.

Pres-Elect Obama: "We Are Just Days Away
From Fundamentally Transforming America."

14 posted on 01/30/2014 8:18:56 AM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
If you follow this logic then it means that slavery is legal as servilism. The definition includes serfdom and wage slavery. slav·er·y (slā′və-rē, slāv′rē) n. pl.slav·er·ies 1. The state of one bound in servitude as the property of a slaveholder or household. 2. a. The practice of owning slaves. b. A mode of production in which slaves constitute the principal work force. 3. The condition of being subject or addicted to a specified influence. 4. A condition of hard work and subjection: wage slavery.
15 posted on 01/30/2014 8:19:16 AM PST by RJS1950 (The democrats are the "enemies foreign and domestic" cited in the federal oath)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY---NAILS IT BIGTIME--Vote-crazed Obama's SOTU said he’d act unilaterally on a cockamamie “savings plan" intended to dupe "all Americans"---called MyRA.

WORDS HAVE MEANING Boobamba said, “I will direct the Treasury to create a new way for working Americans to start their own retirement savings: MyRA. It's a new savings bond that encourages folks to build a nest egg. MyRA guarantees a decent return with no risk of losing what you put in.”

REALITY CHECK: For decades progressives have been looking to get their hands on the trillions in IRAs and 401(k)s beyond their grasp. These “savings bonds” are their “in” to that pool of money. A savings bond is a loan to government, so what Boobamba is proposing is adding more debt to the $17 trillion debt he created.

.... Boobamba's “feel good, sound good” MyRa thingy will add additional untraceable trillions to the nation’s unfunded liabilities. Where will the untraceable money for that “decent return” come from?


Boobamba tripped himself up when he said he would direct The US Treasury" to act on this. Don't be fooled by the Chicago conmen----MyRa is another financial boondoggle on the order of the stimulus and Obamacare.


ONCE UPON A TIME, OBAMA'S COS EMANUEL HAD TWO JOBS Soon as they occupied the WH, Obama and the Chicago con artists (a) took control of the US Census; (b) Obama placed his COS Rahm Emanuel in control of the US Dept of the Treasury.

PAUSE TO REFLECT Remember Obama had tight control of Treasury; Obama calculatedly placed his then-COS Rahm Emanuel in a dual the WH and at Treasury. Obama had a stranglehold on Treasury via COS Rahm Emanuel's dual role

STROLL DOWN MEMORY LANE Soon as they occupied the WH, Obama and the Chi/cons (a) took control of the US Census; (b) Obama placed his COS Rahm Emanuel in control of the US Dept of the Treasury (including the conservative-suppressing IRS). Read on.


THE SMOKING GUN---WSJ REPORT--On Jan 20, 2009 Timothy Geithner was appointed Obama's Secy of the Treasury. But within three weeks, the Obama White House tightened its grip on Treasury. Obama put his COS, Rahm Emanuel, in charge of Treasury---Rahm Emanuel's dual role was an unusual move.

When he got to Treasury, WH COS Rahm Emanuel was so involved in the inner workings that the phrase "Rahm wants it" had become an unofficial mantra among subservient govt staffers, prostrate in obeisance, scurrying to accede to Rahm's wishes, according to Treasury government officials. Reported by WSJ / 05/31/09

More here:


Obama's trillion dollar stimulus scam is a huge unreported story. Makes Madoff look like a piker. In his new book "Extortion" author Peter Schweitzer writes about Obo, Holder (and other insiders), using the Justice Dept "and assorted govt agencies" to extort and steal billions of untraceable dollars.... read on:

EXCERPT---FOURTEEN TRILLION DOLLARS Behind The Real Size of the Bailout; A guide to the abbreviations, acronyms, and obscure programs that make up the $14 trillion federal bailout of Wall Street
Mon Dec. 21, 2009 12:23 PM PST

The price tag for the Wall Street bailout is popularly put at $700 billion—---the actual size of TARP--the Troubled Assets Relief Program. But TARP is just the best known program in an array of more than 30 overseen by Treasury Department and Federal Reserve that have paid out or put aside untraceable money to bail out financial firms and inject money into the markets.

To get a sense of the size of the real $14 trillion bailout, see MJ chart at web site. A guide to the pieces of the puzzle includes massive untraceable Treasury Department bailout programs.

Money Market Mutual Fund: In September 2008, the Treasury controlled by Obama/Emanuel announced that it would insure the holdings of publicly offered money market mutual funds. According to the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP), these guarantees could have potentially cost the federal government more than $3 trillion [PDF].

Public-Private Investment Fund: This joint Treasury-Federal Reserve program bought toxic assets from banks and brokerages—as much as $5 billion of assets per firm. According to SIGTARP, the government's potential exposure from the PPIF is between $500 million and $1 trillion [PDF].

TARP: As part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the Treasury controlled by Obama/Emanuel made loans to or investments more than 750 banks and financial institutions. $650 billion has been paid out (not including HAMP; see below). As of December 21, 2009, $117.5 billion of that has been repaid.

Government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) stock purchase: The Treasury controlled by Obama/Emanuel bought $200 million in preferred stock from Fannie Mae and another $200 million from Freddie Mac [PDF] to show that they "will remain viable entities critical to the functioning of the housing and mortgage markets."

GSE mortgage-backed securities purchase: Under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, the Treasury controlled by Obama/Emanuel may buy mortgage-backed securities from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. According to SIGTARP, these purchases could cost as much as $314 billion ---SNIP---.

LONG READ---go to web site to read more and checkout the shocking financial charts.


16 posted on 01/30/2014 8:28:27 AM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

“If it requires the involuntary burden on another person it is not a right.”

Absolutely right, in my opinion. Many of the evils of the current day originate with the failure to understand that. Once you overlook it you can spend years and years arguing the details of all the problems that arise because of overlooking it. If we had simply understood that simple idea most of the current federal government would not exist.

17 posted on 01/30/2014 9:58:23 AM PST by RipSawyer (The TREE currently falling on you actually IS worse than a Bush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Linda Frances

18 posted on 01/30/2014 10:04:47 AM PST by RipSawyer (The TREE currently falling on you actually IS worse than a Bush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RipSawyer


19 posted on 01/30/2014 5:20:04 PM PST by Linda Frances (Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson