>>Staying out of debt is a peaceful and honest activity. Nobody has the right to force them away from it, in my opinion.
Using your own type of argument, I could and will argue that wasting oil now imposes an energy debt on the public in the future. So how come that is ok while monetary debt is not? I want that we all stay out of energy debt, through democratic political means. Using your own words, are you gong to force me away from it because of your “inalienable right”?
>>So, note – taking on public debt and mandating MPG requirements both force people away from actions that are peaceful and honest.
That depends completely on some arbitrary choice that you make as to what constitutes “peaceful and honest”.
And by the way, is it “peaceful an honest to waste oil when the US military wastes hundreds of thousands of lives and, by the way, also incurs trillions in public debt dollars to support it?
>>Because, justme, I have very rigorous, objective definition of what is and what isn’t a right. I follow the series of actions all the way through and identify which actions force other people away from any peaceful and honest activity.
I’m not so sure that your definitions are very rigorous nor objective. And therein lies the problem of your stated method.
If you ask me, your whole argument that creating public monetary debt is somehow fundamentally different than wasting oil (creating public energy debt) does not hold up.
I don’t expect to be able to convince you, but there may be others that gain some insight from this discussion.
>>Lets be clear – I don’t want to waste oil.
I am pleased to hear that, and there is absolutely no sarcasm intended by me in saying so. Thank you.
