Human Needs Should be Free…or should they?

On the surface, most human rights are straightforward and self-explanatory but not all rights are as easily understood. The dispute regarding human needs has been a long-standing ethical and economical dilemma with no clear solution. After World War Two, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was signed by the United Nations to cover a variety of standard achievements, including necessities for survival, that each nation must follow. Yet these needs are not yet provided. In reality, you are not paying for the resource but rather the process, time, effort, and infrastructure used in the production. Water is easily accessible but unsafe to consume without proper filtration. Manufacturers must find adequate employees, pay them a livable wage, train them, and maintain the facilities. This combined already uses a tremendous cost. Neglecting those costs eventually causes the business to collapse alongside the unresolved need of free food and water. Returning to the UDHR, it can be inferred that the intent was for nations to recognize and acknowledge the rights rather than to provide them; the misconception that has sparked an outrage. The government is not allowed to restrict access to needs in regard to race, sex, religion and so on. From an economic standpoint, by removing the cost of these needs, the supply is devalued while the demand remains the same or even higher. Earth simply does not have infinite resources to comply to the demand. Of course, some solutions have stemmed from this debate but nearly all do not satisfy both the ethical nor economical needs of society. For instance, some people have considered removing wages entirely and rely on government intervention but this would simply remove demand for jobs that require more advanced skillsets and training such as those in the healthcare sector. As simple as this controversy seems, applicable solutions have yet to be discovered.