AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2011-03-29, 21:03   Link #12761
SaintessHeart
Ehh? EEEEHHHHHH?
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx View Post
It should be noted that it is fossil-fuel burning cars that are the main concern.... not necessarily the concept of individual mobile transport.
The thing about electric and hybrid cares is that the technology is expensive and relatively new, and nobody is willing to buy and use a new-fangled machine that isn't time tested.

Fossil-fuel cars have been around since Ford made the first. Society is too deeply entrenched in using this kind of vehicle for a century to make a sudden switch.

Though palm oil cars are the next best bet in mixed fuel cars - but the Asian governments are too dumb to capitalise on this kind of technology.
__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.
SaintessHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-29, 21:28   Link #12762
GundamFan0083
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: classified
Huh, my automobile doesn't cost me anywhere near that much Vexx.
I bought my 1998 Jeep outright for $6700.00 with only 65,000 miles on it.
Insurance costs me $325.00 every 6 months ($54.00/month), and gas is about $160.00/month for me at $3.47/gallon.
I store it in my driveway, I do all the maintenance, buy the parts from NAPA, don't pay parking fees or tolls (I plan ahead so I don't have to, there are exceptions, but those are very rare), taxes on it are very low ($31.00/year, plus emissions every 2 years adds another $20.00).

I agree with you that people MUST have choices and public transit needs to be one of them, but not the only choice.
As SaintlessHeart pointed out, there's no way we can convert to electric cars completely over the next 50 years.
Electric cars have been around since the 1800s, and never have quite caught on (granted technology is much better now).
And considering how far we've come with hydrogen thus far, I think electric-cars are a pipe dream.

As for the right to travel ...I don't care what the DMV manuals say.
I care what the courts have ruled on this issue.

SCOTUS ruled thus:

Quote:
Saenz v Roe, 98-97 (1999):"For the purposes of this case, we need not identify the source of [the right to travel] in the text of the Constitution. The right of free ingress and regress to and from' neighboring states which was expressly mentioned in the text of the Article of Confederation, may simply have been conceived from the beginning to be a necessary concomitant of the stronger Union the Constitution created."

Corfield v. Coryell, 6 Fed. Cas. 546 (1823), the Supreme Court recognized freedom of movement as a fundamental Constitutional right. In effect travel is a right.

In Paul v. Virginia, 75 U.S. 168 (1869), the Court defined freedom of movement as "right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them."

Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116 (1958) "The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.

U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized."

Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all."
The lower Federal courts have also ruled on the right to travel as follows:

Quote:

“A state cannot impose a license, tax or fee on a constitutionally protected right.”—Murdock vx. Pennsylvania 319 US 105 (1942)

"The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221

"The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.
It could not be stated more directly or conclusively that citizens of the states have a common law right to travel, without approval or restriction (license), and that this right is protected under the U.S Constitution.

Quote:

"The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right." Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941.
I'd say it's pretty clear it's a right.
__________________
GundamFan0083 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-29, 22:25   Link #12763
Frenchie
Shougi Génération
*Graphic Designer
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Age: 27
Send a message via MSN to Frenchie
Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamFan0083 View Post
Huh, my automobile doesn't cost me anywhere near that much Vexx.
I bought my 1998 Jeep outright for $6700.00 with only 65,000 miles on it.
Insurance costs me $325.00 every 6 months ($54.00/month), and gas is about $160.00/month for me at $3.47/gallon.
I store it in my driveway, I do all the maintenance, buy the parts from NAPA, don't pay parking fees or tolls (I plan ahead so I don't have to, there are exceptions, but those are very rare), taxes on it are very low ($31.00/year, plus emissions every 2 years adds another $20.00).

I agree with you that people MUST have choices and public transit needs to be one of them, but not the only choice.
As SaintlessHeart pointed out, there's no way we can convert to electric cars completely over the next 50 years.
Electric cars have been around since the 1800s, and never have quite caught on (granted technology is much better now).
And considering how far we've come with hydrogen thus far, I think electric-cars are a pipe dream.

As for the right to travel ...I don't care what the DMV manuals say.
I care what the courts have ruled on this issue.

SCOTUS ruled thus:



The lower Federal courts have also ruled on the right to travel as follows:



It could not be stated more directly or conclusively that citizens of the states have a common law right to travel, without approval or restriction (license), and that this right is protected under the U.S Constitution.



I'd say it's pretty clear it's a right.
Why do you care? Europe is not the US.

With all the hate spewed about the US turning European, I would say that the pipedream is the US ever reforming its public transport system.

I honestly have entirely given up on the US, there's more hope in China turning into a state upholding freedom of the press.
Frenchie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-29, 22:29   Link #12764
GundamFan0083
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: classified
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frenchie View Post
Why do you care? Europe is not the US.

With all the hate spewed about the US turning European, I would say that the pipedream is the US ever reforming its public transport system.

