Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

greytone · 06-26-2005, 02:51 PM

Emminant domain comes to us as part of English Common Law and the 5th ammendment properly limited it to projects for "public use." For more than 200 years we have understood that to mean the the project would indeed be public. In other words, it would be government property and therefore belong to the citizens.

The US was created by a bunch of people who had the audacity to think that government exists to serve the needs of the people. Now John Paul Stevens comes along and says that government can take property and turn it over to a private interest that is likely to generate more tax revenue. In other words, we had better feed the hungry growing state coffers, or get out of the way.

I have heard a number of people in favor of the ruling say that this kind of theft of property will be rare and the individual local governments can be trusted to police themselves. The justices in the majority as much as said the same. Does anyone pay attention to local politics anymore. There are examples of abusing the little guy with emminant domain from coast to coast. The potential for abuse and corruption in town councils and county commisions on this issue is endless. Wallmart and similar companies are going to start donating millions in local elections, hoping to get property at cut rate prices when the owners won't agree to their lowball offers.

We really need a constititional ammendment on this, but I doubt we can count on the requisite number of state legistlatures to vote to limit their power.

In a way we are getting a little like China. There you don't own property, but "lease" it from the government for 100 years. By the way, my understanding of those who were displaced by the hutong destruction were moved into new high rise apartments. There new homes are larger and more comfortable and nicer in every way. But they are not near the occupants old locations. By necessity, their way of life and sense of community have been greatly altered. The government did maintain a few hutongs in select areas for historical reasons. There was one below my hotel window which was only a block away from the northern part of the Forbidden City. I was given the impression that it was "safe."

06-26-2005, 02:51 PM	#23 (permalink)
greytone Junkie	Emminant domain comes to us as part of English Common Law and the 5th ammendment properly limited it to projects for "public use." For more than 200 years we have understood that to mean the the project would indeed be public. In other words, it would be government property and therefore belong to the citizens. The US was created by a bunch of people who had the audacity to think that government exists to serve the needs of the people. Now John Paul Stevens comes along and says that government can take property and turn it over to a private interest that is likely to generate more tax revenue. In other words, we had better feed the hungry growing state coffers, or get out of the way. I have heard a number of people in favor of the ruling say that this kind of theft of property will be rare and the individual local governments can be trusted to police themselves. The justices in the majority as much as said the same. Does anyone pay attention to local politics anymore. There are examples of abusing the little guy with emminant domain from coast to coast. The potential for abuse and corruption in town councils and county commisions on this issue is endless. Wallmart and similar companies are going to start donating millions in local elections, hoping to get property at cut rate prices when the owners won't agree to their lowball offers. We really need a constititional ammendment on this, but I doubt we can count on the requisite number of state legistlatures to vote to limit their power. In a way we are getting a little like China. There you don't own property, but "lease" it from the government for 100 years. By the way, my understanding of those who were displaced by the hutong destruction were moved into new high rise apartments. There new homes are larger and more comfortable and nicer in every way. But they are not near the occupants old locations. By necessity, their way of life and sense of community have been greatly altered. The government did maintain a few hutongs in select areas for historical reasons. There was one below my hotel window which was only a block away from the northern part of the Forbidden City. I was given the impression that it was "safe." __________________ I was there to see beautiful naked women. So was everybody else. It's a common failing. Robert A Heinlein in "They Do It With Mirrors"