Originally Posted by
Dave Cutter
Attaching the word "luxury" to a item, device, or activity... doesn't exclude it from being an entitlement or right. My bicycle may just be a fat old mans expensive toy (according to some). But I DEMAND my right to own [and use on the streets and roads] a bicycle for which I am entitled to use.
A *new* car is more of a luxury than most bicycles.
Sure, you have a right to pursue happiness (at least according to some old parchment), and of course you are entitled to use the roads, as they are created from public funds for public use. You're even entitled to own a car - new or not - if you can afford it, as nobody is suggesting somehow denying people that right.
But I don't think you would argue that someone who can't afford a new car is somehow still entitled to one. I think that is the crux of the issue in this thread.