Vacation is a human right

[bigg cheese]

Vacationing a human right, EU chief says

I knew this was coming:

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. Mr. Tajani was appointed to his post by Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi.
The plan -- just who gets to enjoy the travel package has yet to be determined -- would see taxpayers footing some of the vacation bill for seniors, youths between the ages of 18 and 25, disabled people, and families facing "difficult social, financial or personal" circumstances. The disabled and elderly can also be accompanied by one other person. The EU and its taxpayers are slated to fund 30% of the cost of these tours, which could range from youth exploring abandoned factories and power plants in Manchester to retirees taking discount trips to Madrid, all in the name of cultural appreciation.
"The commission is literally considering paying people to go on holiday," Mats Persson, of pro-reform think-tank Open Europe, told Britain's News of the World. "In this economic climate, it's astonishing that the EU wants to bribe people with cheap holidays."
Mr. Tajani said the program will be piloted until 2013, and then fully launched.
Intended to instill a sense of cultural pride in Europeans, Mr. Tajani's human-rights travel will also help bridge the continent's north-south divide and pad resorts' business in their off-season, the Times reports.
Northern Europeans will be encouraged to visit southern Europe, and vice versa. Mr. Tajani wants to ensure people's "right to be tourists" remains intact.

 

[smoking357]

Under a similar rationale, Hoosiers will only be allowed to vacation in places OTHER THAN:

1. Dale Hollow
2. Gatlinburg
3. Orlando

 

[SD45]

It amazes me how Europe seems to have such a short term memory. In the first half of the 20th century, the continent as a hole started to pile on debt and what I will call "overhead". That coupled with Treaty of Versailles eventually led to WWII. (I know that statement is extremely simplified).

Regardless, when are they going to recognize that the path of entitlement/debt/lossed productivity is one of failure and strife.

 

[5.56'aholic]

good Lord, what next?

 

[leftsock]

List of statutory minimum employment leave by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In most industrialised nations, advances in employee relations have seen the introduction of statutory minimum tariffs for employee leave from work, i.e. the amount of entitlement to paid holiday/vacation. Several companies will offer contractually more time, depending on the sector. Companies and the law may also differ as to whether national holidays are counted as part of the minimum leave. Disparities in national minimums are still subject of debate regarding Work-life balance and perceived differences between nations.

European Union at least 4 weeks, more in some countries
...
United States none[10]

^ US law does not require employers to grant any vacation or holidays and about 25% of all employees receive no vacation time or holidays: No-Vacation Nation. For employees that do receive vacation, 10 working days with 8 national holidays is fairly standard. Members of the US Armed Services earn a total of 30 vacation days a year, not including national holidays.

Well, we have just about the only nation that doesn't require some time off for employees. I don't think we have to worry about our gov. sponsoring vacations.

 

[theweakerbrother]

I watched an episode of a show called Taboo a few weeks ago. Those who are disability in England can visit Amsterdam on the Queen's dime to have sex with prostitutes.

 

[DocBoCook]

Well, if travel is a human right, why do we have taxes for roads, registration, licenses? they should all be free then. But then, we wouldn't have roads, sooooo......

 

[SavageEagle]

Travel is a human right. You cannot tax travel. It would be impossible. However, you can tax HOW people travel. You can tax roads and license plates and what not. However, I do believe that being able to drive a car is a right and not a privilege. Otherwise they need to allow people like me in the suburbs to have horses so we can still travel other than by foot or bicycle. Someone that works 50 miles from home cannot be expected to ride a bike to work.

 

[bigg cheese]

Someone who rides a bike to work shouldn't expect to be employed by a business 50 miles away.

 

[SavageEagle]

Someone who rides a bike to work shouldn't expect to be employed by a business 50 miles away.

Yes, but someone who works 50 miles away shouldn't forfeit that job because they lose their license either.

 

[CarmelHP]

Yes, but someone who works 50 miles away shouldn't forfeit that job because they lose their license either.

If they've done something to lose their license, then yeah, they should.

 

[bigg cheese]

I'm not sure about that. It is all the more motivation not to lose one's license, which is not a guaranteed right.

 

[SavageEagle]

If they've done something to lose their license, then yeah, they should.

So, if someone got a ticket for 2mph over and did not have car insurance at the time, lose their license, they should not be able to drive???

Are you saying you support government mandated insurance?

 

[lashicoN]

Why don't they just hurry it up and seize everyone's paycheck in the EU, then redistribute it out how they see fit. When you're taxed at 100% that's what happens anyway and it seems like that's their ultimate goal.

 

[bigg cheese]

So, if someone got a ticket for 2mph over and did not have car insurance at the time, lose their license, they should not be able to drive???

Are you saying you support government mandated insurance?

I don't recall saying either of those things -- please don't put words in my mouth.

But, current law requires that if you drive on public roadways, you have to have a license. If you lose it, then you forfeit your ability to drive.

I know lots of people who've gotten DUI's who drive scooters to work for months at a time. Kind of humiliating, and time consuming, as many of them don't get up to 55MPH, but such is the consequence, and they're that much more UNlikely to do it again.

 

[lashicoN]

I'm not sure about that. It is all the more motivation not to lose one's license, which is not a guaranteed right.

I think what Savage Eagle is getting at, and I agree, is that driving should be a right, not a privilege. Here is why I believe this, it's very simple.

We have a large country, with many jobs and many businesses all over the place. Everything is spread out. If you don't live in a city, you must have a driver's license to function in society. Like SE said, you can't realistically ride your bike to a job 50 miles away.

We have the right to keep and bear arms for security. We should have the right to drive for job security and family security.

Driver's licenses aren't just used to drive. They are used to identify people, buy tobacco, buy liquor, run firearm background checks, and many other things.

Lastly, we pay taxes on roads. If you have your driver's license or not, you are taxed and part of that money goes toward building new roads, plowing roads and repairing old roads. How would you like to be taxed to build a new park, but then told you weren't allowed into the park?

 

[SavageEagle]

I'm not sure about that. It is all the more motivation not to lose one's license, which is not a guaranteed right.

I missed this post. I'm sorry.

You're right. A license is not a right. A license is a CONTROL. It's not only a way for the government to keep track of you, but it also gives you some magical ability to drive a car. Without one, you are automatically a criminal and a mindless maniac that has no business behind the wheel of a vehicle.

However, as I've said for years, you do have a right to drive a car because it is a means of travel. If I can fly an Ultralight aircraft without a pilots license, surely I can drive a car on the road without a driver's license.

 

[CarmelHP]

So, if someone got a ticket for 2mph over and did not have car insurance at the time, lose their license, they should not be able to drive???

Are you saying you support government mandated insurance?

Insurance is not mandatory, you can show other financial responsibility such as a bond or proof of continuing ability to pay a liability judgment against you. Do you think that you should be able to operate a vehicle unsafely and maim or kill others with no consequences?

Regardless, you're not stopped from driving a car, you're stopped from putting the public in jeopardy on public roads. Drive on your own land to your heart's content.

 

[bigg cheese]

No harm no foul .

You are right though. It is nothing more than a means of control. I don't agree with the laws as is, but they aren't unconstitutional, and the likelihood of them being repealed is nil.

 

[bigg cheese]

Do you think that you should be able to operate a vehicle unsafely and maim or kill others with no consequences?.

That's a good point. It has to be addressed some way. The old way was (if there was cost associated to the incident) to become an indentured servant. Something tells me that wouldn't go over very well today.