Current Events — HabitableZone

Current Events » in reply to Odds are good that middle- and lower-class property owners...

Tell that to the people in CT...
Larry J — (archived)

who raised the case in the first place. They lived in an old but not blighted neighborhood. A drug company wanted their land and the city government decided to take it because the company would contribute more to the tax coffers than home owners. The drug company didn't give a rat's ass about the ill will - they just wanted the land. The city just wanted more tax revenues.

There is no guarantee that the land owners will get the true "fair market" price for the land, either. Once condemnation proceedings have begun, the buyers can force a "take it or lose it" decision on the owners. Unless you live in a state that restricts this practice, don't be too confident that it can't happen to you.

As for your Odds are that the reason the conservative justices voted to oppose this is because the people whose property is most likely to be condemned will lose income. remark, that backs up my point about the legitimate property owners not being guaranteed fair market price for their property. Not too long ago, an elderly woman in Atlantic City was almost forced off her property so Donald Trump could expand his casino. The city was for it because it would've meant more tax revenues. Funny, I thought it was the liberal assertion that conservatives wanted to take from the poor to give to the rich. Yesterday's court decision shows that liberal and "moderate" SC justices are fine with the idea, so long as it increases revenues. It was the conservatives who stood up for ordinary people against big business and abusive government.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (90 posts)