Source: The White House
quote: NADA even went as far as to say that the 54.5 mpg standard would tack on another $5,000 to new 2025 model prices and boot 7 million Americans from the new car market.
quote: Right are something that I have which do not infringe on other people's rights
quote: Entitled means that it is provided for you by others, which is the opposite of freedom because something is forcibly taken away from someone else to give to you.
quote: Let me be clear: owning a car has never been a right.
quote: You should go to China or North Korea. They don't have Democrats/Liberals over there.
quote: Get your facts straight, learn what a "legal right" is and then come back and talk.
quote: As a registered Republican who is active in politics you and Reclaimer are embarrassments to the party.
quote: Just because you are allowed to do something does not make that a protected right.
quote: I agree. Maybe in a different country where rights are held by the government by default instead of the people, but in this country, if it's not itemized in the constitution (and none of this crap is) then the right is automatically in the possession of the individual states or by individuals themselves.
quote: Your example is stupid. As if we're saying we have a "right" to ANY car we want, even one owned by someone else who refuses to sell. Seriously? Is that what you're actually taking away from this?
quote: Rights can be acted on by individuals without the assistance of government and without forcibly interfering with other individuals.Entitlements , on the other hand, cannot be fulfilled except through specific government actions which require forcible interference with others.
quote: Get your heads on straight people. Actually LEARN about the country you live in.
quote: There is no Constitutional right to purchase a vehicle.
quote: This is just stupid, you are making arbitrary distinctions that have no legal basis whatsoever.
quote: You were the one saying that an individual has the right to purchase legal tangible goods. That is incorrect. You have the right to contract with that individual, but not a right to purchase. Words do have meaning
quote: You may disagree with lightfoot, but what he said is right
quote: Did I say there was a "Constitutional right" to purchase a car? No. But it's still a right.
quote: AHAHAHA!! You really think that's going to work? That dragging this down into minutia is going to save your failed point of view? You are debating sir, you're hiding!
quote: A lot of tough talk from someone who doesn't understand the most basic aspect of the Constitution.
quote: So when you say something like "we don't have a right to own a car". I have to ask what you're basing that on. If We the People aren't granted the right to own property and engage in commerce with ourselves, I would like to see you prove that.
quote: The Constitution is based on the belief that we as human beings, have certain inalienable rights. That our rights were NOT dictated and spelled out by Governments and rulers.
quote: The purpose of the Constitution wasn't to list our rights. It was to PROTECT our inalienable rights from the Government. It dictates to our Government, not the other way around.
quote: Nice try, but that was the Declaration of Independence and has no significance whatsoever in Constitutional law.
quote: The Constitution is limited to the Seven Articles and the 27 Amendments.
quote: Constitutional law doesn't apply here because this is SUCH a no brainier there's never been a SINGLE case in the history of this country regarding it.
quote: Your argument is basically the same as saying I don't have a right to purchase food. That if the Government saw fit to, it could regulate me into starving to death.
quote: You've abandoned all common sense and logic in the favor of mental gymnastics and red herrings. You're a FOOL.
quote: The right to property is an essential part of any free society.
quote: Please, abandon this campaign of confusion and absurdity and understand that in this context "buy" and "contract to buy" is the same thing. We mean the same things!
quote: Lightfoot said "owning". He didn't say purchase, or buy, or contract. He said "own".
quote: We almost certainly have a right to OWN vehicles. Just stop, this is over. Admit you are wrong and move on.
quote: My exact quote of "owning a vehicle is not a right" meant specifically that it is NOT the governement's responsibility to ensure that every citizen owns a vehicle
quote: but there is NO LEGAL REMEDY to provide you with a car if you do not already own one.
quote: Please. I've seen lawyers debate an issue. To say he falls short of that standard is an understatement. He's not even citing case precedence or any trial rulings to back his position, something ANY lawyer would have done nauseatingly so by now.
quote: This isn't even a Constitutional issue, but he keeps trying to force it into that area. We have a right to obtain vehicles in this country, the OP lightfood is dead wrong. And it's a travesty so many weak minded socialist morons agree with him.
quote: This argument, if anything, highlights the cultural chasm between understanding the difference between a right, and an entitlement. The meaning of the two have been severely blurred over the years. Nobody is saying we're entitled to automobiles, that's different.
quote: What you call a right, often times isn't one covered under the constitution.
quote: If now you are saying that he is right when you say that people are not entitled to an automobile in violation of another's property rights then you are beginning to understand the distinction.
quote: Rights have absolutely no meaning unless they are backed up by legal support.
quote: So since the constitution doesnt specifically say I can twiddle my thumbs, scratch my balls, or pinch my own nipples, I do not have the right to do it? If there is a law specifically covering this, then I would LOVE tho see it!
quote: The reason why I was harping about the distinction with right to purchase vs right to contract is because some people honestly believe they have the right to go anywhere and be sold a product or service, otherwise it's a constitutional violation.
quote: Now you don't agree because you've already spoken of your love for the Commerce Clause. So I can't sway your insanity. I can only say that, on behalf of all Americans, thank you for continuing to misinterpret that clause and give the Government more and more power to bend us over a barrel.
