I think that is a flawed argument

However healthcare is not innate

However can be adopted

it isnt a "Tier 1 right"

We are also born with the capacity to kill others and stopping that takes intervention yet i don't think anyone would say that we have a natural right to kill others

That is because we rank rights

You cannot express your rights if they directly impact someone else's innate right to autonomy for example

The right to life is above the right to freely express your murderous desires

For example

I guess

This is why the right to speech ends after you call directly on someone to take action against another

as that right has then negated that other person's right to autonomy

It's also why the abortion argument is difficult

As you have to judge when the foetus gains their humans rights

When does your right to autonomy start infringing on the foetus's right to life

For example

https://discordapp.com/channels/462008211378012160/622430298746912768/637054294746595331 @Joshu

Positive and negative freedoms.

Depends on your point of view.

I see positive as in rights

However not extreme

Social mobility is good

But not if it sacrifices basic rights.

It's the auth vs lib argument essentially

Negative freedom (or negative liberty) consists of freedom from something whereas positive freedom (or positive liberty) consists of the ability to do something.

Your social mobility would be considered positive freedom

They intersect a bit

I have the ability to speak because I am free from prosecution due to it.

One enables the other in some cases

Mhm

However things like "I have the ability to be a worker because I am not free to do anything else" such as seen in some places in history is lacking basically both.

It truth true freedom gives you a helping of both types but not too much of one.

How on earth can you consider social mobility a positive right? I mean if you have a caste system and have to remain at whatever class you are born *that* would be a positive right. Simply allowing people to achieve whatever they can in life is still a negative right. I suppose if social mobility were determined by government grants you could call it a positive right but you would also call it a dystopian nightmare........

"I suppose if social mobility were determined by government grants you could call it a positive right but you would also call it a dystopian nightmare........"

I would argue that is what Britain is, hence said what I said

Oh so you're saying that you guys do social mobility wrong?

When it encourages foreigners to swarm here en mass? Yeah.

Wait how does that relate to social status???

Any pro brexit peeps here

I fucking wonder Austin

<:dogekek:602103206528417795>