The Minnesota Daily is a student paper at the University of Minnesota, and like other college papers across the country, it publishes left wing nonsense frequently. 

To be clear (as we shouldn’t even have to state), they have every right to publish them. It is their first amendment right to do so. However, it’s our right to criticize and call it out:

Driver’s licenses are a human right

From a May 7th Letter to the Editor, titled “Is being able to get a driver’s license a privilege or a human right?”:

“Even today, many undocumented immigrants already drive knowing full well that it is illegal. If they are going to drive anyway, why not allow these people the chance they seek to learn how to be a safe driver?”
 
The piece argues that being able to drive saves people’s lives, by, for example, being able to rush them to the hospital. And, it would be better for us all to let people who live here illegally drive legally.
 
Driving people to the hospital does saves lives, this is true. But there are many other goods and services that can be used to save lives or reduce the likelihood of lost lives. Many.
 
From smoke detectors to newer cars with superior safety features compared to older models, to bike helmets, to better electrical wiring in a home, there are an endless number of things that would become “human rights” if the above criteria were applied. The phrase would lose all meaning, and create a ridiculous number of government programs.

Restricting people from using welfare at theme parks and movie theaters is “dehumanizing” the poor

 

This column, published on April 13th says:

“Last week, policymakers in both chambers of the Republican-controlled Kansas Legislature passed a bill that would severely restrict the ways welfare recipients can use their benefits. The wording of the bill —  which Republican Gov. Sam Brownback is expected to sign — would ban welfare checks from theme parks, swimming pools, movie theaters and other public emporia.

While this bill may sound sensible (Why should the poor waste taxpayer dollars on entertainment?), it is merely the latest attempt in a long line of proposals that are meant to dehumanize the poor. 
 
Simply put, politicians who claim they are helping the poor by regulating how they use welfare checks provide no evidence that these controls would improve the conditions of the socioeconomically disadvantaged.”
 
It won’t improve their conditions? Well if they can’t use the money on entertainment, won’t they use it on things that they can use it for? Like things that improve their living conditions…medical care, housing, food, etc?
 
If people need to use their own money at movie theaters, wouldn’t that be an incentive to earn more money on your own? It doesn’t hurt their living conditions and health, and gives people a better incentive to get out of poverty. It also may save taxpayer money. Win win win.
 

Entitlements increase economic productivity

From April 30,
 
“As the United States Supreme Court considers the constitutionality of same-sex marriage this week, it’s important to remember that social equality and welfare policies increase productivity, rather than drain valuable resources. “
 
Of course, no hard data was provided to back up this claim, and it’s a big enough claim that it certainly needs data.
 
Social equality is great, but to claim that welfare policies increase economic productivity is a super stretch. Safety nets don’t improve the overall output of the country. The argument for safety nets is to help people when they need it, at the expense of others. On net, society is still down. You are trading wealth for human happiness and survival, in other words. 
 
Let’s hope the paper starts publishing some more non-left wing pieces soon, in the spirit of intellectual diversity. Check out their website, it’s pretty one sided.