quote: If you don't like it then why don't you run for office and change it or get confirmed to the Supreme Court?
quote: Nah how about the people in the judicial branch and you lawyers just do your goddamned jobs and uphold the Constitution more, and creatively "interpret" it less. It doesn't need interpretation, it's VERY clear.
quote: And at least I'm not a hypocrite extolling the clarity of the U.S. Constitution while turning around and saying that there are rights included in the Constitution that aren't expressly written.
quote: First.. Congress apparently felt it required a constitutional amendment, the 18th, to bring prohibition about, which specifically bans the sale of alcohol, but not, by my understanding, the possession. Seemed to them that people had the right to buy anything someone was willing to sell them, thus requiring an amendment to the constitution in order to nullify that right in a very specific instance.
quote: The whole point of this argument was to correct a statement amounting to "if I have the money then I have a right (constitutional or otherwise) to purchase a vehicle" and that is wrong.
quote: If I don't want to sell you something, I don't have to unless I am refusing to sell to a specific class of protected people.
quote: As such, the 9th and 10th Amendments are some of the most misunderstood amendments.
quote: If I go to buy a car and a dealership turns me away without an expressed legitimate reason (money, credit check, etc) I can sue them. They've violated my consumer rights. It most certainly IS protected.
quote: Coming from someone who believes the Commerce Clause isn't being raped and pillaged, this means next to nothing.
quote: he Left believes that Government can best achieve this aim through a combination of positive action and market forces, while the Right believes the government that governs best governs least.
quote: And to describe the Democrats in America as Marxists is a comical misrepresentation of their political and economic philosophies.
quote: Considering how Singapore, Hong Kong, some former Soviet areas, and SEZs "Special Economic Zones" around the world where governments admit their red tape crushes business incentive elsewhere, the weight of history is on one of those sides.
quote: Then you don't know Marx and the influences he had on political thought. Virtually all of the modern Democrats (post-Vietnam in particular) simply did not exist in this country until Marx's influence permeated the country.It's also easy to see close similarities between Democrats in this nation and this ideological peers that aren't too big of pussies to call themselves Socialist, Communist, or in one nice example, The Red-Green Alliance.
quote: Actually, you're mistaken. Hong Kong and Singapore are the top two most free economies in the world according to several sources. They're also some of the most competitive, and the least corrupt.
quote: Thats what I meant; history in on their side, the side of the free-market Hong Kongs of the world, not the socialists in places like Italy, where tax evasion is common, public perceptions of corruption high, and the government always one bad bond auction away from collapse.
quote: But if we set the Red-Green Alliance of Denmark or the Socialists of France as a benchmark for modern communism or socialism, and look at Obama, Pelosi and Reid ideologies and intentions, then its still fair to say I think that the resemblance is strong.
quote: And, just like you have the occasional racist loon in the Republican party, there is indeed the occasional old-school communist in the Democrat party that can't understand why we didnt just nationalize GM, or prop it up, or throw up huge trade barriers, or nationalize the electric grid or the healthcare system. In fact, I'd say a majority of Democrat *politicians* (not necessarily voters) can't fathom why nationalizing, say, the electrical grid, would be a bad thing, so heavily influenced by Marx as they are.
quote: If anything, cheap POS cars like what you see everywhere in Europe is what will flood the market.
quote: If Joe Blow wants to turn his car into a 1500hp 8mpg fuel vampire--I have no problem with that; he should be allowed to do it.
quote: I agree, but as the owner of a convertible that has to share the road with his kind, I would say that his emissions should be required to be filtered through his passenger cabin, and not mine.
quote: Ya see why your arguement is stupid?
quote: If their numbers were to be believed then seatbelts, collapsible steering columns, anti-lock brakes, airbags, air condition, electric windows, etc. would already have pushed prices up way beyond what a normal family can afford.
quote: Reclaimer is in Tampa for the convention ;)
quote: Although it might not seem like it, the USA is a fantastically wealthy country by global standards.
quote: By the middle of the next decade, our cars will get nearly 55 miles per gallon, almost double what they get today.
quote: Tesla also jumped on the CAFE bandwagon when it learned that it could sell any credits for surpassing the standards to companies that haven't.
quote: Mainly because they all feared that the standards would regulate most new vehicles that sell for under $15,000 out of existence.
quote: This is going for under $20k in the year 2012 and is at 53 mpg. Also, its a petrol/electric hybrid vehicle.
quote: Diesel is almost non existant from the US not just for emission reasons, but people don't want to buy them.
quote: And then there's another challenge for diesels--stricter U.S. emission regulations. The 50-state light-duty vehicle limit for emissions of nitrogen oxides is 0.07 grams per mile. In Western Europe, the limit is 0.29. Reducing NOx to nitrogen and oxygen is much harder with a diesel engine because the exhaust is typically cooler and contains less oxygen compared to a gas engine. To meet U.S. regulations, diesel engines are required to use complicated--and expensive--high-pressure fuel injection and after-treatment systems that in some cases inject an aqueous urea solution to handle the NOx. The added expense of course means an even longer payback period for the consumer. Read more: Diesel Cars in Europe vs. America - Why Diesel Vehicles Are Expensive in US - Popular Mechanics