Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Someone that gets it in here
Sadly you and I are the only real Americans in here.
... no, lulz!Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Someone that gets it in here
Sadly you and I are the only real Americans in here.
I'm genuinely surprised by your reaction as you've been a pretty staunch opponent of eminent domain int he past. I see no difference here; why should the owners be penalized? As far as I can tell, all they want is fair compensation for an asset that they rightfully own. Do you seriously think they should just donate that land? If so, how are *you*living up to that charitable standard to the families of flight 93?
Originally posted by: jjzelinski
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Someone that gets it in here
Sadly you and I are the only real Americans in here.
I'm genuinely surprised by your reaction as you've been a pretty staunch opponent of eminent domain int he past. I see no difference here; why should the owners be penalized? As far as I can tell, all they want is fair compensation for an asset that they rightfully own. Do you seriously think they should just donate that land? If so, how are *you*living up to that charitable standard to the families of flight 93?
Show me they are not getting a "fair" compensation.
What did they pay for it, what did or are they doing with it?
You call $250,000 donating it?
404 No Penalty Found
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: jjzelinski
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Someone that gets it in here
Sadly you and I are the only real Americans in here.
I'm genuinely surprised by your reaction as you've been a pretty staunch opponent of eminent domain int he past. I see no difference here; why should the owners be penalized? As far as I can tell, all they want is fair compensation for an asset that they rightfully own. Do you seriously think they should just donate that land? If so, how are *you*living up to that charitable standard to the families of flight 93?
Show me they are not getting a "fair" compensation.
What did they pay for it, what did or are they doing with it?
You call $250,000 donating it?
404 No Penalty Found
how was the value of the offer they were proposed derived? And do you think it is somehow "unfair" to have an independent appraiser review the valuation of the property?
You bet your ass *I'd* make sure an independent appraiser was hired. These folks should not be forced into selling their property at an arbitrary value.
Originally posted by: jjzelinski
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: jjzelinski
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Someone that gets it in here
Sadly you and I are the only real Americans in here.
I'm genuinely surprised by your reaction as you've been a pretty staunch opponent of eminent domain int he past. I see no difference here; why should the owners be penalized? As far as I can tell, all they want is fair compensation for an asset that they rightfully own. Do you seriously think they should just donate that land? If so, how are *you*living up to that charitable standard to the families of flight 93?
Show me they are not getting a "fair" compensation.
What did they pay for it, what did or are they doing with it?
You call $250,000 donating it?
404 No Penalty Found
how was the value of the offer they were proposed derived? And do you think it is somehow "unfair" to have an independent appraiser review the valuation of the property?
You bet your ass *I'd* make sure an independent appraiser was hired. These folks should not be forced into selling their property at an arbitrary value.
What do you think has been taking place for 7 years?
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: jjzelinski
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Someone that gets it in here
Sadly you and I are the only real Americans in here.
I'm genuinely surprised by your reaction as you've been a pretty staunch opponent of eminent domain int he past. I see no difference here; why should the owners be penalized? As far as I can tell, all they want is fair compensation for an asset that they rightfully own. Do you seriously think they should just donate that land? If so, how are *you*living up to that charitable standard to the families of flight 93?
Show me they are not getting a "fair" compensation.
What did they pay for it, what did or are they doing with it?
You call $250,000 donating it?
404 No Penalty Found
Show me they are getting offered "fair" compensation. What they paid for the land and what they are doing with the land are irrelevant. If it is worth substantially more than $250,000.00, then yes, that is essentially donating it.
blackangst1
Lifer
- Feb 23, 2005
- 22,914
- 2,359
- 126
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: jjzelinski
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: jjzelinski
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Someone that gets it in here
Sadly you and I are the only real Americans in here.
I'm genuinely surprised by your reaction as you've been a pretty staunch opponent of eminent domain int he past. I see no difference here; why should the owners be penalized? As far as I can tell, all they want is fair compensation for an asset that they rightfully own. Do you seriously think they should just donate that land? If so, how are *you*living up to that charitable standard to the families of flight 93?
Show me they are not getting a "fair" compensation.
What did they pay for it, what did or are they doing with it?
You call $250,000 donating it?
404 No Penalty Found
how was the value of the offer they were proposed derived? And do you think it is somehow "unfair" to have an independent appraiser review the valuation of the property?
You bet your ass *I'd* make sure an independent appraiser was hired. These folks should not be forced into selling their property at an arbitrary value.
What do you think has been taking place for 7 years?
*blink* I just saw a trail derail!
WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot
SunnyD
Belgian Waffler
But the question remains, who exactly wants that road routed? Wal-mart? That's where the problem is. If there's a legitimate use for the road other than for financial gain, then it might be prudent. But when eminent domain becomes all about some corporate entity trying to save/make a buck (which in 99% of all cases it is), that's just wrong. The abuse isn't the government, it's the fact that the government is owned by corporations and not the people's best interests.
Anubis
No Lifer
im just gonna quote this as well 2200 acres is a fucking huge amount of land FFS they dont even need a 10th of that for their stupid fing memorial
Fayd
Diamond Member
Originally posted by: BoomerD
I'm shocked that there hasn't been a "Dave McOwen visits a VERY Un-American memorial...the last Confederate victory in the Civil War...against the USA...how appropriate" comment.
youse righties are slipping...
'righties' are generally for states rights, which is what the civil war was fought over...
nobodyknows
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2008
- 5,474
- 0
- 0
Yeah, a square mile is 640 acres so this is like 3 1/2 square miles. To put up a monument?? Mount Rushmore is only 1200 acres and it's a whole damn moutain.
A monument for this is not needed. They can put up a plaque at ground zero in NY city. Using eminent domain for this is just plain wrong.
I wouldn't force them to use eminant domain if I owned the land... Maybe work a deal acre for acre or something... but 2200 acres? maybe they need to build roads/p-lot/etc... maybe they want to do something really nice.
No way should this happen. If the owners dont want to sell it then build a memorial somewhere else, pure. plain, and simple. Its not their fault a plane happened to crash on there land. And who cares what they do or dont do with it it's THEIR land. If they wanna never do anything with it but sit in a lawn chair in their underwear and drink beer who cares!!! It is their land and they are completely free to do that. If someone in my family had died in that horrible crash I may want a memorial but a granite plaque just big enough to put every victim's name on would be more than enough. I figure 10 square feet should do it. Just something to remember them by and show the younger generations of my family. And if they don't wanna sell the 10 sq ft, oh well find a sidewalk in D.C somewhere or better yet put it off to the side of the runway the plane was supposed to land on...
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Yep, the memorial in Pearl Harbor takes up a total of 17.4 acres. What's proposed, imho, is outrageous. I'm sorry to be politically incorrect, but what's the difference between the untimely deaths of any individual on that flight and the untimely death of anyone else in the country? Why is it so much more of a tragedy for any individual victim and their families than it is for the victim of a dwi? Is my sense of perspective way off or something?
40 people died in that crash. More than that are going to die today in accidents involving someone who is dwi. Where's their memorial?
Message to any relatives of people who died in that flight & might read this online:
I'm sorry your relative died. It was a horrible thing. But horrible things happen to people all over the place all the time. Your relative would probably want you to move on with your life.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter