NationStates Jolt Archive

Need-Based Rights
A resolution to reduce income inequality and increase basic welfare.


Category: Social Justice
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: French States

Description: Noting that famine, plague, and war have eradicated entire populations,
Seeing the unsurvivable living conditions in many cities,
The United Nations
Declares that, henceforth, basic human needs shall be considered basic human rights, and
Stipulates that all member states shall guarantee the attainment of these needs for all of their citizens.

Basic human needs shall include the following:
1. A healthy diet including at least 2000 calories per day
2. A structurally stable residence of at least fifty square meters of floor space per resident
3. At least seven sets of clothing in wearable condition (Nations where nudity is manditory or encouraged are exempt from providing this necessity.)
4. Enough education to reasonably be able to provide oneself with the previously listed needs
5. Safety for one's person and property
6. Freedome from harmful levels of pollutants
7. For children
a. All of the necessities listed above, with the amount of food adjusted perportionally for their lighted masses
b. An healthy environment in which to mature.

All member nations shall either
1. Freely provide these necessities, or
2. Freely provide means by which their citizens might attain these necessities. (Children under the age of fourteen years, adults over the age of seventy, and mentally handicapped individuals with intelegence quotients less than seventy shall not apply to this option whatsoever.)

Approvals: 6 (Pine Ocean, Bijanian Utopia, BLACKGRUE, Ancients Tomatoes, Sinitsyn, French States)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 143 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Fri Apr 15 2005

Delegates, this is already on file in the United Nations.
It is called the United Nations Decleration on Human Rights.
We do not need this redundant action.
It is already being done, and thus, any further addressing is not needed.

The United Nations has no grounds to mandate a nation on what exactly it should give it's citizens. None whatsoever.

Thank you.

Delegates, this is already on file in the United Nations.
It is called the United Nations Decleration on Human Rights.
I have been unable to find any resolution or proposal of that name. Either you have given the incorrect name or I am looking for this legislation in the wrong places. I have manually searched in "Passed UN Resolutions" and "Submitted Proposals." MarxHammer, please inform me of the correct title or the correct location of this legislation.
The United Nations has no grounds to mandate a nation on what exactly it should give it's citizens. None whatsoever
The United Nations members rarely show any concern for national soveriegnty. I would be disappointed if they did in this case, seeing that this is a most noble proposal. (my personal oppinion. I admitt, I am somewhat biased concerning this matter.)

Need-Based Rights
A resolution to reduce income inequality and increase basic welfare.


Category: Social Justice
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: French States

Hmm. This should be interesting. I'm already intrigued by the title.

Description: Noting that famine, plague, and war have eradicated entire populations,
Seeing the unsurvivable living conditions in many cities,
The United Nations
Declares that, henceforth, basic human needs shall be considered basic human rights, and
Stipulates that all member states shall guarantee the attainment of these needs for all of their citizens.

So far, so good.

Basic human needs shall include the following:
1. A healthy diet including at least 2000 calories per day
2. A structurally stable residence of at least fifty square meters of floor space per resident
3. At least seven sets of clothing in wearable condition (Nations where nudity is manditory or encouraged are exempt from providing this necessity.)
4. Enough education to reasonably be able to provide oneself with the previously listed needs
5. Safety for one's person and property
6. Freedome from harmful levels of pollutants
7. For children
a. All of the necessities listed above, with the amount of food adjusted perportionally for their lighted masses
b. An healthy environment in which to mature.

I would change the first one. Change it to "A healthy diet meeting all nutritional requirements of their species." I would add in a clause 8 extending this to other sentient species with the stipulation that this extends to nonhumans with alterations made to match their necessary space and education requirements made by each individual nation.

All member nations shall either
1. Freely provide these necessities, or
2. Freely provide means by which their citizens might attain these necessities. (Children under the age of fourteen years, adults over the age of seventy, and mentally handicapped individuals with intelegence quotients less than seventy shall not apply to this option whatsoever.)

