[extropy-chat] Public Transportation (was suitcase nukes)

[Brian Lee]

There are limitations to the right to "travel in one's personal conveyance 
on the public rights of way" in that I can't drive a tank down roads and I 
can't drive a car that is 30 feet wide, etc.

I'm not against craftsmen buying vehicles that they deem needed for their 
line of work. I'm against my accountant buying an expedition because it 
weighs 6200lbs and is tax deductable. There is no reason for the gov't to 
encourage this behavior through tax cuts. We may as well make smoking tax 
deductable.

BAL

>From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Public Transportation (was suitcase nukes)
>Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:42:19 -0800 (PST)
>
>--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > There is no "right" to driving a car on a congested highway. Nor is
> > there a "right" to having a fast computer.
>
>Actually, the common law right to travel in one's personal conveyance
>on the public rights of way is, in fact, a right going back to the
>magna carta and was the key right in helping the serfs free themselves
>from the feudal system. This is one of the unenumerated rights
>protected by the 9th amendment.
>
>When you are not being paid to carry passengers or cargo, you are not
>"driving" nor is your auto a "vehicle", nor are you exercising your
>"operator" rating on your 'drivers license'. These terms are all terms
>of art that signify commercial activity, not personal activity and can
>only apply to you if you are being paid to drive a commercial vehicle
>or if you own and operate a vehicle (and pay yourself or someone else
>to drive that vehicle).
>
>While you can disparage this legal position, it was the sole valid one
>up until the Roosevelt packing of the courts in the 1930's, resulting
>in vast expansions of the definitions of 'commerce'.
>
>Furthermore, there is also a right on the part of craftsmen to purchase
>whatever tools of their trade they can afford which is 'state of the
>art'. This is another common law right that the trade guilds fought for
>way back when and is based on Aristotle's declaration that mans natural
>endowment of the hand gave him the right to wield any tool the hand can
>handle.
>
> >
> > The problem is that lots of people driving on a highway with huge
> > cars
> > impedes the rights of others. One of the purposes of tax law is to
> > guide
> > taxpayers towards acts deemed moral or desired by the government:
> > i.e.
> > buying a house, having children, donating to charity. So tax cuts on
> > cars
> > that are smaller or use less gas or pollute less would be a way to
> > encourage
> > people away from buying suburbans as daily commuter vehicles.
> >
> > To pre-emptively address some responses: of course some people need
> > suburbans because they have tons of kids or live in the mountains or
> > whatever. Most SUV drivers don't "need" them specifically and current
> > tax
> > law encourages SUV purchases (small business tax breaks on 6000lb+
> > vehicles,
> > registration fees by cost not by weight, etc etc).
> >
> > BAL
> >
> > >From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> > >To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Public Transportation (was suitcase
> > nukes)
> > >Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:48:03 -0800 (PST)
> > >
> > >
> > >--- Bret Kulakovich <bret at bonfireproductions.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > And with the new 2005 sedans averaging 200+ horsepower - I think
> > we
> > > > need to start hitting these excessives with some sort of
> > additional
> > > > tax. (There. I said it. And me of all people.)
> > > >
> > > > Because the average commuter rail train comes out to 3 horsepower
> > per
> > > > rider, and the average sedan on the highway is carrying one
> > person,
> > > > perhaps 2.
> > >
> > >Imagine if people said that about computer megaflops. Rights aren't
> > >about needs.
> > >
> > >Mike Lorrey
> > >Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
> > >"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
> > >It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
> > >                                       -William Pitt (1759-1806)
> > >Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >__________________________________
> > >Do you Yahoo!?
> > >Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
> > >http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >extropy-chat mailing list
> > >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> >
>
>Mike Lorrey
>Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
>"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
>It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>                                       -William Pitt (1759-1806)
>Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
>http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat