Local governments may seize people's homes and businesses...
-
Local governments have been able to do this for ever, but this seems to loosen the restraints a bit... http://apnews.myway.com//article/20050623/D8ATDSD80.html[^] "As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue." "New London officials countered that the private development plans served a public purpose of boosting economic growth that outweighed the homeowners' property rights, even if the area wasn't blighted." Having just bought a house in an area that is quickly being developed....:~ -J
Think of a computer program. Somewhere, there is one key instruction, and everything else is just functions calling themselves, or brackets billowing out endlessly through an infinite address space. What happens when the brackets collapse? Where's the final 'end if'? Is any of this making sense? -Ford Prefect
-
Local governments have been able to do this for ever, but this seems to loosen the restraints a bit... http://apnews.myway.com//article/20050623/D8ATDSD80.html[^] "As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue." "New London officials countered that the private development plans served a public purpose of boosting economic growth that outweighed the homeowners' property rights, even if the area wasn't blighted." Having just bought a house in an area that is quickly being developed....:~ -J
Think of a computer program. Somewhere, there is one key instruction, and everything else is just functions calling themselves, or brackets billowing out endlessly through an infinite address space. What happens when the brackets collapse? Where's the final 'end if'? Is any of this making sense? -Ford Prefect
so sad. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
Local governments have been able to do this for ever, but this seems to loosen the restraints a bit... http://apnews.myway.com//article/20050623/D8ATDSD80.html[^] "As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue." "New London officials countered that the private development plans served a public purpose of boosting economic growth that outweighed the homeowners' property rights, even if the area wasn't blighted." Having just bought a house in an area that is quickly being developed....:~ -J
Think of a computer program. Somewhere, there is one key instruction, and everything else is just functions calling themselves, or brackets billowing out endlessly through an infinite address space. What happens when the brackets collapse? Where's the final 'end if'? Is any of this making sense? -Ford Prefect
jasontg wrote: Local governments have been able to do this for ever Yup. We create a government to make us slaves. Not necessarily a bad thing - better a master of our choosing and all... but you're still a slave and you'd better not forget it.
Firefox? CodeProject? GreaseMonkey? A better Life?
-
jasontg wrote: Local governments have been able to do this for ever Yup. We create a government to make us slaves. Not necessarily a bad thing - better a master of our choosing and all... but you're still a slave and you'd better not forget it.
Firefox? CodeProject? GreaseMonkey? A better Life?
Shog9 wrote: better a master of our choosing A master of most of our choosing. -J
Think of a computer program. Somewhere, there is one key instruction, and everything else is just functions calling themselves, or brackets billowing out endlessly through an infinite address space. What happens when the brackets collapse? Where's the final 'end if'? Is any of this making sense? -Ford Prefect
-
Local governments have been able to do this for ever, but this seems to loosen the restraints a bit... http://apnews.myway.com//article/20050623/D8ATDSD80.html[^] "As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue." "New London officials countered that the private development plans served a public purpose of boosting economic growth that outweighed the homeowners' property rights, even if the area wasn't blighted." Having just bought a house in an area that is quickly being developed....:~ -J
Think of a computer program. Somewhere, there is one key instruction, and everything else is just functions calling themselves, or brackets billowing out endlessly through an infinite address space. What happens when the brackets collapse? Where's the final 'end if'? Is any of this making sense? -Ford Prefect
This country of ours is becoming less and less free every day :sigh:
-
Local governments have been able to do this for ever, but this seems to loosen the restraints a bit... http://apnews.myway.com//article/20050623/D8ATDSD80.html[^] "As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue." "New London officials countered that the private development plans served a public purpose of boosting economic growth that outweighed the homeowners' property rights, even if the area wasn't blighted." Having just bought a house in an area that is quickly being developed....:~ -J
Think of a computer program. Somewhere, there is one key instruction, and everything else is just functions calling themselves, or brackets billowing out endlessly through an infinite address space. What happens when the brackets collapse? Where's the final 'end if'? Is any of this making sense? -Ford Prefect
That is INCREDIBLY OH SO STUPID. So you seize all the homes for economic development and people get scared and they all leave and then all you have is businesses with nobody to patronize them. Smart. Real smart. X| Wake up America. You're under seige from within. :suss: The genius of the true fool is that he can mess up a foolproof plan.
