Well, we can inquire upon the premises.
Why do all human beings deserve this minimum standard of treatment? Deserving something concerns justice, and justice typically deals in receiving what is owed. To be owed is to have given something in return for an accounted cost, and thus to rectify an injustice. You quote from the Gospel, and from this we may read from the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant (Matthew 18:21–35):
https://biblia.com/bible/esv/matthew/18/21-35Here, the master deals in pity, not justice. The servant does not "deserve" forgiveness, yet it is granted anyway, by philanthropy. This does not mean charity is unjust, but simply that it isn't justice. After the servant is forgiven, he deals in justice, seeking what he's owed, and for this sake, the master persecutes him as a hypocrite, for the sake of his begging. The unforgiving servant deserves what he is owed, but he also owes another - and at a greater price. To speak of what one deserves is then limiting of the potential for kindness. One's compassion flows freely outwards, without expectation of reward. So, I would say that it is in the nature of kindness to give without taking, and in this is a principle higher than justice. So, we can say that people ought to be kind, but this cannot be a political ideology, since it is purely ethical. The unfortunate failures of humanitarianism is shown in the charitable aid given to Africa, which has acted like a dispensation for beggars; crippling people into dependence, and allowing for a strengthening of political corruption. Charity alone does not solve political problems. If the rich young ruler withdrew all of his possessions and gave the proceeds to the poor, evenly stretched out across the world, each person might only receive a penny. At the same time, it is true that many are excessively wealthy while others are excessively poor - but this was also true from the time of Christ. Christ advocates for an ethical alternative to politics, yet recognises that there is a "narrow path" of those who will maintain the means to find contentment in it - for one must strive for riches in heaven rather than on earth. Regardless, we see that the Church divided their possessions amongst themselves in common, signifying fellowship:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%204%3A32-35&version=ESVNone were poor because each thing was evenly divided. As Jesus may add however, one should not cast pearls before swine. Covenant implies mutual obligation, lest a greedy guts as Judas betray it. We see that Judas rebukes Christ for using the oil instead of selling it - and so the love of money also corrupts, even in its act of equitability. What this implies is that each should receive only what is both (i) owed to them by their work; for as we read, a man deserves the wages of his labour (Luke 10:7), and (ii) compassion gives more than what is owed, for the treasures of heaven are superior to treasures on earth.
So, when we speak of deserving something, we may read thus:
<Stay there, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wageshttps://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2010%3A7&version=NIVAnd for whatever else, we may read:
<go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heavenhttps://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2010%3A17-27&version=KJVAnd finally:
<There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%204%3A32-35&version=ESVBut be weary:
<the love of money is the root of all evilhttps://biblehub.com/1_timothy/6-10.htmThe price of Joseph was 20 pieces of silver; Jesus was 30.
When one speaks of sacrifice, there are many different meanings.
So, you must unify the (i) lawful, (ii) ethical, and (iii) political.