[talaniman]

Families implement a reasonable plan to address needs and pay bills responsibly.

[smoothy]

Families implement a reasonable plan to address needs and pay bills responsibly.

THen why does the average family have an average credit card debt of $15,185


American Household Credit Card Debt Statistics: 2013

Where the average income is $51,017 a year..

http://money.cnn.com/2013/09/17/news...ome/index.html

That's CLEARLY not reasonible.

[talaniman]

You analysis is a bit off.

American Household Credit Card Debt Statistics: 2013

What lower credit card debt means for the economy

What does this mean? Credit card debt is holding fairly steady – but whether that's a good thing is up for debate. On the one hand, higher consumer spending puts the economy on a positive track. Higher spending leads to more jobs and higher incomes, which in turn lead to higher spending. However, if wages and employment are improving at this sluggish pace, this might well be an indication that families are borrowing to make ends meet rather than a reflection of a well-founded increase in consumer confidence.

This consumer driven economy is in trouble if EVERYBODY stops spending.

[Tuttyd]

Fact is what anyone thinks is irrelevant..because its a right and would require a change to the constitution to change....which can not simply be legislated. Ratification my a supermajority of the States would be required.

And it legally can be done absent the input of House or Senate....or the President. As there is a mechanism built into it for that very purpose.

I see the problem. You are confusing natural rights with legal rights. No one is going to change natural rights. It is impossible for anyone to change natural rights through legislation or Supermajority, or another means what so ever. They are the rights that you have when you are born. No one can take them away.The only thing that can be changed is the legislation that doesn't conform to natural rights.

We will assume for the moment that natural right and natural law are one and the same are one and the same.

[speechlesstx]

Families implement a reasonable plan to address needs and pay bills responsibly.

Unlike the government.

[Tuttyd]

First of all where did I say they weren't rights? In fact I actually arguing they are rights.

Having said that it is irrelevant to the truth or falsity of your statement as to what I see or the rest of the population see as correct.

Ok, let me explain. What I have said here is that truth or falsity of a statement cannot be determined by popular opinion or lack of popular opinion. The statements truth values is something that exists independently of opinions

[talaniman]

Unlike the government.

Governments can levy taxes, but you guys don't believe in it. You rather levy poor people, working families, and victims of the strictly for profit business cycle.

Hell you think it's okay the cops and first responders work for free. If you wanted a million workers to have a paid vacation why didn't you just say so?

[smoothy]

I see the problem. You are confusing natural rights with legal rights. No one is going to change natural rights. It is impossible for anyone to change natural rights through legislation or Supermajority, or another means what so ever. They are the rights that you have when you are born. No one can take them away.The only thing that can be changed is the legislation that doesn't conform to natural rights.

We will assume for the moment that natural right and natural law are one and the same are one and the same.

As far as the Bill of Rights is concerned... Natural rights and legal rights are one in the same.

They trump any legal statute (meaning you can't write a law that does away with one of the enumerated rights)... as we are discussing the Bill of Rights... Not the legal code of a country. At least in our case. Your actual rights in many countries are about as solid and secure as a fog bank.

[speechlesstx]

Governments can levy taxes, but you guys don't believe in it. You rather levy poor people, working families, and victims of the strictly for profit business cycle.

Hell you think it's okay the cops and first responders work for free. If you wanted a million workers to have a paid vacation why didn't you just say so?

Sorry Tal, I call bullsh*t on that one. All of it - a clear demonstration of Democrat aversion to reality.

[Tuttyd]

As far as the Bill of Rights is concerned...Natural rights and legal rights are one in the same.

They trump any legal statute (meaning you can't write a law that does away with one of the enumerated rights)....as we are discussing the Bill of Rights....Not the legal code of a country. At least in our case. Your actual rights in many countries are about as solid and secure as a fog bank.

They are not one and the same for a not only a very interesting reason, but a logical reason as well. And it is all to do with natural rights. If they were one and the same then they would take the form of a tautology ( X's are X's) and therefore be logically indistinguishable. This is not the case.

They are logically distinguishable for one very good reason. Natural rights or natural laws ( being the same for the purpose of this argument) are actually UNWRITTEN. Where as rights that appear in the Constitution are WRITTEN.

If we don't acknowledge this subtle distinction then you run into contradictions as per your second paragraph.

When you say you are discussing the Bill of Rights and not the legal code of the country; natural rights and legal rights being one and the same, then you are in fact discussing the legal code of your country.

Now I know I will be accused of counting angels on the head of a pin, but if we don't acknowledge important logical distinctions when required then we usually end up with a logical contradiction on our hands.