I would alter Clause Two to remove the exceptions. Some nations have found jobs that people of those ages can perform while not overtaxing them. Children, for example, can actually be good for training couples on how to deal with children and how to raise them (of course, the child must be compensated for the bother...).

whilst this proposal does seem interesting, we would not support it. whilst we have a welfare system in place, we dont like dependence on the government. this proposal is opening the door for such abuse of the system. we, The Lynx Allience, are not a corporate state, and believe whilst minimum things do need to be maintained, our people should be able to support themselves. yes, we will help out those in need, but we encourage them to find their own feet. a government has too many issues to deal with that this could be seen as an unnecessary burdon

Is the United Nation prepared to give my nation the funding to pay for these basic human needs? The cost of this new proposal would be astronomical. How is my nation expected to pay for this? I will never vote for an unfunded mandate of any kind. Amend the proposal to include United Nations funding for meeting these basic human needs and I will vote in favor of it.

I say again however, I will not vote for unfunded mandates.

The ideas here are good, but I think the proposal needs a few refinements:

1. A healthy diet including at least 2000 calories per day
2. A structurally stable residence of at least fifty square meters of floor space per resident

I agree with DLE on the species stuff with this

3. At least seven sets of clothing in wearable condition (Nations where nudity is manditory or encouraged are exempt from providing this necessity.)

There could also be exemptions for species that don't wear clothes.

5. Safety for one's person and property

There's bound to be someone who announces "property is theft!". As I understand it these kinds of ideology, if you substitute "possessions" for "property" you'll avoid this (correct me if I'm wrong)

6. Freedome from harmful levels of pollutants

No "e" at the end of "freedom". I'd also go for something like freedom from harmful levels of environmental damage, as this protects against physical as well as chemical violations (e.g. affecting climate by mass deforestation).

7. For children
a. All of the necessities listed above, with the amount of food adjusted perportionally for their lighted masses

The amount of food required isn't proportional to mass, I don't think. In fact, I'd overhaul the food requirements to simply state "A supply of food and drink which ensures that the nutritional requirements for good health of each individual can be fulfilled. Individuals with particular ethical dietary wishes such as vegetarianism must, where practical, be supplied with food which fulfils these wishes". This takes into account differing requirements depending on age, species, special diets for medical reasons, and ethical ideals. It also more clearly allows the individual to choose whether or not to eat the food, as my proposed clause only talks about what is given to the individual, not the diet (which is what is eaten). Previously it looked like it might be problematic for hunger-strikers etc. I have tried to write the second sentence so that people with reasonable wishes are catered for, but governments won't have to supply, for instance, a diet composed exclusively of caviar - it could probably do with improvement.

b. An healthy environment in which to mature.

Unless I'm much mistaken, "A" not "An"

(Children under the age of fourteen years, adults over the age of seventy, and mentally handicapped individuals with intelegence quotients less than seventy shall not apply to this option whatsoever.)

I am very reluctant to approve the use of IQ testing, as it is regarded by many experts to be a flawed measurement. In fact, even the concept of measuring intelligence is probably flawed. Also, the wording isn't as clear as it might be.

EDIT: Oh, and assistance for countries which really can't afford these things might be a good idea.

Delegates, this is already on file in the United Nations.
It is called the United Nations Decleration on Human Rights.
We do not need this redundant action.
It is already being done, and thus, any further addressing is not needed.

The United Nations has no grounds to mandate a nation on what exactly it should give it's citizens. None whatsoever.

Thank you.


Famine, Disease and Hunger is an International Problem. One way to combat this is for the United Nations to pass legislation to help protect the people of the world from these 3 menaces. And there is no Resolution on file within the United Nations that states the items that are addressed within this proposal.

The Holy Empire of Shazbotdom will vote positive for this if it ever reaches the general assembly.

The Holy Empire of Shazbotdom will vote positive for this if it ever reaches the general assembly.
I'd say that's unlikely.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8682112&postcount=746

OOC: OH well



Also, does anyone know why i'm getting "Invalid Link" and "Server Error" pages on here? Or is it just on my computer's end?

OOC: OH well



Also, does anyone know why i'm getting "Invalid Link" and "Server Error" pages on here? Or is it just on my computer's end?

It's probably an issue with Jolt. Their servers have been acting up lately.

I'd say that's unlikely.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8682112&postcount=746

That's a disappointment.

Does anyone else have the time/inclination to pick up this idea and keep it going? I would, but I don't have the time to work on a proposal right now.