Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: FDR's unrealized 2nd bill of rights is our solution!

Posted 2 years ago on Jan. 10, 2012, 12:52 a.m. EST by antigoldencalf777 (14)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Occupy has presented to the world of the problem of economic inequality suffered by the 99%. Now that we have presented a problem; it is time to present a solution and unite and work to implement the solution. I believe that the solution is Franklin D. Roosevelt's unrealized '2nd bill of rights' for those who has not heard of it, it goes like this: Excerpt from President Roosevelt's January 11, 1944 message to the Congress of the United States on the State of the Union[2]: “ It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth—is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.

This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.

As our nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.”[3] People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.

For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world. ” let us unite to make this 2nd bill of rights a reality. the 1% should realize that this bill of rights will ensure their continued wealth and security. Also it will create more consumers that can afford to spend money. This is a win, win idea.....some will say that this is socialist idea. so what? if it means that there will be no one living on the streets, dying of lack of medical care, people going hungry, etc....then it is a very humanitarian idea. uncontrolled capitalism driven by endless greed at the cost of the majority cannot sustain itself. it must transform into a more humanitarian capitalism in order to survive...let us present this solution that have been hidden so long in plain sight to the 99%!

23 Comments

23 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Lord, someone spoke the forbidden name, FDR! Weren't you taught by the corporate media that his name is never to be mentioned! Shame on you!

Oh, and I agree with you completely.

[-] 2 points by antigoldencalf777 (14) 2 years ago

Thanks, I really want our country and the world to become a more livable society. Please spread the idea

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

I'm doing that right now - Hey everybody - FDR was right!!!!!

[-] 2 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

Any one who can should make the pilgrimage to FDR's Springwood ( http://www.nps.gov/hofr/index.htm ) and Eleanor's Val-Kill ( http://www.nps.gov/elro/index.htm ). They are both in Hyde Park, NY.

Before going I had pretty much bought into the criticisms of FDR (Japanese internment, the failure to support democracy in the Spanish civil war, turning away ships of Jews fleeing Nazi Germany, Pearl Harbor mal possibilities, etc.). But once at Springwood I realized the fighting spirit of the guy. Also that was the first time I had ever heard of his Four Freedoms. The postwar (WWII) world should have been built on them. It would be a different world today.

We still can bring about FDR's world, that is our task.

More links: http://www.fdrheritage.org/links.htm http://www.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/links.html

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

FDR was the super-awesome(ness) :)

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by toonces (-117) 2 years ago

That is the communist manifesto

[-] -1 points by capella (199) 2 years ago

fdr was a racist.

[-] -1 points by headlesscross (67) 2 years ago

"true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence."

Who provides this "economic security"?

How will you have "independence"?

[-] 1 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

By shifting to a small business economy -- more jobs, more innovation.

Bigness is badness. Such concentrations of economic power that they overpower democracy can no longer be allowed. If giant foreign companies want to sell the products in the U.S., they'd have to price them within the "price basket" of U.S. manufactured products.

We, the people, are sovereign. Unrestrained dog eat dog capitalism that leaves only the mad dogs standing is not a law of physics. We don't have to allow it.

[-] 0 points by headlesscross (67) 2 years ago

"Bigness is badness. Such concentrations of economic power that they overpower democracy can no longer be allowed."

Does that also apply to Government?

[-] 1 points by antigoldencalf777 (14) 2 years ago

we the people will provide it to each other through a medium called government. right now that medium which should be for the people by the people are actually for the rich by the rich only and this destroys de-mock cracy and made it into 'to-mock(the people) cracy! our government lost its original function. instead of spending our tax money to help us live a secure life, it uses it to fatten the pockets of the 1 % by creating artificial enemies of our country to justify them spending our money on weapons etc....use the money for the people because the money is peoples

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Man I love to know there are people out there who really get it! Thanks for this comment!

[-] 1 points by antigoldencalf777 (14) 2 years ago

I am very thankful that you understand. lets hope that the rest of 99% see the light...I personally make over 150K a year and I am comfortable but I understand the plight of those who have a hard time making it no matter how hard they work...I will never forget when I was a tadpole because I understand that all can't become a frog in this corrupt society......

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Thank you for affirming my faith in humanity. It is those who have, and can still recongnize injustice that will save us. We need people like you in this movement!

[-] -1 points by headlesscross (67) 2 years ago

How will you have REAL "independence" if you are dependent on the Govt. for everything?

[-] 1 points by antigoldencalf777 (14) 2 years ago

I am not saying the you should be dependent on the government for everything. all I am saying is that the government's purpose is to guarantee the 'pursuit of happiness' ie....who do you thing the minimum wage is for? the people or the rich? minimum wage was established by the lobby of the rich. it is basically how much money they can pay...but the reality is that it is not enough to cover the basic necessities such as rent and food and transportation.....all I am saying is that the government should make it possible for a wage earner to be able to support a family....after all, our society needs, dish washers, butchers, cashiers, and all the low paying jobs that do not pay enough to support a family.....personally I make over 150Ks now so I am comfortable. But once upon a time I wasn't able to provide enough for my family and realize that this society needs people in all types of low paying jobs....I think it is the governments responsibility to enact realistic pay rates so that any job could provide for a family........I think the government should ensure that all wages are realistic enough for a person to at least provide the minimum things such as shelter, food, and education etc....the independence comes from the freedom of individuals to pursue to achieve more than the basics.....a mercedes and a 10 bedroom mansion etc.....What I am saying is that basic needs such as food medicine and housing should not be a thing that can only be realized by spending all their lives for.....

