Local governments may seize people's homes and businesses...
-
Marc Clifton wrote: The solution is to exercise our right to bear arms and start a civil war. Somehow I just don't think the spectre of a bunch of computer geeks trying to figure out the intricacy of modern infantry tactcis, without artillary, armor, or air support, would greatly intimidate the government. "Capitalism is the source of all true freedom."
-
I am amazed that there are those who feel this represents anything to do with capitalism or conservaatism. This is pure liberalism. Allowing government the carte blanch power to take peoples property is precisely where the left has been trying to take us. All of you lefties should love this decision. What is the difference between allowing the government to take your land and allowing it to take your wealth in other forms? You lefties are pure hypocrits. Property is property no matter what form it happens to be in. "Capitalism is the source of all true freedom."
It does look like the traditionally liberal justices did vote for City of New London, and the typically conservative ones voted against it. HOwever in the street, almost everyone - on the left and the right everyone - who has heard bout this is voicing opposition to it.
-
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
Rob Graham wrote: A revolution every 200 years or so seems to be necessary. I must agree, to me it's entirely logical that, that is correct. Regardz Colin J Davies The most LinkedIn CPian (that I know of anyhow) :-)
-
I am amazed that there are those who feel this represents anything to do with capitalism or conservaatism. This is pure liberalism. Allowing government the carte blanch power to take peoples property is precisely where the left has been trying to take us. All of you lefties should love this decision. What is the difference between allowing the government to take your land and allowing it to take your wealth in other forms? You lefties are pure hypocrits. Property is property no matter what form it happens to be in. "Capitalism is the source of all true freedom."
Stan Shannon wrote: Property is property no matter what form it happens to be in. Yeah, this is just land tax, using land as the payment method. Regardz Colin J Davies The most LinkedIn CPian (that I know of anyhow) :-)
-
I am amazed that there are those who feel this represents anything to do with capitalism or conservaatism. This is pure liberalism. Allowing government the carte blanch power to take peoples property is precisely where the left has been trying to take us. All of you lefties should love this decision. What is the difference between allowing the government to take your land and allowing it to take your wealth in other forms? You lefties are pure hypocrits. Property is property no matter what form it happens to be in. "Capitalism is the source of all true freedom."
Stan Shannon wrote: What is the difference between allowing the government to take your land and allowing it to take your wealth in other forms Here, the confiscation isn't for the greater good but to enhance private interests. If you think your government doesn't represent the people, think about starting a revolution. Also, if 'you' think your civil society is so corrupt, stop trying to export that model, will you?
- Not a substitute for human interaction -
-
It does look like the traditionally liberal justices did vote for City of New London, and the typically conservative ones voted against it. HOwever in the street, almost everyone - on the left and the right everyone - who has heard bout this is voicing opposition to it.
Well then those on the left need to reevalutate what they believe in, because this is precisely what they have been voting for. "Capitalism is the source of all true freedom."
-
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: I would have been equaly angry had the vote split the other way (which some might have expected from the 'big business buddy' conservatives). something i didn't recall yesterday: 7 of the current 9 justices were appointed by Republicans. so, it's not quite accurate to call them liberal. what i should've said was : i agree with the "most-conservative" judges on this one. Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker