Some, including most Objectivists, claim that property rights are the key to all rights; that they are more important than the right to life. Consider an individual who grows sufficient amounts of fruits and vegetables to feed himself and his family, but not enough to share and to sustain the health and welfare of him and those he loves. Now, imagine those who grow nothing petitioning the government to force this producer into giving up 10% or more of his crop to them. Their claim lies solely on the basis that they have been unsuccessful or unwilling to plant their own crops and without being kept by their brothers, they will surely die.

In the first place, the person who produces has a right to keep that which is derived from his/her own labor or intellect. He has a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Those who would place unjust demands on the producer for a portion of his property do so by placing his or members of his family’s right to life, by restricting his freedom to work at a level that provides sustenance and rest at levels acceptable to him, and by imposing on his right to happiness by forcing him to work for the benefits of strangers and the risk of wellbeing to his family at a cost that is detrimental both physically and mentally to his right to “catch happiness for himself”.

I think it should be clear to even the most stubborn political ideologue that the right to life is no right at all without private property rights.