[-] -1 points by headlesscross (67) 2 years ago

So what you're saying is (for example) if a teenager or young adult with no real experience yet,should be able to work their first job of car washer,burger flopper,pizza delivery etc,...and.....

" the government should make it possible for a wage earner to be able to support a family"

Do you suggest the Govt. should impose a minimum wage of say $20.00 an hour? $30.00?

How many small businesses could afford to hire an inexperienced teenager/adult and then be forced to pay them $20 to $30 an hour?

How much of that $20 an hour or more would then be subjected to taxation to support the scope of State and Fed Govt. involvement in creating and sustaining this "realistic" scenario of FDR's?

How much $$$ will we then be able to keep to pursue this "independence" and "freedom" of buying Mansions and Mercedes?

Thanks for your indulgence and time in answering my questions.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Your argument is essentially an argument against the middle class. If trillions of dollars weren't being skimed off the top by a tiny percentage of people, a minimum wage of twenty dollars an houe would be possible, and that would drive up wages for everyone except the top 1/10th if the one persent. So unless you feel that you will be in that minescule class you are arguing against your own advancement. If those trillions of dollars were recovered for the economy there would be enough money in circulation that small businesses would be able to afford those wages and still be making higher profits than they are now,

[-] 1 points by antigoldencalf777 (14) 2 years ago

Did you know that our constitution give our government the right to print money and set the prices? The government gave this right to the private organization dubiously named 'Federal reserve' Government can freeze the prices and increase the wages at will but that right has been forfeited to the stock market etc......those who profit from fluctuating prices are not producers.....all profits should be based on production not artificial fluctuations....this is how the rich keeps getting rich without financing anything that produce any tangible goods....and the government can stop the bs but unfortunately, all of the politicians are either part of the 1% or at the minimum bought off by them.....solution: freeze the wages and lower the prices to increase peoples buying power or freeze the prices and increase the wages.....its really simple if we don't listen to the brain washed economists or others who are all under the spell of the bs...by the way, I am one of the fortunate people who makes enough to be able to afford a decent living.....but I do know that under the current system, I am an exception rather than the norm.....I think it is to the interest of all; if we reduce the needy, it will reduce the crime rate because most of the crime is driven by lack of money....

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Yes, I know that. But unless we deal with the underlying problem they will simply find another mechamism to accomplish the same goals. The thing I see as the root of the problem is the corporate charter itself. I think it must be outlawed and replaced by straightforward business ownership. The function of the corporate charter is to prevent business from being held accountable for it's actions to the larger society. If we don't slay this dragon outright, it will simply find another way to rear its ugly head again in the near future.

[-] 1 points by antigoldencalf777 (14) 2 years ago

Your welcome, I am just trying my best to win over a person as intelligent as you into joining the struggle to make this society a more humanitarian society where we don't have to be bombarded by homeless people, sick people, starving people etc....I am a very selfish person. I like to enjoy my life in a safe and happy society without feeling sad or intimidated by unfortunate people living in the streets etc.... The young teenager should make enough to be able to afford a studio apartment....the person who is married and has a family but in the same occupation should be able to afford a one, two, or three bedroom dwelling in accordance with his circumstance even if he/she is doing the same work. to regulate things like this is the reason why we need governments....about the tax issue, The tax should be a flat rate. Maybe 10 percent...if you make a 1000 you pay one hundred...if you make 100K you pa10K.....it doesn't have to be complicated....why do you thing our taxes are so complicated?...its because of the 1 percent's lobby.....because they bought off our representatives in the government through special interest lobby etc....our tax codes became a complicated mess in order to give the one percent loopholes to pay less than what they rightfully should....if the tax code was a logical flat tax rate, it would be equitable for all don't you think? what do you think is stopping the logical flat tax? Did you know that our congress has the right to establish the exchange rate? This right has been given to the so- called stock market in order to appease the one percent. I advise you to read the constitution and bill of rights....most of the congressional powers designed to be used to provide a climate that supports the pursuit of happiness has been forfeited by the government to appease the one percent minority......government's function should be to appease the majority in a democratic society but unfortunately than is not happenning and many of us are brain washed into accepting this as the norm. perhaps your reasoning is a product of the one percent's brain washing agenda....

[-] 1 points by headlesscross (67) 2 years ago

Thanks for your reply,however you didn't address any specifics of how two people working the same job are getting paid different $$$ because of their personal situations. Wouldn't this then become a case of discrimination for the ACLU?

I agree with a flat or fair tax. But do believe that only 10% would be able to sustain this type of Govt. involvement?

I read this quote a long time ago,do you agree with it? “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.”

Thanks again,you're very generous.

[-] 1 points by antigoldencalf777 (14) 2 years ago

By the way, two person working the same job are already being paid different amounts according to their circumstances....the best example is the housing pay for military personnel....a person who are married and/or have a dependent gets more money for housing than a person who is single and same rank....I think this is a very reasonable policy...Yes I totally agree with the above quote....I am not saying that the government should guarantee everything....all I am saying is that it should guarantee at least the basic needs such as housing, health care, food, etc....after that people can live according to the above quote: according to ones want and desires or needs, and according to their abilities they can get more than the basic...such as luxurious jewelry, expansive cars, mansions, yachts, private plane etc.....lets just make our government more humane and establish the system to prevent homelessness, hunger and lack of health care....it will just mean that there will not be homeless and sick people going hungry.....thanks