Obama Nationalizing the Suburbs

You've firstly incorrectly stated that safety, health care, education and sexuality are not human rights, when they evidently are. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person." (Article 3) This defines a humans rights to freedom within society from oppressive restrictions, as well as the behaviour of others, such as crime. "Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services..." (Article 25) This is straight-forward; humans have the right to adequate health and medical care, undeniably rendering your statement of no right to health care incorrect. "Everyone has the right to education." (Article 26) This indisputably contradicts your claim of no rights to education. I would also like to remind you that, recently in The United States of America, gay marriage has been legalised. "Men and women of full age, without any limitation... have the right to marry and to found a family..." (Article 16) MARRIAGE is a right. Furthermore, impoverished individuals have certainly not put themselves in their situation. The majority of those who are poverty stricken do not choose to be. They may have been born into a family that is already poor, have limited jobs available to them or have an underlying factor such as sustained injury that doesn't allow them to work, have to supply for a large family, inherit little wealth or have little government assistance. Poverty can lead to death from starvation, disease, dehydration or even hypothermia. I can assure you that little to none of the population says to themselves "I want to be impoverished. I want to have little resources; I want inadequate housing; I want to starve; I want disease." Would you want that? President Abeam has nationalised the suburbs to give these human beings a chance at life. Likewise, does that seem like "the poor are entitled to everything?" Agreed, it is not your responsibility to "get them out of it." No one told you it was. Albeit, it is the President Ob ma's responsibility to serve justice and equality throughout America - it's his job. Thus, he is allowing those families and individuals living in crime-ridden, poverty stricken areas to someone where resources, jobs, adequate housing, etc. are available. In 2013, there were 45.3 million impoverished people in America. Are you saying that 45.3 million people chose to be poor? Well, they didn't. Additionally, there is no problem with children of financially unstable families attending the same public schools as "suburban kids". You say that "the rich will be forced to welcome them (families of lesser wealth) into their neighbourhoods." Thus, you have stated that "suburban kids" are rich. Their wealth could grant them access into a private school, seeing that poorer children attending the same school is such as problem. It's a public school - there are no restrictions to your finical status that limit you from attending. Likewise, if suburban families are "rich" as you've stated, why is it a burden for them to pay property tax? Yes, equality is imperative, and the moving families should be required to pay it, but, considering their circumstances, why can't we allow them time to gain financial stability before doing so? It is true that the most people within the suburbs work hard, but they've had the opportunity, and now President Abeam is giving these families the opportunity to get onto their feet. You come into this argument seemingly sided Republican, speaking from the point of view of a wealthier, suburban individual. I come into this argument looking for the just, equitable solution, and that is to give these impoverished families the opportunity to live by nationalising the suburbs. You do not know the experiences and struggles of these people, nor do you have to, but to be a decent human being you should consider using empathy. Step into their shoes. See how it feels to live with inadequate food, clothing, shelter and opportunity. See what it looks like to look up at wealthier people and just wish that the opportunity would come where you could supply for yourself or your family like they do. Step back into your own shoes. See how your own struggles are little compared to the everyday battles these families fight. Realise that you, as a wealthier family, could be doing something to HELP, just as President Abeam is doing by nationalising the suburbs. Finally, I would like to point out that you can not simply ship the lesser part of the American population to Cuba. If President Abeam did this, America would shift from a capitalist country to a country with a dictator; a totalitarian government. It would be similar to committing genocide, wiping out, per say, an entire regime of individuals; the impoverished, those who weren't fortunate enough to be born into better circumstances. He may not kill the individuals, but he would be getting rid of them, all to create this utopia you have pictured where the poorer families do not meet with the wealthier. In your mind, you want equality too, but you don't realise it. You want everyone to have the same wealth and live in the same suburbs. There would be no poorer people. But there are poor families, thus President Abeam is nationally the suburbs to bring the poor up to the standards of those in the suburbs so they can assimilate almost, but more importantly, get the opportunity of equality, which, by the way, is a human right. "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights." (Article 1) SOURCES: http://www.un.org... http://www.census.gov...