3 ms·
This is completely absurd. People should not be given rights that require someone provide something for them. Surely, the problem with believing someone has a '
by tseabrooks 17y ago
This is completely absurd. People should not be given rights that require someone provide something for them. Surely, the problem with believing someone has a 'right' to broadband internet access they should also have a right to a computer, or a television, or cable.
- gloob 17y agoPeople should not be given rights that require someone provide something for them. I read: "People should not be given rights to trial by jury or elections". The former requires that random citizens be selected to give up their time for my sake. The latter requires that random government-types go out of their way to organize the whole bloody thing, which is both extraordinarily expensive and inconvenient. Both "require someone provide something for them". Edit: For that matter, what about universal education, as well? I know the above is clearly not what you intended. Nonetheless, it follows logically from your statements. Perhaps you could clarify your stance?
- Tichy 17y agoIn Germany people have a right to a television. If you are on social welfare and you don't have a TV, the government will buy one for you (afaik). Some sell it for the extra dough. Maybe it makes sense from the perspective of the government, because they can use TVs to brainwash the masses. But seriously, I think it is an OK move - or it used to be, when TV was more important. These days I would agree that people should be given a computer, as life without internet is severely hampered.