As punishment for my contempt for authority, Fate has made me an authority myself. -
Local governments have been able to do this for ever, but this seems to loosen the restraints a bit... http://apnews.myway.com//article/20050623/D8ATDSD80.html[^] "As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue." "New London officials countered that the private development plans served a public purpose of boosting economic growth that outweighed the homeowners' property rights, even if the area wasn't blighted." Having just bought a house in an area that is quickly being developed....:~ -J
Think of a computer program. Somewhere, there is one key instruction, and everything else is just functions calling themselves, or brackets billowing out endlessly through an infinite address space. What happens when the brackets collapse? Where's the final 'end if'? Is any of this making sense? -Ford Prefect
I bet Ernest Hewett would not be so pleased if it was his home that was in question.
"Ideas are a dime a dozen. People who put them into action are priceless." - Unknown
-
Local governments have been able to do this for ever, but this seems to loosen the restraints a bit... http://apnews.myway.com//article/20050623/D8ATDSD80.html[^] "As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue." "New London officials countered that the private development plans served a public purpose of boosting economic growth that outweighed the homeowners' property rights, even if the area wasn't blighted." Having just bought a house in an area that is quickly being developed....:~ -J
Think of a computer program. Somewhere, there is one key instruction, and everything else is just functions calling themselves, or brackets billowing out endlessly through an infinite address space. What happens when the brackets collapse? Where's the final 'end if'? Is any of this making sense? -Ford Prefect
Public confiscations may sometimes be justified, as "for projects with a clear public use, such as roads or schools", and as long as there's a fair repayment. But when confiscations are used to push private projects, with no direct advantage for the inhabitants, that sounds really unfair. And strangely, future victims live in a working-class neighborhood...I wonder if the same thing would happen if the houses belong to the richest inhabitants. Nah, I don't wonder at all.
Fold with us!
There are two things that one must get used to or one will find life unendurable: the damages of time and injustices of men - Nicolas de Chamfort (1741 - 1794) -
Local governments have been able to do this for ever, but this seems to loosen the restraints a bit... http://apnews.myway.com//article/20050623/D8ATDSD80.html[^] "As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue." "New London officials countered that the private development plans served a public purpose of boosting economic growth that outweighed the homeowners' property rights, even if the area wasn't blighted." Having just bought a house in an area that is quickly being developed....:~ -J
Think of a computer program. Somewhere, there is one key instruction, and everything else is just functions calling themselves, or brackets billowing out endlessly through an infinite address space. What happens when the brackets collapse? Where's the final 'end if'? Is any of this making sense? -Ford Prefect
To make damn sure any elected official that approves such confiscation never again in his life holds public office. The courts may betray us (this pack of Liberal judges sure has), but we still have the ballot box.:mad: Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power Eric Hoffer The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a god or not. Eric Hoffer
-
jasontg wrote: Local governments have been able to do this for ever Yup. We create a government to make us slaves. Not necessarily a bad thing - better a master of our choosing and all... but you're still a slave and you'd better not forget it.
Firefox? CodeProject? GreaseMonkey? A better Life?
I think its a part of the human condition to seek freedom if you are a slave, but seek slavery once you are free.
"Live long and prosper." - Spock
Jason Henderson
blog -
Local governments have been able to do this for ever, but this seems to loosen the restraints a bit... http://apnews.myway.com//article/20050623/D8ATDSD80.html[^] "As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue." "New London officials countered that the private development plans served a public purpose of boosting economic growth that outweighed the homeowners' property rights, even if the area wasn't blighted." Having just bought a house in an area that is quickly being developed....:~ -J
Think of a computer program. Somewhere, there is one key instruction, and everything else is just functions calling themselves, or brackets billowing out endlessly through an infinite address space. What happens when the brackets collapse? Where's the final 'end if'? Is any of this making sense? -Ford Prefect
Well I suppose there is some hope in that this is local governments - so if a local government treats you badly you have the option of moving - (I suppose if your house is bulldozed you really have no choice.) The solution is to let it be known which localities are the ones that ruthless idiots are in charge of and not build or move to - or run for election yourself as a alderman to turf them out on one these platforms.
