April 19, 2010


I'm learning the ropes of taking care of a baby, but I still don't get on the internet that often.  (Example: my friend said, "So how about that volcano business?" and I said, "What volcano?")  However, today I did read something that got my goat.

Via Mark Steyn, who says, "No matter how fast Obama Europeanizes America, you can't out-Euro the Euros": Vacationing a human right, EU chief says

The European Union has declared travelling a human right, and is launching a scheme to subsidize vacations with taxpayers' dollars for those too poor to afford their own trips.

Antonio Tajani, the European Union commissioner for enterprise and industry, proposed a strategy that could cost European taxpayers hundreds of millions of euros a year, The Times of London reports.

"Travelling for tourism today is a right. The way we spend our holidays is a formidable indicator of our quality of life," Mr. Tajani told a group of ministers at The European Tourism Stakeholders Conference in Madrid on April 15.

And this is the slippery slope of rights.  Once we believed that we only had "rights to action."  Now by declaring that we have the right to health care, we have fundamentally shifted to saying we believe we have the right to someone else's labor.  So where does it end?  Once you have the right to money from another taxpayer's pocket, who's to say it should end with health?  It's good for your health to be stress-free, and vacations help you relax.

So then they're a right too.

I find this slippery slope frightening...

Posted by: Sarah at 03:02 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 267 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I'm still on the Internet a lot, but I didn't know about this new "human right."

This article lists thirteen "third rails." Will vacations be a fourteenth?

Posted by: Amritas at April 19, 2010 06:38 PM (hBtE2)

2 Sarah, I don't know if you caught Chuck's definition of a right:  http://tcoverride.blogspot.com/2010/03/simple-definition.html

It is amazing how much you can appreciate someone you hardly know.

Posted by: Kate at April 20, 2010 01:41 PM (J1l7A)

3 Wonder how the "right" to vacations interacts with the "right" to "a carbon-free environment?"

Posted by: david foster at April 21, 2010 09:45 AM (Gis4X)

4 Kate, thanks for the link to Chuck Z's definition.

A government-given "right" is wrong. And government "giving" always entails taking from someone else.

Posted by: Amritas at April 21, 2010 02:50 PM (+nV09)

5 david,

Initially travel expenses will only be paid to those who pledge to use ground-based mass transit to reach their destinations. Only the One, St. Al, and other elites should have the right to fly. Eventually "travel expenses" will be redefined as expenses incurred during travel by bicycle or by foot. Then bicycles will be banned ... oops, forget we said that. Propaganda campaigns will tout the value of vacations spent at home. One can take a day off without leaving a big carbon footprint.

Posted by: kevin at April 21, 2010 03:47 PM (+nV09)

6 Wow, that is really interesting.  I live in a system where my money from my pocket pays for health care for those that can't afford it, and I have been ok with that so far.  But paying for someone else's vacation?  Not sure I'm on board with that!  I guess it really can be that slippery slope.  

Posted by: Stacy at April 22, 2010 01:55 PM (qlReK)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
44kb generated in CPU 0.0441, elapsed 0.1039 seconds.
48 queries taking 0.097 seconds, 175 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.