|
GM declares bankruptcy (pg. 9)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
Yes, but you also have a responsibility to do the right thing by other citizens, consumers and peoples of the world, as well as the environment.
I'm sure you'd be up in arms if 17sss bought a pair of shoes that he knew were manufactured by slaves and said "I feel like it", but for some reason a car seems to be different. |
Well, if slaves made it, wouldn't that slave have their rights violated? Slaves have no liberty. Therefore, yes, those shoes would be bad. But slaves don't make Ford F-150's.
| quote: | | Also, 'lol' at: 'the government should not be telling people what they can and cannot buy'. Isn't that exactly what all governments have been doing since the dawn of time. Why are drugs illegal? Why is it illegal to sell children's toys with lead in them? Why are cigarettes becoming more and more rare? None of those three scenarios directly 'violate' someone's rights (not sure what you even mean by that term) and yet they're in force for a reason. |
You'r right, governments have been overwhelmingly oppressive throughout history. Luckily, our free market economics and democracy have changed that. That's why 17sss has the freedom buy things he doesn't need. Our economy isn't based on needs but on wants. Just because drugs are illegal doesn't mean that policy is the right policy. It is illegal to sell children's toys with lead, because that's child's right to life, and by default 'health', is being violated. Cigarettes aren't rare by the way.
I would tell you your last sentence is wrong. |
|
|
| Domesticated |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
You'r right, governments have been overwhelmingly oppressive throughout history. Luckily, our free market economics and democracy have changed that. That's why 17sss has the freedom buy things he doesn't need. Our economy isn't based on needs but on wants. Just because drugs are illegal doesn't mean that policy is the right policy. It is illegal to sell children's toys with lead, because that's child's right to life, and by default 'health', is being violated. Cigarettes aren't rare by the way.
I would tell you your last sentence is wrong. |
Okay, so by "rights", you mean an effect on others?
If you take that meaning, then every owner of an SUV or LTV is impinging upon my right to live by driving a vehicle which is far more likely to kill me should we have an accident.
That line of reasoning is ridiculous anyway, come up with something else. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
If you could provide a direct causal link that pacific islanders are losing their homes because 17sss drives a Ford F-150, I might believe you. |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
im not talking about you specifically, im talking about the entire US automobile industry, with their massive engines due to historically low gas prices. |
|
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
Okay, so by "rights", you mean an effect on others?
If you take that meaning, then every owner of an SUV or LTV is impinging upon my right to live by driving a vehicle which is far more likely to kill me should we have an accident.
That line of reasoning is ridiculous anyway, come up with something else. |
No no, it's not ridiculous. I rather think your line of reasoning is the illogical one.
See, 17sss has a right to pursue his happiness, so long as no one else's rights are violated. Like life, liberty, or happiness, property...You'v yet to come up with anything to the contrary for why 17sss should be denied his right to lawfully pursue his happiness. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
No no, it's not ridiculous. I rather think your line of reasoning is the illogical one.
See, 17sss has a right to pursue his happiness, so long as no one else's rights are violated. Like life, liberty, or happiness, property...You'v yet to come up with anything to the contrary for why 17sss should be denied his right to lawfully pursue his happiness. |
this is ing retarded. he doesn't have a "right" to pursue his happiness. and like i pointed out, other people's rights to own property are being violated as their homes disappear due to western lifestyles. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
this is ing retarded. he doesn't have a "right" to pursue his happiness. and like i pointed out, other people's rights to own property are being violated as their homes disappear due to western lifestyles. |
| quote: | Originally posted by The United States Declaration of Independence
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. |
|
|
|
| Domesticated |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
No no, it's not ridiculous. I rather think your line of reasoning is the illogical one.
See, 17sss has a right to pursue his happiness, so long as no one else's rights are violated. Like life, liberty, or happiness, property...You'v yet to come up with anything to the contrary for why 17sss should be denied his right to lawfully pursue his happiness. |
So now happiness is measured by the size of a person's car?
This is just getting more and more ridiculous.
It's also laughable that you say I'm yet to come up with any reason why he shouldn't drive a big car. I have cited numerous study which prove it's not only unsafe to himself, but also to other users on the road. I would say that 'PEOPLE DIE' is generally a pretty sound reason for denying someone their petty desires for material goods. Oops, sorry, I meant happiness. |
|
|
| Sunsnail |
| why do you guys care so much, pkc start smokin weed again. i liked beat blog better too |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
|
PKC, the US isn't the only one who drives cars. In fact, China is now the number 1 carbon emitter. Not making excuses, but global climate change isn't going result in us outlawing cars. |
|
|
| Omega_Blue |
| GM just sold the hummer brand to a chinese company today, woo |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
So now happiness is measured by the size of a person's car?
This is just getting more and more ridiculous.
It's also laughable that you say I'm yet to come up with any reason why he shouldn't drive a big car. I have cited numerous study which prove it's not only unsafe to himself, but also to other users on the road. I would say that 'PEOPLE DIE' is generally a pretty sound reason for denying someone their petty desires for material goods. Oops, sorry, I meant happiness. |
An F-150 truck is what makes 17sss happy, that's why he bought. You have no right to deprive him of that right, neither does government. By the way, what country do you currently reside in, I'm just curious.
Anytime anyone goes out on the road, they take the risk of getting into a car accident. I'd like to see the statistic that says F-150 trucks or trucks like it are any more dangerous than any other vehicle in the number of road deaths involved. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
this is ing retarded. he doesn't have a "right" to pursue his happiness. and like i pointed out, other people's rights to own property are being violated as their homes disappear due to western lifestyles. |
Actually, yes he does. Everyone has a right to pursue their happiness, so long as no one else's rights are violated. And those pacific islanders you are talking about. They also emit carbon, so they aren't off the hook either. The argument is invalid. |
|
|
|
|