-
Local governments have been able to do this for ever, but this seems to loosen the restraints a bit... http://apnews.myway.com//article/20050623/D8ATDSD80.html[^] "As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue." "New London officials countered that the private development plans served a public purpose of boosting economic growth that outweighed the homeowners' property rights, even if the area wasn't blighted." Having just bought a house in an area that is quickly being developed....:~ -J
Think of a computer program. Somewhere, there is one key instruction, and everything else is just functions calling themselves, or brackets billowing out endlessly through an infinite address space. What happens when the brackets collapse? Where's the final 'end if'? Is any of this making sense? -Ford Prefect
This is one of the stupidest decisions ever. Ripe for abuse. Perhaps congress can do something about it. :~
"Live long and prosper." - Spock
Jason Henderson
blog -
jasontg wrote: Local governments have been able to do this for ever Yup. We create a government to make us slaves. Not necessarily a bad thing - better a master of our choosing and all... but you're still a slave and you'd better not forget it.
Firefox? CodeProject? GreaseMonkey? A better Life?
Shog9 wrote: We create a government to make us slaves. Not necessarily a bad thing - better a master of our choosing and all... We seem to have a fundamentally different concept of the purpose of government. I have always believed that government is intended to be the SERVANT of the people, not the master. Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power Eric Hoffer The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a god or not. Eric Hoffer
-
This is one of the stupidest decisions ever. Ripe for abuse. Perhaps congress can do something about it. :~
"Live long and prosper." - Spock
Jason Henderson
blogJason Henderson wrote: Perhaps congress can do something about it That's like expecting a pack of wolves to help you recover your stolen chickens... Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power Eric Hoffer The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a god or not. Eric Hoffer
-
That is INCREDIBLY OH SO STUPID. So you seize all the homes for economic development and people get scared and they all leave and then all you have is businesses with nobody to patronize them. Smart. Real smart. X| Wake up America. You're under seige from within. :suss: The genius of the true fool is that he can mess up a foolproof plan.
As punishment for my contempt for authority, Fate has made me an authority myself.Three branches of government. And all three utterly f*cked-Up. Jefferson was right. A revolution every 200 years or so seems to be necessary. Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power Eric Hoffer The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a god or not. Eric Hoffer
-
To make damn sure any elected official that approves such confiscation never again in his life holds public office. The courts may betray us (this pack of Liberal judges sure has), but we still have the ballot box.:mad: Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power Eric Hoffer The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a god or not. Eric Hoffer
Rob Graham wrote: The courts may betray us (this pack of Liberal judges sure has), but we still have the ballot box. as much as it pains me to say it - your 'liberal' is right (actually 7 of the current 9 were appointed by Republicans). i am fully in agreement with the dissenters (the conservative judges). i am fully in agreement with the dissenters (the most conservative judges) on this one. taking land in any situation is offensive; taking it to give to a private developer is a motherfucking disgrace. the majority sayeth:
"Those who govern the city [of New London] were not confronted with the need to remove blight..., but their determination that the area was sufficiently distressed to justify a program of economic rejuvenation is entitled to our deference....Clearly, there is no basis for exempting economic development from our traditionally broad understanding of public purpose."
as this blogger puts it[^]:
What does this mean for you? It means that at any point in time, a private developer can go to the city and say that they can make better use of your land than you can. What is next? Tearing down small ranch style homes in order to build multi-million dollar mansions? The Supreme Court has now decreed that the burden of proof is on the individual to somehow prove that they deserve their land, instead of it being on the taker to prove that they absolutely need it. This is an incredibly dangerous shift. This is the most fucked up combination of socialism and capitalism that I've ever seen, and it makes me sick.
makes me sick too. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
Jason Henderson wrote: Perhaps congress can do something about it That's like expecting a pack of wolves to help you recover your stolen chickens... Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power Eric Hoffer The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a god or not. Eric Hoffer
-
Rob Graham wrote: The courts may betray us (this pack of Liberal judges sure has), but we still have the ballot box. as much as it pains me to say it - your 'liberal' is right (actually 7 of the current 9 were appointed by Republicans). i am fully in agreement with the dissenters (the conservative judges). i am fully in agreement with the dissenters (the most conservative judges) on this one. taking land in any situation is offensive; taking it to give to a private developer is a motherfucking disgrace. the majority sayeth:
"Those who govern the city [of New London] were not confronted with the need to remove blight..., but their determination that the area was sufficiently distressed to justify a program of economic rejuvenation is entitled to our deference....Clearly, there is no basis for exempting economic development from our traditionally broad understanding of public purpose."
