I have never liked eminent domain as a practice, nor do I think that expanding its use to include public taking for private groups is a good thing. But the law is what it is; only the people can change it.
I have learned from experience that, in regard to the law and government action in a democracy, the people will get what they want if they are willing to apply their effort and their intelligence. If they aren't willing to work for what they want, they wind up with the profits of their laziness. If we wish to delegate our rights away, we have no cause to be surprised if those of us with more focused objectives, such as the acquisition of money or power, step in to pick those rights up.
Current Events » in reply to Eminent domain itself isn't the main issue.
PS
The whole thread (90 posts)
- CNN: "High court OKs personal property seizures"
- I'm hearing that there were a lot of questionable "Eminent Domain" actions that are now proceeding because of this decision.
- High Court Justices' Property at Risk
- The power of imminent domain...
- The rest of the decision:
- The gist of this decision:
- Odds are good that middle- and lower-class property owners...
- Tell that to the people in CT...
- Also, about lost income, I referred to rental income.
- no income is lost............
- Strange bedfellows
- The issue is the "uniqueness" that is inherent in each piece of real-property
- re: bedfellows
- The Supreme Court is ruling on its authority to abrogate a local law.
- Strange bedfellows
- no income is lost............
- So we can get it on the record:
- Also, about lost income, I referred to rental income.
- Tell that to the people in CT...
- Odds are good that middle- and lower-class property owners...
- Going back to the point that language has meaning and misuse leads to emotional misunderstanding..
- jWow! Scalia and Thomas came down on the side of people!!!
- Sounds like a BAD decision to me.
- re: CNN: "High court OKs personal property seizures"
