More Emminent Domain Abuse

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by David Floyd


If what you are getting at is "how do you conduct transactions", then obviously, two people agree on value.

So value is relative to ownership.

[David Floyd]

Value is relative to whatever the person who owns the item or land in question thinks it's worth.

[David Floyd]

And of course, whatever the prospective buyer wants to pay.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Value is relative to whatever the person who owns the item or land in question thinks it's worth.

Not in all cases. Case in point.

[David Floyd]

What case might that be?

[Berzerker]

This has nothing to do with political ideology and everything to do with political corruption.

Corruption induced by the ideology of liberalism - transfering wealth is the status quo... If almost everyone believes that is the purpose of government, then ya gotta expect government to become a feeding frenzy...

Kid -

It's not a transfer at all.

Yes it is, property is being taken from one group and given to another.

It's compensation, and more importantly it makes things better for people. The land owner is compensated fairly and a lot of people are made better off.

The article said the property was condemned, i.e., property of the state. But your interpretation of this power wasn't fair enough to find it's way into the Constitution which says eminent domain applies only to property needed by the state for structures serving the public, not private developers.

People in Fresno have been waiting for a long time for the private sector to create jobs. It's not going to happen without businesses here. There has to be places for businesses here or they can't come.

And you don't think the state government of California has no negative impact on Fresno's economy? Here's another example of government creating a problem and then using that problem as an excuse to abuse a different power. Same tactic employed in the drug war, ban drugs and use the black market violence as an excuse to expand government control over our lives...

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Corruption induced by the ideology of liberalism - transfering wealth is the status quo... If almost everyone believes that is the purpose of government, then ya gotta expect government to become a feeding frenzy...

Conservatives are just as addicted to stealing people's property. They usually just prey on the poor and defenseless.

[David Floyd]

Yes, and liberals prey on the rich. What's your point? Neither Berzerker nor I can be considered conservative by any means.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by David Floyd
What case might that be?

Eminent domain.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Yes it is, property is being taken from one group and given to another.

You guys are like religious zealots. They are compensated and usually very well.

The article said the property was condemned, i.e., property of the state. But your interpretation of this power wasn't fair enough to find it's way into the Constitution which says eminent domain applies only to property needed by the state for structures serving the public, not private developers.

I never claimed that the Constitution is fair. What the govt did was legal though.

And you don't think the state government of California has no negative impact on Fresno's economy? Here's another example of government creating a problem and then using that problem as an excuse to abuse a different power. Same tactic employed in the drug war, ban drugs and use the black market violence as an excuse to expand government control over our lives...

[/QUOTE]

Concession? I think so.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Yes, and liberals prey on the rich. What's your point? Neither Berzerker nor I can be considered conservative by any means.

You sure can. You are the most conservative people here. You advocate the worst possible govt for the least fortunate among us.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

ummm... you realize you gave credence to the whole arguement that abuse of emminent domain is wrong. By agreeing that value is a negotiation of seller's and buyer's perceived value. (Unless you can provide other examples) The one instance you provide where this is not he case was identified by the opening post an indication that the process went horribly wrong. Therefor negation of this process by governmental duress (using governement only's perceived value and ignoring the value perceived by the seller) is inherently wrong akin to theft.

[Kidlicious]

Ogie,

I'm not saying abuse of it is wrong. The libertarians are arguing against it all together though.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

The nut to crack is determining what is 'abuse'.

[Kidlicious]

Obviously the intent of the framers was to allow the govt to use property for the good of all and to compensate the owner fairly. Compensating owners more than usual amounts is not in the best interest of all. The compensation has to be reasonable.