as this blogger puts it[^]:
What does this mean for you? It means that at any point in time, a private developer can go to the city and say that they can make better use of your land than you can. What is next? Tearing down small ranch style homes in order to build multi-million dollar mansions? The Supreme Court has now decreed that the burden of proof is on the individual to somehow prove that they deserve their land, instead of it being on the taker to prove that they absolutely need it. This is an incredibly dangerous shift. This is the most fucked up combination of socialism and capitalism that I've ever seen, and it makes me sick.
makes me sick too. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
Chris Losinger wrote: as much as it pains me to say it - your 'liberal' is right. I would have been equaly angry had the vote split the other way (which some might have expected from the 'big business buddy' conservatives). Stupidity has no political philosophy, and the 5 that voted for this were just egregiously stupid in their mis-interpretation of the "Taking" clause. Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power Eric Hoffer The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a god or not. Eric Hoffer
-
Rob Graham wrote: The courts may betray us (this pack of Liberal judges sure has), but we still have the ballot box. as much as it pains me to say it - your 'liberal' is right (actually 7 of the current 9 were appointed by Republicans). i am fully in agreement with the dissenters (the conservative judges). i am fully in agreement with the dissenters (the most conservative judges) on this one. taking land in any situation is offensive; taking it to give to a private developer is a motherfucking disgrace. the majority sayeth:
"Those who govern the city [of New London] were not confronted with the need to remove blight..., but their determination that the area was sufficiently distressed to justify a program of economic rejuvenation is entitled to our deference....Clearly, there is no basis for exempting economic development from our traditionally broad understanding of public purpose."
as this blogger puts it[^]:
What does this mean for you? It means that at any point in time, a private developer can go to the city and say that they can make better use of your land than you can. What is next? Tearing down small ranch style homes in order to build multi-million dollar mansions? The Supreme Court has now decreed that the burden of proof is on the individual to somehow prove that they deserve their land, instead of it being on the taker to prove that they absolutely need it. This is an incredibly dangerous shift. This is the most fucked up combination of socialism and capitalism that I've ever seen, and it makes me sick.
makes me sick too. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
I want to build a house on Chris's beautiful forty acres of land but he won't sell it to me. If the county board will declare eminent domain on his land so I can buy it for "fair" market value, I promise I'll build a small park and erect a statue of the chairman where his house once stood.
"Live long and prosper." - Spock
Jason Henderson
blog -
Rob Graham wrote: The courts may betray us (this pack of Liberal judges sure has), but we still have the ballot box. as much as it pains me to say it - your 'liberal' is right (actually 7 of the current 9 were appointed by Republicans). i am fully in agreement with the dissenters (the conservative judges). i am fully in agreement with the dissenters (the most conservative judges) on this one. taking land in any situation is offensive; taking it to give to a private developer is a motherfucking disgrace. the majority sayeth:
"Those who govern the city [of New London] were not confronted with the need to remove blight..., but their determination that the area was sufficiently distressed to justify a program of economic rejuvenation is entitled to our deference....Clearly, there is no basis for exempting economic development from our traditionally broad understanding of public purpose."
as this blogger puts it[^]:
What does this mean for you? It means that at any point in time, a private developer can go to the city and say that they can make better use of your land than you can. What is next? Tearing down small ranch style homes in order to build multi-million dollar mansions? The Supreme Court has now decreed that the burden of proof is on the individual to somehow prove that they deserve their land, instead of it being on the taker to prove that they absolutely need it. This is an incredibly dangerous shift. This is the most fucked up combination of socialism and capitalism that I've ever seen, and it makes me sick.
makes me sick too. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
I'm writing my Congressman and Senators to tell them to "forget about flag burning" - pass an ammendment that says simply "Under no circumstances may any public authority seize property from one private party for the purpose of transfering it to another private party". keep it simple and unambigous, clearly the supremes can't read well. Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power Eric Hoffer The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a god or not. Eric Hoffer