Amazon.com Widgets

Scotland considers enshrining a right to food law: Should the government be responsible for ensure food for its citizens?

  • The Government Should Be Responsible for Ensuring Food For its Citizens

    One of the most basic functions of government is to keep its people safe. The government does this with health care as well as military protection. Why shouldn't food be added to that list as well? Food is of such little cost to the government and the benefits to the people would be so great.

  • No person should go hungry, ever!

    Nobody is deserving of starvation. A government should never overlook it's citizens that are without food. Sure, it takes money to provide food, but for those that simply cannot find the means to purchase food, the government should step in and ensure that they do not go hungry. Even the staples are expensive anymore, and many families are undernourished because of this.

  • Yes, the government should be responsible for ensuring food for its citizens.

    Yes, the government should be responsible for ensuring food for its citizens because everyone needs to eat. The government is in place to protect its people and if it fails to give everyone the necessary food, then the government should be taken down. It is only good if it provides for its people.

  • Government should not be responsible for ensure food for its citizens

    Government should not be responsible for ensure food for its citizens. At what point does the government stop being the nation's babysitter and people start taking personal responsibility for themselves? Where there is no incentive for a person to produce for themselves, they become lazy and ever more reliant on government. Government is not efficient and it would only be a matter of time before it all collapsed under its own weight.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.