The problem for me is when "rights" is dressed in words like "handouts" "entitlement" and even "welfare/benefits".

Rights also mean things like a fair trial, freedom of speech, a right to a lifestyle other people may not agree with, the right to vote etc

But if we are going to talk about the abuse of welfare, then of course they're are going to be bad parents, lazy people and opportunistic scroungers.

But they are, in my experience, the minority.

I will happily provide for the lazy, opportunistic scrounger if it means that the decent but vulnerable and poor are provided for.

Likewise I will happily give from my salary to the bad parent if it means his/her innocent kids are provided for.

The right wing nuts are misanthropes and they believe that most, if not all of us are selfish and lazy. If that seems far fetched, just read their favourite "thinker" Ayn Rand

I believe that most people enjoy working when it means being useful and active.

The problem I see with work today is that work has had much of the satisfaction and usefulness removed from it.

Instead of rewarded we have to be "motivated" and instead of useful we feel "used".

I worked for a boss like the nut described in the OP: he spent half his time making people miserable at work because he thought if people were enjoying themselves he was paying them too much, and then he spent the rest of his time tlling people stick ona grin and "suck it up".

I think he was a sadist and a narcicist, tbh.

i told him to go fuck himself.

How can anybody end up thinking we have to many rights though,its ridiculous and bordering on masochism/sadism.

Regarding welfare/subsidies i think if they are to be removed from the average person then the subsidies that banks,companies,land owners,mp's should be removed also,it's the inconsistency that is the most annoying thing i find,sorry and the fact the government are out to cleanse the country of the people they no longer need for factories that are in china.

p.s the guy i spoke of is either edl or bnp or both.

humanspirit wrote:
Well it wouldn't be flying in the face of any archetypes.

Have you asked him what rights he thinks he has to claim what he calls his country, his own?

It would be interesting to see who he thinks it belongs to, who he thinks it should belong to and then compare that with the facts of who it actually is the property of.

Then we can see him put the words "too many" and "rights" together to form a sentence.

I might quiz him but on the other hand life's to short to listen to hate rants with no valid arguments attached.

I dont think the person you spoke to thinks that 'we' have too many rights tbh - it sounds as if they have fallen into the oft heard bigotry which says that certain groups of people should not be afforded the same rights as the group they themselves identiy with.

Most people for example advocate free speech as a right that everyone should have - but if a paedophile wished to express that right by talking about the delights of young children or a rapists were to start extolling the virtues of drugging and violently raping another person then the notion of the 'right to freedom of speech' would quickly go out the window.

Or you get NIMBY's - the sort who will donate to shelter and spend the odd xmas eve handing out soup at a drop in centre but become litigious if a caravan of gypsies dares to stop off in a field.

Or those who think that homeowners should be able to shoot burglars but that the police should not be kitted out with tasers.

People who think that gay and lesbian men and women should not have the right to have children but that straight people should be allowed to breed themselves into financial dependency on the state.

It is another form of discrimination - My right to do or say something will likely impinge on an others rights to something else - so conflict arises as people scrabble to get what they think they deserve.

It always boils down to 'cost'.
The cost can never be expressed except in terms of something that itself doesn't exist either except in our minds.

Is it me, or all we all insane?

andyh wrote:
Not at all. But the money delusion is a strong one.

Okay, maybr some of us are indeed round the twist, but what I would like to address is ambiguity in the term "right".

Does it mean what we should not be seperated from or does it mean that which should be supplied to us by others should our need arise?

False consciousness abounds

thoreau wrote:
^^ This! There are far too many people banging on about their "rights" without thought to their responsibilites.

However, of course we have basic human rights. It says in the Bible that we are to love one another as ourselves. If everyone managed to do that then the whole "rights" thing becomes unnecessary.

But I agree with the posters who say your friend sounds like a wee bit of a fruit-loop, OP! Unless he's a very old friend of whom you are particularly fond, then I would give him a wide berth!

Mandy

Too many rights?

Return to the Victorian era?

Well waddaya know?


rt.com/news/osborne-employee-rights-shares-987/

$3000 doesn't really cover the other benefits.

As I've said before, its all backwards. Human beings should be the ones who are tax exempt and the institutions and corporations etc ought to be the ones paying taxes.
Institutions and corporations includes corporation sole such as the crown and the church too btw...

andyh wrote:
I agree with you. As for taxation on the Church (or temple, mosque, jedi shrine) well in my opinion one of the things that is encouraging shady institutions to pass themselves off as religions or charities or NPOs etcetera is the the tax loophole.

What we are seeing instead is a tax funded private sector: either by direct handouts or by the public given bill after bill to pay for what the corporations smugly call "externalities".

