If this article is accurately portraying the situation, Antonio Tajani, the European Union commissioner for enterprise and industry, thinks vacations are a human right.
"An overseas holiday used to be thought of as a reward for a year’s hard work. Now Brussels has declared that tourism is a human right and pensioners, youths and those too poor to afford it should have their travel subsidised by the taxpayer."
Read the article here (it's short).
Also interesting, see how opinions about needs and wants have evolved over the years:
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/09/luxury-or-necessity/
Personally, I wouldn't say any of the things in that first graph (clothes dryer, dishwasher, home computer, cable or satellite tv, home air conditioning, car air conditioning, microwave) are necessities, but then again I spent two years in a 3rd(ish) world country.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I died a little inside when they claimed vacations were a right.
But, about the other items: a lot of those contribute to allowing upward social mobility. A home computer speeds up a job search. Car air conditioning keeps you presentable (for us sweaty types) while you're out and about ("presentable" being a social norm of not being sweaty because everyone has a/c). Even the dryer (and associated washer) was a necessity for Haley and me when we found an apartment in Charlottesville because we do laundry almost daily (courtesy of the little guy's backside), and trips to the laundromat would be a two-person job, taking considerable time away from studying.
I think it's the makeup principle. When it wasn't available, women didn't have to wear it. Once it became available, it became a social necessity if one wished to improve (or maintain) their social status.
I think I get what you're saying, but even in your situation I wouldn't call a dryer a necessity. I think it's still a luxury (there's probably some middle ground on these definitions). I draw a low line for that sort of thing.
Obviously, to accomplish your goals, a lot of what I would call luxuries are necessary, but I think that's different than what it means to say something is a human necessity (which is also distinct from a human right which demands government subsidy).
I guess the question becomes "necessity for what?" Upward social mobility is a worthwhile goal, or at least a desirable side-effect of other worthwhile goals, but I wouldn't call it a necessity either. This topic probably deserves a lot more than two blog comments, but that's a beginning.
If we're only talking about what deserves a *government* subsidy, you'd have to catch me on a good day to say food belongs on the list. But that's another discussion.
For all of those items, I would run a quick CBA in my head before I purchased any of them, so I guess they wouldn't be bare minimum necessities. The fact that I would consider not buying one tells me it's not a living necessity.
I think I misunderstood the post at first because I don't consider them luxuries if they serve a purpose beyond ease or comfort. While it makes sense to me to consider improving one's station a luxury, it's my understanding that doing so is also a spiritual imperative, so I consider it a necessity.
There is the danger of withholding our substance from others to provide luxuries for ourselves under the guise of "necessity," but there's also the danger of withholding our substance from others because we convince ourselves they don't really need more than they have. (D&C 51:3 changed my perspective on that, and caused me sore repentance.) It's definitely a balancing act, and a tricky one.
Well, except for vacations. That's not tricky.
Post a Comment