Quote:
|
Originally Posted by scout
Somehow I figured this argument would go the exact opposite that what it currently is. I figured the "left leaners" [not meant in a bad way] would oppose this decision since it in effect gives the rich with a bit of money to spend a constitutional go-ahead to take the poor man's land all in the name of more government and the "right-wing" [again, not meant in a bad way] to be calling this a landmark decision for big business.
I sure missed it. I guess big government is ok as long as it's taking land to make a bigger tax base? Would it still be ok the government took these people's land if they was going to put a church there? I think all you "lefties" [again, not meant in a bad way} would be screaming bloody murder about how the religious "righties" [not meant in a bad way...] was taking over the world.
My opinion of this ruling is that it sucks! It just proves that in reality "we the people" own nothing and the government owns it all and we merely pay rent in the form of taxes. Republicans get elected promising smaller government and less bullshit and in reality all we get is more of the same shit just rolled up in a different wrapper. Don't get your panties in a bunch, I realize this had nothing to do with the elected parties I'm just frustrated and venting a bit.
|
Yes it does suck, but it is the law. As far as do you own it...... they do have to pay fair market value, and they usually go by the appraised value that the taxes you pay on the land is.
As I have stated I worked with my dad as his rodsman growing up and I know for a fact, a vast majority of people like it when they have eminent domain because they either got more for the property than they would have or it increased the value of surrounding land.
I do think the people need to make a rising and start getting laws to make sure this is somehow controlled, or we could end up in trouble.
The ruling was a wake up call that we need to check local and state laws and adjust them.