3 ms·
Interesting that the article talks about wealth but not income. After all, today's income is tomorrow's wealth. If control over your wealth is a "basic human ri
by whack 10y ago
Interesting that the article talks about wealth but not income. After all, today's income is tomorrow's wealth. If control over your wealth is a "basic human right", then shouldn't control over your income and cash flow also be a"basic human right" for all the exact same reasons given? And if control over your income is a basic human right, and nations like US and Canada have tax rates approaching 40% on high earners, does that mean they are violating basic human rights? At what tax rates do we go from economic-policy to human-rights-violations?
I agree with the other comments here. The whole point of human rights is to enshrine the things that we absolutely need for our physical and psychological needs. Water, air, housing, safety, education. To claim that taxation, inflation and demonetization are a violation of human rights, devalues the term itself.
- meanduck 10y agoIf something is being done against someone's will ==> Basic Human Right is being violated. Thus Taxation by the definition, is a human right violation for many.
- whack 10y agoSo your opinion is that every major nation in the world, by having mandatory taxes, is violating basic human rights. It's exactly statements like this which dilute and devalue the power of terms like "human rights." If you are a hardcore libertarian, and want to claim that every major nation violates libertarian principles, more power to you. But don't appropriate the term "basic human rights" towards a political ideology that it was never meant to represent.
- meanduck 10y ago"Dont do somthing that you dont want to be done to yourself." is probably the reason that give birth to every basic human right. So yes its absolutely appropriate. You dont have to be even a libertarian to realize that.