I honestly have entirely given up on the US, there's more hope in China turning into a state upholding freedom of the press.
Because I care about humanity Frenchie, that's why I care about Europe, Asia, Africa, all of mankind.
I know, I'm a bleeding heart Liberal so just shoot me now.

I absolutely agree with you on the US public transit system needing reform.
It does, but unfortunately there's no money for it right now.
I'm not against public transportation, I just don't want it to be THE ONLY form of transportation.

About China....you might be right.

_________________________________________

In other news:

Home prices in the US decline further.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Home-p....html?x=0&.v=1

Also, 13% of US homes now sit vacant.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Housin...77853.html?x=0
__________________
GundamFan0083 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 02:00   Link #12765
Lord of Fire
The Voice of Reason
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Netherlands
Age: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamFan0083 View Post
Huh, my automobile doesn't cost me anywhere near that much Vexx.
I bought my 1998 Jeep outright for $6700.00 with only 65,000 miles on it.
Insurance costs me $325.00 every 6 months ($54.00/month), and gas is about $160.00/month for me at $3.47/gallon.
I store it in my driveway, I do all the maintenance, buy the parts from NAPA, don't pay parking fees or tolls (I plan ahead so I don't have to, there are exceptions, but those are very rare), taxes on it are very low ($31.00/year, plus emissions every 2 years adds another $20.00).

I agree with you that people MUST have choices and public transit needs to be one of them, but not the only choice.
As SaintlessHeart pointed out, there's no way we can convert to electric cars completely over the next 50 years.

Electric cars have been around since the 1800s, and never have quite caught on (granted technology is much better now).
And considering how far we've come with hydrogen thus far, I think electric-cars are a pipe dream.

As for the right to travel ...I don't care what the DMV manuals say.
I care what the courts have ruled on this issue.

SCOTUS ruled thus:



The lower Federal courts have also ruled on the right to travel as follows:



It could not be stated more directly or conclusively that citizens of the states have a common law right to travel, without approval or restriction (license), and that this right is protected under the U.S Constitution.



I'd say it's pretty clear it's a right.
The courts dealt with the right to travel, not with the 'right' to own and/or use a car. There's a difference. They say you have the right to go wherever you like, but they do not say that you have the right to use a car for that.
__________________
Lord of Fire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 02:11   Link #12766
flying ^
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frenchie View Post

With all the hate spewed about the US turning European.....
speaking of US turning EU-ian, this presidential candidate is deathly afraid that US will be like EU in just a few decades...


Quote:
"I have two grandchildren — Maggie is 11, Robert is 9."
"I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they're my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/52023.html
flying ^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 02:36   Link #12767
GundamFan0083
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: classified
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord of Fire View Post
The courts dealt with the right to travel, not with the 'right' to own and/or use a car. There's a difference. They say you have the right to go wherever you like, but they do not say that you have the right to use a car for that.
You've got to be joking.
That's a very weak argument and is basically an argument to ignorance.

Considering it is illegal to walk or ride a bike on most major highways, it is obvious (as in doesn't require the SCOTUS to rule on) that we have a right to own cars.
They're property like all other goods and/or services.
Government (at least the US government) does not have the constitutional authority to ban property without due process of law.
Even arms are protected (a la the 2nd Amendment).
We have a right to own any type of property that doesn't infringe on the rights of our fellow citizens.
Nuclear weapons are produced by private companies.
Even nuclear power plants are owned by private companies.
Private property rights in the USA used to be immense before corporate lobbyists got their way.
However, even in that case the government had to pay the owner of the land, move his house to the new location, and compensate him for the forced move.

Therefore, any attempt to try and make the case that "cars aren't protected" by the court rulings on the constitutional right to travel is inane at best.
__________________________________________________ ________

Now back to the news:

Very interesting article on inner city Americans of African decent fleeing the "blue" states:

http://blogs.the-american-interest.c...tes-in-droves/

Well, if you didn't think there was an international banking elite before, maybe this National Journal article will change your mind.
It's about how the bailouts have resurrected the big banks.

http://nationaljournal.com/magazine/...0110328?page=5
__________________
GundamFan0083 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 02:36   Link #12768
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by flying ^ View Post
speaking of US turning EU-ian, this presidential candidate is deathly afraid that US will be like EU in just a few decades...

