View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently September 2nd, 2014, 5:21 pm



Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
 Stupid 
Author Message
Hall of Fame Player
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2005, 7:03 am
Posts: 7411
Location: Ford Field - 35 yard line / Row 32
Post 
bsand2053 wrote:
Its not a tiny percentage when you are the one who is kicked out of your house.



](*,)


June 26th, 2005, 9:40 pm
Profile WWW
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9855
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post 
So, LF57, you think eminent domain has ONLY been used for public works up until now. You really are naive.

Read one or more of the following books:

?Unequal Protection?The Injustice of Using Eminent Domain on Behalf of Private Business? - By Dana Berliner

?Eminent Domain for Private Gain?- By Dana Berliner

?Dispossessed? - By Susan Allen

?The Rampant Injustice of Eminent Domain? - By Nate Dickinson

Have I read all these books? No. But I HAVE read the last one. Yes, I have read a book on eminent domain.

I am in favor of American companies building plants here. I am also in favor of them exhausting every effort to do so. However, there is case upon case upon case of private companies, much smaller than Pfizer, being able to manipulate politicians into declaring properties 'blighted' that aren't. Suddenly thereafter, those people are faced with dispossession and are forced to sell, often at a fraction of the value of their home, not the windfall you claim they've just been handed.

You state there is 270 million people in this country. Do you know how much undeveloped land there is that isn't part of a nature preserve, protected wetland or forest. ACRES, and acres and acres. So why do these companies choose to build where there are people living? Because it's cheaper for them to build on developed property.

I got news for you. Companies will build overseas for cheaper help, not for the low cost of building there. The companies often have to deal with corrupt governments and other difficulties that cost them millions or billions extra. But, in the long run, the cheaper work force will save them money. When I spoke of American car companies, I spoke of people buying American cars to keep the money in the American economy. It wasn't about keeping jobs here, it was about the money staying here.

So LF57, you continue to go ahead and believe that our governments, local, state and federal, are only doing what's best for all of us. Continue to believe that every time eminent domain is used, it's used with only the best intentions in mind and that all of us are benefiting from it. Continue to believe that no corruption is involved, or personal gain for both the private business and the politicians planning these 'legal' moves. The system of checks and balances always works, and there is no loopholes that politicians and corporate lawyers ever manipulate to their advantage.

If I offended and angered you because I defend an old woman's right to remain in her home, than you have a problem. You say ' I CAN SEE her side of it', and then quickly follow with 'but' and speak of the greater good of the community. How are you so sure that the community was against her, but just not willing to fight beside her because of the enormous costs involved? Big money (companies) will usually win these types of cases, just like people with money usually find ways to avoid being found guilty of crimes.

Continue to believe what you want LF57. It would be a better world if it were true.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


Last edited by m2karateman on June 27th, 2005, 7:47 am, edited 1 time in total.



June 27th, 2005, 6:46 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Player
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2005, 7:03 am
Posts: 7411
Location: Ford Field - 35 yard line / Row 32
Post 
It's always easy to point at the times something was abused and declare it no good. Verses pointing out the less publicized times when it worked. Again, I'll use the police force as an analogy here.

It's always easy to blame the politicians and rich people / companies when you don't like or understand events and their outcomes.

The way you see the problem - IS the problem.

So, we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this.

In the end the supreme court has confidence in both the system and the intent of how emanate domain is to be used.

Image


June 27th, 2005, 7:11 am
Profile WWW
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9855
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post 
This discussion was never about eminent domain and whether it had any place in our society as a lawful endeavor. This was about times when it has been abused, and whether this decision made by the Supreme Court was a good one. I do NOT believe that allowing eminent domain to be utilized by a city government to allow private development is a good idea. I firmly believe that our Founding Fathers never intended for it to be used in such a manner as this. While you may have faith that what the Supreme Court is doing, I feel it is my duty as a citizen to question it. The existence of eminent domain was never 'on trial' here. It's abuse is what was being discussed. The Supreme Court has made errors in the past, and they continue to do so. Suddenly, they (and others) have made this country into an oligarchy, where the few overrule the many. This is something that Thomas Jefferson openly feared when this nation was in it's infancy. The remainder of our court systems typically follow in line with the Supreme Court. So when our nations highest court finds in favor of a company, who represents 'the few' instead of finding in favor of homeowners, who represent 'the many', I disagree with that decision. Of the 270 million people you mentioned that live in this country, how many do you think would be in favor of being told to find a new place to live to make room for a factory? I don't think it would be a majority of them.

You were the one making the comments about how eminent domain must be used 'in the public interest'. You were the one saying that the homeowners always got fair compensation for their homes. Those statements are wrong, because things aren't working that way. And tell me, do you really think it's just the people whose homes are being brought to demolition that are arguing against having this company build there? If you were a homeowner whose house will now butt up against that large factory, would you see your housing value go up or down? Those homeowners aren't being offered any compensation, and often are negatively impacted by a large factory being built 'next door'.

I'm certain that there are many cases where eminent domain was used as it was intended and was for the greater good. I, for one, am not against those instances, nor have I ever said I opposed them. But when eminent domain is abused to allow for the building of car lots, amusement parks, strip malls and other such private businesses, then I do oppose it's misuse.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


Last edited by m2karateman on June 27th, 2005, 6:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.



June 27th, 2005, 8:17 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 1:25 am
Posts: 4918
Location: Hills of Auburn
Post 
I understand an occasional (rare) need for the government to enact eminent domain. But to take from one private party and hand it to another is crap.

One of the people in the New London case was born in her house in 1918 and has lived there her entire life. What are they doing with the house she has always lived in "office buildings, upscale housing, a marina and other facilities".

In another story I read the city council voted no on development...until 8 months later...and many sizable campaign contributions from the developer to the counsil :roll:

That's way too much power in city officials hands. At that level there is too much room for error and corruption. And the people most effected often times are the poor and elderly who cannot even muster the money to pay for the medication let alone launch a law suit against the state.

As opposed to the Supreme Court ruling via common law this should be legislated in much more detail that would justify the instances to which Eminent Domain could be inacted. Terms like "Public Good" are way to vague IMO.



It's utter crap [-(

_________________
Regards, Alpha|Lionbacker.com \(^o^)/
"I date this girl for two years and then the nagging starts: I wanna know your name..." - Mike Binder


June 27th, 2005, 2:01 pm
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.