Roosevelt's Second Bill of Rights

One of the rights that he spoke of was the right to a "remunerative job".

This may sound laudable in a superficial way.  But, let's look at this closely.

For instance, who provides the job?  The private sector, or the public sector?  How do you define "remunerative"?  What if a private company cannot afford to pay this "remunerative" wage?  How do you guarantee that these wages are paid?  Somebody has to pay for it.

A thought occurred to me that one way to guarantee that everybody had a job was to bring back slavery.  If you had slavery, everybody would have a job with perfect job security.  Another factor is that responsibility for fair treatment of the slaves would ensure that nobody got unfair treatment.  Just like animal cruelty laws.  You can't mistreat a pet, or you'd get into trouble.  Why not give that same consideration to people?

People aren't animals, it could be argued.  But what makes people different from animals?  Is it because humans have a moral sense?  If that is true, what gives man a moral sense?  Isn't it the power to choose between good and evil?  Furthermore, isn't it the knowledge of good and evil?  An animal knows nothing about good and evil.  It just does what it does in order to stay alive.

If people have the power to choose, that implies responsibility, does it not?  For if you cannot choose, how can you be held responsible for anything?  After all, an individual is only doing what he or she does.  You don't hold a trial for animal that kills somebody, do you?  No, such an idea is absurd.  Why bother with a trial if nobody has a choice in their actions?

If the difference between people and animals is that animals don't have a moral sense, then how can you make a man a slave?  Are some people less than human then?  It is a perplexing question.  For if all people have the power to choose, how can some people be forced into working for someone else?

But if you can't have slaves, how can you guarantee that someone must be paid a certain wage?  That would entail that the employer would have to pay for something that is unaffordable. If such be the case, in order to hire someone, an employer would have to go broke.  Oops!  No more job.

Now, if jobs cannot be provided by the private sector, then the government must provide them.  But how do you pay for all these jobs?  What if the government cannot afford to pay for all of these jobs?  That seems to be a problem without an solution.  For you cannot require something that cannot be done.

It can't be a right if it cannot be done.  It should be called the Bill of Dreams, not the Second Bill of Rights.  But if it cannot be enforced, it cannot be a law.  Oops!

From this I conclude that the speech was just utopian rhetoric.