"I have two grandchildren — Maggie is 11, Robert is 9."
"I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they're my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/52023.html
putting aside the minor question of how an Atheist country could be dominated by Islamist radicals.
why group the two things together.
its like saying "sex and violence" or "ice-cream and genocide"
one is exteremly desirable, the other should be avoided like a virus.
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 02:44   Link #12769
flying ^
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
putting aside the minor question of how an Atheist country could be dominated by Islamist radicals.
why group the two things together.
its like saying "sex and violence" or "ice-cream and genocide"
one is exteremly desirable, the other should be avoided like a virus.

he could be thinking of the current and future trends in places like UK
flying ^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 02:44   Link #12770
GundamFan0083
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: classified
Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
putting aside the minor question of how an Atheist country could be dominated by Islamist radicals.
why group the two things together.
its like saying "sex and violence" or "ice-cream and genocide"
one is exteremly desirable, the other should be avoided like a virus.
Hah!
That didn't click the first time I read the post.
An Islamic controlled atheist country ....talk about a non sequitor.
That's like a KKK controlled African country, not gonna happen.
__________________
GundamFan0083 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 02:51   Link #12771
ganbaru
books-eater youkai
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
China executes 3 Filipinos despite Manila's pleas
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...72T0Z620110330
__________________

ganbaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 03:25   Link #12772
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by flying ^ View Post
he could be thinking of the current and future trends in places like UK
but the UK and the US are two completely different matters.

the UK suffers from the same cultural guilt trip as most of europe that makes them stupidly act like they're suppose to feel sorry and ashamed for their past actions.
and they are foolishly trying to atone by acting like their culture is NOT inherently superior to anyone elses.
how hopelessly misguided.

the US, to the best of my knowledge, has no problem declaring itself as the greatest nation on earth.
you know, the PROPER way to behave.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamFan0083 View Post
Hah!
That didn't click the first time I read the post.
An Islamic controlled atheist country ....talk about a non sequitor.
That's like a KKK controlled African country, not gonna happen.
thats exactly it.
it's a fear that makes no sense, and its grouping Atheists with Islamists, which also makes no sense.
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 03:30   Link #12773
WordShaker
In scientific terms only.
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Over a hand lens
Age: 19
Send a message via MSN to WordShaker
Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
it's a fear that makes no sense, and its grouping Atheists with Islamists, which also makes no sense.
Of course it doesn't make a lick of sense, but did you see the number of buzzwords in that quote? I see a strong contender for the presidency in Newt Gingrich.
WordShaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 03:33   Link #12774
Haak
Haters Gonna Hate
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK
Age: 23
Yeah that sure is the proper way to behave...

Anyway I just came across this interesting recent study and wanted to know if anyone else knows anything about the subject:
http://www.manchester.ac.uk/aboutus/...splay/?id=6866
__________________
Haak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 03:33   Link #12775
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by wassupimviet View Post
Of course it doesn't make a lick of sense, but did you see the number of buzzwords in that quote? I see a strong contender for the presidency in Newt Gingrich.
Touché

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haak View Post
Yeah that sure is the proper way to behave...

Anyway I just came across this interesting recent study and wanted to know if anyone else knows anything about the subject:
http://www.manchester.ac.uk/aboutus/...splay/?id=6866
of course it is the proper way to behave.
what other way is there ?
__________________

Last edited by bladeofdarkness; 2011-03-30 at 07:17.
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 03:42   Link #12776
Haak
Haters Gonna Hate
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK
Age: 23
I don't know about you but I'm happy with the constant critical cynical take we always have on everything (even if it is killing our English football). It doesn't make me or anyone I know "sorry or ashamed" for past actions and I reckon acting like my culture is inherantly superior to everyone elses would be rather backwards.
__________________
Haak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 03:49   Link #12777
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haak View Post
I don't know about you but I'm happy with the constant critical cynical take we always have on everything (even if it is killing our English football). It doesn't make me or anyone I know "sorry or ashamed" for past actions and I reckon acting like my culture is inherantly superior to everyone elses would be rather backwards.
there's a difference between being critical of ones culture (which is good) and accepting the notion that it isn't inherently superior to all others (which is bad).
both aspects are required.
if you aren't critical of your culture, then you say that it doesn't require constant improvment.
if you accept the idea that it's NOT inherently superior, then you say that there's no POINT in constantly improving it.

either option accepts mediocrity.
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 07:25   Link #12778
Haak
Haters Gonna Hate
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK
Age: 23
If you accept the idea that it's not inherently superior, then you say that there's every reason in constantly improving it.
If you say it is inherently superior then you say that there's no point in constantly improving it and every reason to oppose change.

That's the way I see it.
__________________
Haak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 08:51   Link #12779
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haak View Post
If you accept the idea that it's not inherently superior, then you say that there's every reason in constantly improving it.
If you say it is inherently superior then you say that there's no point in constantly improving it and every reason to oppose change.

That's the way I see it.
If your country/culture/nation is not the greatest in the world, why live there ?
why defend it ?
why try as much as possible to spread it ?
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 09:17   Link #12780
yezhanquan
Observer/Bookman wannabe
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
If your country/culture/nation is not the greatest in the world, why live there ?
why defend it ?
why try as much as possible to spread it ?
The same reason as how old Winston describes democracy: it's not the best out there, but it is as good as it gets after trying all others. Also, I defend my country for other reasons. It's where my family and friends are, and really, do you need any other reasons to live in the place or defend it?
__________________
Those from the lower levels cannot hope to surpass those from the upper.

RIP, Oba-chan (1935-2008)
yezhanquan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
current affairs, discussion, international, news

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:54.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
We use Silk.