Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 8 of total 8 in this topic |
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
Heard the guy on the radio on the way back from Tahquitz tonight.
Tragic!
Gerry Browns' (the lefty posterboy) Oakland destroying a 54 year old family buisiness so they can extort more tax revenue and reward their campaign contributors.
The left is all worried about the feds knowing what library books they read, but fully in support of theft of personal property by government.
It won't be long untill the local polls start condemning property because it's prop 13'd. After all, Souter, Ginsberg, (a former ACLU board member), and the rest, have determined that increasing tax revenue is a ligitimate use of eminent domain. proceedings.
|
|
Bruce Morris
Social climber
Belmont, California
|
|
This isn't anything new, though. CalTrans used to condemn property and take it to build new freeways up and down the State. If you didn't sell, first the Sheriff, then the National Guard, showed up outside your place with bulldosers.
|
|
Spinmaster K-Rove
Trad climber
Stuck Under the Kor Roof
|
|
The sky is falling! The sky is falling!! Last time I checked imminent domain was a police power used by most followers of ideological political reasoning fairly frequently. It is what allowed the Great Industrialists to build railroads from coast to coast, highways to be built through the Bronx and ports to be built along the eastern seaboard. It is how stadiums are built in presettled areas. It is not always a good thing for everybody, but the ideological question is are private property rights more powerful than progress for the greater good?
The Fifth Ammendment states "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." It doesn't say "the public shall not taketh land that belongeth to others." Now whether or not this right should be excercised in this particular situation is debateable, but constitutionally it seems, and the Supreme Court agrees, that local and state governments are well within their rights to excercise this power.
Furthermore, the reason the Court deferred to local and state governemnts is that this power lies in the hands of elected officials, who serve at the pleasure of the electorate and can be recalled, impeached or not reelected as per the laws of their locality.
So here you have the FEDERAL government deferring to the state and local governments because their power is checked by the electorate, and you are crying 'big government socialist?' How does that work exactly?
If the people who actually live in Connecticut and Oakland don't like what is happening they should get rid of the officials in question. It is not like people are powerless on this issue.
Furthermore, should 1 person be able to stand in the way of something that may help thousands or perhaps millions of people? If a port was being built to create jobs and economic opportunity and 1 or 2 people protested, should that prevent it from happening?
|
|
Khun Duen Baad
climber
Retirement
|
|
Dig on this twist to the story:
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A California man, angry over a U.S. Supreme Court decision expanding government power to take private property, says he will try to use the ruling to seize the New Hampshire home of Justice David Souter and convert it into a hotel to be named the Lost Liberty Hotel.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/usa_court_souter_dc
Ha!
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
The West
|
|
Actually, Bush does usually appear happy; I assumed by the description that that was to whom you were refering.
|
|
Bruce Morris
Social climber
Belmont, California
|
|
I hope the State of California grabs Fat Rad's house and turns it into a bowling alley - something that improves the quality of life for us all.
|
|
| Messages 1 - 8 of total 8 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!