I missed the segment, but I know folks who have lost their homes to eminent domain for a shopping mall.
How high has this gone in the court systems? I'd like to see this go before a State Supreme Court or the U.S. Supreme Court.
How high has this gone in the court systems? I'd like to see this go before a State Supreme Court or the U.S. Supreme Court.
There was a documentary made a while back (I think it was in the 80's) about a residential area in a PA town that was forced out by eminent domain because an automaker wanted to build a factory there. Basically the government's argument (accepted by the Supreme Court, I think) is that 1. the public need for the property far outweighs the individual's property rights, and 2. they are giving you fair market value for the property, so that satisfies the requirements of due process. It was originally intended only for public use property but most of the abuse has been with corporations paying off local governments.
the 60min segment never mentioned the price offered for the property and what a third party would consider the fair market value.
have these numbers ever been mentioned for eminent domain evictions?
have these numbers ever been mentioned for eminent domain evictions?
MovingTarget
Diamond Member
- Jun 22, 2003
- 9,002
- 115
- 106
i wasn't supporting or refuting the issue of eminent domain, nor equating money over your freedom and rights. i was simply asking a question related to the issue.
Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
How bout Iron Chef smite your heathen ass? Yeshua won't but Elohim will
Iron Chef Heathen Ass battle.
You guys are morons if you feel bad for someone who has not paid their proper taxes and loses their home. Sorry buddy, but you owe it to this country for that thing you walk around with, everyday, called "freedom".
Originally posted by: Kilgor
Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
How bout Iron Chef smite your heathen ass? Yeshua won't but Elohim will
Iron Chef Heathen Ass battle.
hehe, I can only imagine what dishes would result from that showdown!!!
MovingTarget
Diamond Member
- Jun 22, 2003
- 9,002
- 115
- 106
Ummm...if they dont pay their taxes, the government should be able to sieze their property if they cannot without using eminent domain. However, if you look at my previous link, you'll see that the use of eminent domain has been abused. People who you cannot accuse of any sort of wrongdoing or breach of obligationi towards the government can and do have their property seized using eminent domain to put up, say, a walmart so the city can increasy tax revenue in their limits. Its a shame.
I hope you're being sarcastic.... Either that or you don't understand what eminent domain is. Eminent domain has absolutely nothing to do with reclaiming lost taxes. I think you're confusing some of the comments in this thread regarding the government's desire for more tax money with eminent domain itself. Eminent domain is simply a way for the government to claim private land for public use. Plain and simple. The case being discussed in this thread is an example of the abuse of that power. The government is taking private land and giving it to other private owners (in this case a corporation/business) so the government can make more money in taxes.
Simple enough?
Unfortunately the US is turning more socialist all the time, whatever's better for the public they say...
ironically its capitalism creating this situation. maybe extreme capitalism and extreme communism are the same thing...
[the theoretical end result of unregulated capitalism is that only one company would exist in the end after all the mergers, competition, bankruptcies, as strong merges with strong, crushing out all weak, all converging into a single entity...]
microsoft anyone?
ironically its capitalism creating this situation. maybe extreme capitalism and extreme communism are the same thing...
[the theoretical end result of unregulated capitalism is that only one company would exist in the end after all the mergers, competition, bankruptcies, as strong merges with strong, crushing out all weak, all converging into a single entity...]
microsoft anyone?
i also saw that segment regarding the eminent domain on 60 minutes.
there was also eminent domain taking place in NY also, where the new york times want to build their hq near times square.
there was also eminent domain taking place in NY also, where the new york times want to build their hq near times square.
Doesn't the NY Times want to build on some strip of land in New Jersey as well (asked the government to kick out current residents)?
more tax dollars to be spent on public programs = public improvement. I dont' agree with it, but it somewhat makes sense given the purpose of eminent domain.
mugs
Lifer
- Apr 29, 2003
- 48,920
- 46
- 91
Yeah, that's the justification they use. And it does make sense to an extent - a shopping center benefits the community in many ways. Unfortunately in my area it's being used to replace inexpensive housing with more expensive housing (more property taxes). That, I think, is wrong.
I didn't see 60 minutes last night. Did they focus on the Alabaster, Alabama situation where the Town took the land from generations of families and gave it to Wal-Mart?
Neal Boortz has been leading the Crusade against this, he is so personally outraged by it. We should all be outraged. At this rate Russians had more rights and we would be better off under England's rule. Time to tear up the Constitution and all Hail the King and Queen!
8-28-2003 P&N Forum Alabaster Property Seizure
8-21-2003 Boortz.com Draw the line in Alabaster
StageLeft
No Lifer
- Sep 29, 2000
- 70,150
- 5
- 0
I knew the gov't could do it for things like highways and I agree with it (holding up a massive highway because of some squatter in a shanty - whether they love their shanty or not - just doesn't make sense to me), but I agree that doing it for private business is iffy. There is a lawsuit going on with this where I am; 6 families don't want to give up their crappy homes for a new walmart center or stripmall or something. The law here says that if an area is decrepit (not sure the real word they use) or "could become" decrepit (the last being an in for them doing whatever wherever), then they can seize your property.
The lawyer for this case (Oh I see somebody brought it up!) is quite right in stating that when eminent domain is used in a private business matter it takes away the natural capitalistic energies. Ie, normally if you want somebody's land you'll pay them. If they don't want to sell you'll keep raising the money until it's worth it to them; in this case though that doesn't happen because big brother moves in.
The lawyer for this case (Oh I see somebody brought it up!) is quite right in stating that when eminent domain is used in a private business matter it takes away the natural capitalistic energies. Ie, normally if you want somebody's land you'll pay them. If they don't want to sell you'll keep raising the money until it's worth it to them; in this case though that doesn't happen because big brother moves in.
Happens all the time...
In Garden Grove, CA, there was a family owned strawberry field. One of my favorite fruitstands was on the property as well.
Then, 15 or so years ago, the govt kicked them off the property using ED. They sold the property to a friggin Kaiser Permanente office building! the family had owned that field for generations, and gets the boot because they refused to sell the property to Kaiser.
Watch a few city council meetings. You'll see more and more of this crap. In Anaheim recently they shut down a building with 3 upstairs apartments, and a bunch of storefronts on the bottom that had been there since WW2. Why? To widen Lincoln Avenue. :|
I can accept ED for roads and infrastructure. So the Anaheim one, while pathetically stupid, I can live with. But shutting down a family farm to put a fscking office building in is just bad.
In Garden Grove, CA, there was a family owned strawberry field. One of my favorite fruitstands was on the property as well.
Then, 15 or so years ago, the govt kicked them off the property using ED. They sold the property to a friggin Kaiser Permanente office building! the family had owned that field for generations, and gets the boot because they refused to sell the property to Kaiser.
Watch a few city council meetings. You'll see more and more of this crap. In Anaheim recently they shut down a building with 3 upstairs apartments, and a bunch of storefronts on the bottom that had been there since WW2. Why? To widen Lincoln Avenue. :|
I can accept ED for roads and infrastructure. So the Anaheim one, while pathetically stupid, I can live with. But shutting down a family farm to put a fscking office building in is just bad.
Linflas
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2001
- 15,395
- 78
- 91
Libertarians and some conservatives have been editorializing for years about this subject. Then again everyone knows they are "extremists" and no one need pay them any mind. It is all part and parcel of the general disintigration of property rights in this country.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter