America guarantees the right to pursue happiness-

but does not guarantee food and shelter...how can one pursue happiness
while starving and homeless?

A right means they can't deny you something. It doesn't mean they are obligated to provide you with anything though.

>rights without access
Distinction without a difference.

Heroin

If you have to ask, the system is working just fine.

No, the government dosen't "provide" anything for you, what rights are are things the government CAN'T deprive you of with due process, and you have no rights to people's labor.

that's part of the pursuit of happiness, no one ever said it was a quick or easy pursuit

The Declaration of Independence is a part of our foundation myth, but doesn't actually hold the weight of law.

It guarantees the right to the pursuit, not to be given free shit.

by not being a nigger and having a job?

>"how can one pursue happiness"
>"while starving and homeless?"
first of all that's a line break between "happiness" and "while", do you have this shit copied to some notepad so that it makes easier to repeatedly shitpost it?
then: you pursue that which you don't have. being hungry and homeless is the best time to concentrate on said pursuit.

By trying not to be starving and homeless, dumbass.

>pursue
Do you even english?

The second amendment doesn't imply free government guns.

In what world do rights equate to gibs?

While I think OP is just another libtard shitting on this board, he rises and actual valid point I'm also fed up with.

Everything is owned by someone. If I come from a poor background or a liberal useless family, it's obviously not possible to to buy land and just start homesteading you own stuff.

You are required to buy it from someone. For that you obviously need money. If you can't get a job, you'll never have the money to buy yourself free, and there will be no happiness.

Even when I'm provided with shelter and food, surviving and happiness aren't the same. Because without ressources you can't do anything. You can't improve yourself. You'll be like a living dead person.

>work is hard
Fuckin leafy eh; scared of guns and wants the sweet gibs.

One does it by learning how to do something people will PAY you for, OR GET A DAMN JOB. If you can't, I dont think we really need you

>implying anyone has starved to death in america in forever since you can just go to a food bank or homeless shelter if you need to

socialists projecting what happens in their countries

Learn to suck dick I guess.

>w-what if I'm a lazy, stupid bastard and don't wanna work hard enough to improve myself and gain respect among my peers and create my own work, perhaps even employing others!
Geez kid. Try harder.

...

>equality is a false god

That is right. Not all equally profittable to their jew capitalist overlords. White people are less profittable than brown people. That is why your capitalist elites will replace you.

How can an upright person be happy then? One also could rob, murder, and con people to gain something but there is no meaning if something more important was lost.

Oh, this only applies with working welfare. I still have the "luxury" to keep clean even if it get's be nowhere. Once there is no welfare and honest work is denied, there is no reason to not kill people to survive, as it just became such a either you or me world.

The same way you can pursue happiness while living in a billion dollar mansion and munching on gourmet meals cooked by your private chef.

America does guarantee food and shelter. We don't always do a good job of it, but don't imagine for a second that we aren't spending huge amounts of money feeding and housing the poor. Our homeless problem is largely a mental health issue, and substance abuse comes into play. If you see someone living on the street, chances are they avoid homeless shelters because they are crazy, the shelters are dangerous, or some combination of the two. That doesn't make it okay, but it's false to suggest we don't give a shit about our disadvantaged citizens and are of the mind to let people starve and freeze.

Apart from that, you make a good point, and the real problem is this. In a system that cares for its poor, people take advantage of the system and the tragedy of the commons sets in. People who can live without welfare participate anyway because they can and because they will be more comfortable doing so. This drains the system and means less help for people who truly need it.

How does Canada care for its poor without the almost-poor hopping on board for the ride? How do you deal with the more capable among you opting out of middle income situations because fuck it, being poor is tolerable living and less work?

I won't be happy until you suck my dick faggot! Don't deny access to my right to pursue happiness!

>leaf thinks the 2nd amendment demands the government to hand us all free guns

I fucking wish, man.
>Each household is to given an ar-15, a center fire bolt action, a pump shotgun, and a pistol. Along with 1000 rounds of ammunition for each firearm. Enjoy and train your freedom, citizen.

thats one of those fancy rights that dont mean anything at all but sound very nice when read aloud.

Define this "rights without access" problem you imply exists. A right, in the original American Constitutional understanding of the word, is better described as a negative right. The government CAN NOT behave in a certain way. I'm afraid you might be thinking of what has become the modern understanding of a right and is better described as positive rights. The government MUST behave in a certain way. Negative rights allow citizens freedom from government interference, whereas positive rights provide security against things like discrimination or homelessness and starvation.
A subject of her majesty, such as a leaf like yourself, might find freedom terrifying and enjoy living a neo-feudal society because that's what positive rights end up creating.

Don't think that's going to happen, Ruskie. Are you a mongol or a slav?

Because building homes is a fuckton of work.

Where government takes the role of provider, it sucks at its job. Positive rights create poverty. Step back, and let the economy operate. Man is a sapient problem-solver. Restrain force and fraud. Otherwise step back, and let man solve problems.
Men work together. Nothing is beyond the economy. Let it loose, and let the world rise over the poverties of ancient times.

Who in America is denied access to food and shelter? Food and shelter are private industries that love selling their product to anyone who walks through the door. And if you are too lazy to earn your own money to buy said food or the shelter the gov WILL provide it to you. So what the fuck are you even talking about?

You can literally PURSUE happiness regardless of your situation. It's not a guarantee you'll find it.

The right to the pursuit of happiness isn't a right at all. It's a universal condition.

>how can you hug children with nuclear arms. How can you pursue a penis when your homeless and ungey.?
You look for a second hand hot dog, if you find one you're all smiles

>how can one pursue happiness
>while starving and homeless?
You go out & pursue food & shelter, moron.

Pursuit of happiness, stupid leaf, and not the right to be happy.
Imagine if killing or being a neet made me happy. It would be chaos because law would not be able to do nothing.

There is no “right to food or shelter” anywhere in the constitution or the Declaration of Independence. You’ll also notice that it says right to “pursue” happiness, not a right to happiness itself, merely the pursuit.

when youre starving, just tell yourself that youre full

when you thirty, just tell yourself that you quenched

when youre homeless, just tell yourself it's for a greater cause.


it's the american way