WaIIy wrote:

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 08:58:27 -0700, Stephen Trapani
wrote:


Brian Whatcott wrote:


On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 17:23:58 -0400, "Jim Carter"
wrote:



Could someone please explain to me "how the government can take your house
for a private development?" I do know that expropriation can take place
for the good of the city for roads and things like that but for private
development is beyond my comprehension.
Thanks.......
Jim Carter
"The Boat"
Bayfield


In the town of New London, the infrastructure was decaying badly
in this old working class town. Then the navy handed back some real
estate, and an industrial outfit decided to build a research park
style development. The town commissioned a careful plan to
rejuvenate the town, as a worthy public purpose. The Supreme Court
held that this purpose was worthy of applying eminent domain - in the
face of a few property holders, on 1/10 acre plots who had a
sentimental attachment to them - having lived there like their
parents, even grand-parents had, and despite strong financial
incentives to sell.

The Supreme Court also held that this decision was open to misuse
by public authorities, and their manipulation by wealthy developers
They knew this - and warned that each case must be examined on its
merits. In this case, the benefit to the many outweighed the
great discomfort to the few, and their real property rights, they
held.

So that how the government can take your house - the same way
it could before - for a public purpose of sufficient merit.

Glad they weren't endorsing the take-over of my place, all the same.

And don't forget, they have to *pay* for the property, usually more than
it's worth.

Some of you should try living in some other countries so you can learn
how good the one you're in is.

Stephen


Uhhhhhh........ why don't *they* live here for a while and go back and
make theirs better?

Anyway, your statement is absurd. We see more and more government
control and legislation by the bench these days and are highly ****ed.

Dude, what matters is what actually happens, not what is written on some
paper. What's absurd is living in fear of paper. In real life I have had
exactly zero increase in any government control in anything I do or want
to do. They leave me entirely alone. How can it be any better? Where is
the increase in control?

"Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively,
or to the people. "

The Tenth Amendment has been shot to hell along with much more.

It frosts me to my core.


Seems you need to look out your window. Any govment agents? I didn't
think so. Mellow out, no one is after you. You live in the best and most
free country in the world.

--
Stephen

-------

For any proposition there is always some sufficiently narrow
interpretation of its terms, such that it turns out true, and
some sufficiently wide interpretation such that it turns out
false...concept stretching will refute *any* statement, and will
leave no true statement whatsoever.
-- Imre Lakatos