- I have the right to participate in representative government.
- I have the right to eat Cheetos in my bed.
In the context of this discussion, the right in question is freedom - freedom to secure housing, freedom to seek education, freedom to protect yourself. The State does not have an obligation to fix your bad decisions, nor does it have the authority to do so (because that would infringe on your personal freedom.)
So while you have a "right" (aka "are free") to eat Cheetos in your bed, expecting the State to provide the Cheetos and the bed is ridiculous. You are, however, free to obtain them yourself.
You do not have a right to protection.
You do not have a right to housing.
You do not have a right to employment.
You do not have a right to education.
You do not have a right to health.
You have a right to pursue all of these things, but you are not entitled to them. If you choose to be employed, you need to earn that employment. No business is obligated to hire you simply because you are a wonderful person. Further, you may choose to be unemployed, in which case the State is not obligated to support you to your satisfaction. We have programs in place to support people who become unemployed due to no fault of their own, but these are transitional programs, not lifestyles.
You do have a right to speak up about bad and corrupt government.
You do have a right to vote.
You do have a right to participate in government, at multiple levels.
As for compassion, I do know there will be victims of this situation. However, the vast majority of Detroit residents have been tolerating this disaster of a city for decades, and are now upset that the fairytale they have been spoon-fed isn't coming to fruition. I have trouble being sympathetic for folks who trot mindlessly down a well-marked dead-end road and get upset when the road ends.
Detroit is a city, but it is far from being an essential resource. If it imploded tomorrow, I doubt it would be more than an interesting news tidbit for the rest of the nation.
Finally, it's clear that you don't comprehend freedom. Freedom includes the ability to royally screw yourself by making one bad decision after another. Detroit has made many bad decisions over the years, and it is completely outside the pervue of the US Federal government to step in and mandate that the rest of the nation support a city or to dictate how a city is run
Drivers and cars need to be insured independently. The insurance industry will fight this tooth and nail, because it eliminates their ability to lump everyone in your household into a cost bracket associated with the worst driver. Have a 17-year-old son or daughter? Everyone's rates go up. Why? Because the insurance industry prohibits you from being insured individually.
Insure the car as a car. If it's self-driving, it gets a different policy and rate from one that requires a meatbag in the pilot's seat.
Insure the individual as an individual driver. Have lots of accidents? Your rates go up, but your spouse's rates don't. Same thing with teen drivers (higher rates) and no-accidents-for-thirty-years drivers (lower rates.) None of this BS about raising everyone in your family's rates because one child did something childish.
This resolves a number of "what if" scenarios that currently result in finger-pointing. Borrow your neighbor's car
I know, it won't happen. The insurance companies will protect their profits at all costs, including destroying the self-driving car.
I like bug suffering, but not people suffering.
Well said, citizen. The Federal Network would like to remind viewers that February will be "Kill a Bug Month." Join in, and do your part. Also, remember that Service Guarantees Citizenship.
Would you like to know more?
I've watched an obese family member make and eat an entire batch of cookies because she was feeling bad, and had to suffer through her diatribe about how "it's not my fault" and "why won't someone else solve my problems for me?" crapola. There can be no respect in these situations. And putting these people on continuous medication programs will only further absolve them of responsibility for their actions.
Now, if they could get a piece of the action, that's a horse of a different color.
And how do you plan to validate their public key without a CA?
That's easy - just have the phones exchange keys over Bluetooth.
I am currently an officer of the ""He-Man Women Hater's Club." As a private club, I may deny you and anyone else admittance to said club, for pretty much any reason - I don't like your hair; you have the wrong color eyes; it's Tuesday. My behavior may be unfair, or even discriminatory, but it's not illegal*, and you may pound sand.
*Note that certain establishments, like restaurants, do come under legal scrutiny because they have an interaction with the public. There are many other examples where discriminatory behavior is prohibited, but a private horse registry ain't one of them.
Now, if the registries are colluding in an oligopolistic fashion, and are taking anti-competitive measures, then there is actionable stuff there. However, if the AQHA has a policy of not registering cloned animals, so be it.
The quarter horse association, which has a registry of 751,747 animals, stated in court that it is a private organization and has the right to decide its membership rules.
I'm with the Quarter Horse Association on this one. They're not the government. They have no "fairness" obligation to everyone. I don't see how they can be accused of holding a monopoly when "no other horse breeding registry allows cloned animals
Hey, I just started the "No Clones Alllowed Horse Registry." Can these two horse breeders sue me and force my no-clones registry to accept their cloned animals?