Angry Jeremy Clarkson readers on about bicycle riders benefiting from their road tax don't realise that the cost of the new motorway is an externality dumped on us by the automobile and oil industry.

mikey mikey wrote:
Exactly yep

Everything is passed on to the average joe at the end of the day.
The whole point of the economy is to give purpose to our lives and if the economy is messed up then so is our purpose.
Its a very serious thing which I think not enough people pay attention to, they get distracted by the money and don't see the bigger picture.

As for the church btw they still haven't coughed up to the irish govt
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_Chu...e_scandal_in_Ireland

Unbelievable...that said they are shortly having a vote to create the 'SS' in Ireland shortly...rewriting their own constitution to allow it the daft bastards...lol.
Supposedly as much as 90% of the public are in favour and they haven't even managed to have anyone put forward a no argument...for the love of all that is holy :/

So few people understand that handing over such responsibility to institutions like the govt or church leads to all this mess.
Sure there are some parents who can and do abuse kids but the 'abusers' will gravitate towards positions in society where they can fulfill their fantasies and here we are facilitating it.
There is nothing special about these institutions that makes them somehow perfect, they are comprised of human beings and humans do shit, the more humans there are involved the more shit there is and the laugh of it all is...the LESS they are scrutinized.
Instead now the scrutiny is on the parent and todays society does not encourage responsibility, instead it encourages everyone to outsource it and forget it. It is the total destruction of the family unit and thereby the total domination of the human race.

People cannot afford to be parents, they have neither the time not the money to do it, they also have the pressure of this scrutiny all the damn time with the state sticking its nose in at every opportunity..I ask you, its little wonder that fertility rates are falling below replacement levels throughout the western world.

Kids are important to me personally because married life changed me, if I didn't get married then I would never have tried as hard as I did to be responsible. I would never have cared about the future.

So you see, it will only take a couple of generations, perhaps 3 to completely change us.
The brave new world that huxley spoke of isn't far off imho, he was certainly far more accurate than orwell.

yes andy i concur about huxley's view. he wasnt bang on the money, if you read bnw revisited you see that he based his vision on some dodgy information. the same dodgy info that gates et al blather about. no surprises there really

for me, there's only one right 'they' are going for. the right to be human. huxley's bokanovsky process may or may not be the future but i see enough evidence of a concerted push toward a standardised and gradated population through myriad methods, to not doubt that the transhumanists are a long way ahead of the game. the right to be a free thinking individual human unit is going out of fashion.

with the game this stacked and so far advanced there's only one hope for those that see value in humanity. that the human collective realise 'heaven' is of their own making, so is "hell" and all the worlds between. if you live in a causation world you'd best be on your game when it comes to passing shit on or not. taking responsibility for ourselves is the first step towards reclaiming our humanity. how we face and reflect the ups and downs of life is as important as the sun itself.

considering that the sz has a member list of but 200 people and that you could wager that most if not all of us are aware of "the game", it doesn't bode well. we have chosen to let the lower end of what being human is destroy the place. we've let our individuality come between us and the "community" is in tatters. a big fucking own goal in the 89th minute.

Did you hear Osborne's scheme where he quoted Marx's Workers of the world unite smugly like the smug little prat he is?

He's gonna allow us plebs to trade our employment rights for a share in the company check out Aidrian Beecrofts report:
www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/news-and-events...gulatory-reform-bill

Would like to hear your opinions guys.

humanspirit wrote:
Was this person specific about which rights need to be removed? Or was it more of a general rant?

Something has dawned on me over the past couple of days, when the Coalition have been saying about how they'll make work pay, I was wondering where all the jobs will come from. In fact, what they actually mean is that they'll take away as many out of work benefits as possible and support for people on low incomes, so even part time minimum wage jobs will be better than nothing.

I feel really stoopid now.

Guevarista wrote:
It leads to all sorts of confusion and mess. Not to mention small biz isn't going to compete with a plc on stuff like that.
I'd much rather see co-ops with direct AND EQUAL shared ownership which I've mentioned before...the elite would never ever go for such an idea though. They always want the MAJORITY ownership of everything.

I don't think anyone has a 'right' to anything however you have to remember that our fathers, grandfathers ,and great great grand fathers and mothers fought and stood up for what is now in place ...the welfare system, the benefit sytem, the NHS ......these things help not hinder the UK 'system' is one of the best in the world.

If your friend OP is just a bit riled up by the recent tory conference I wouldn't come down too hard on him

Immergration is always going to raise tempers and emotions , but it is not as big a problem as the ecomonmy

dawnbreak wrote:
The prob is a lot of ppl think that the immigrants are to blame...this is ofc despite the fact that the banks have brought down the world economy and its been mentioned in the news like..I dunno....9 million f*cking times now?