Active Now

lavender
QUACK
Just Asking
Mrs. C
Adaydreambeliever
Patchouli
Malizz
elon musk
my2cents
Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » Are you PRO or CON eminent domain? If it is YOUR property they wanna confiscate do you roll over? Does the STATE always prevail?

Are you PRO or CON eminent domain? If it is YOUR property they wanna confiscate do you roll over? Does the STATE always prevail?

What if the EMINENT DOMAIN reason is shoddy crappy sleazy absurd? Does it win anyway? Who decides if it is REALLY for the public good and not to enrich the pockets of the greedy evil deceitful?

Posted - January 8

Responses


  • 1589
    I have no set stance on the issue ... and must judge each case individually.

    I have seen too many instances in the last 30 years, where it was used to seize property for urban development (AKA: "shopping mall") or some kind of private development where the developer couldn't persuade the property owner to sell.  
    Now, some of those malls have fallen into disrepair due to lack of "anchor stores" because everybody is shopping online.  Yet the original property owners are still without homes in some instances, because the money they received was far less than the value (even before the development was going in).

    If it's something like "that's the only place we can build the water treatment plant" public good ... that's one thing.
    But for the government to seize someone's land just because they won't sell to a developer ... that is a blatant violation of the intent of both "eminent domain" and the Fourth Amendment.  Such instances should cause real patriots to storm city hall and demand the removal of every official who agreed to it.
      January 8, 2019 8:58 AM MST
    1

  • 56627
    Thank you for your thoughtful reply Walt. I am not torn. I am against it. I think the state should have NO RIGHT to take the land of others just because the state wants it.  I cannot imagine any circumstance in which ONLY ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY WILL DO. I can't. I think that's used as an excuse for the greedy to just steal whatever they want to steal and pay as little as possible for it. It reeks of scam con ripoff.  Why would there be only ONE place where a  water treatment plant could be built? I'm not saying such a situation wouldn't exist. What I am saying is that I think the state should have NO LEGAL RIGHTS AT ALL. They can negotiate with the property owner of course and if the price is right and the owner  WANTS to sell then by all means have at it. But to manufacture a bogus situation just so you can legally STEAL property from people and prevail sucks!
      January 8, 2019 9:07 AM MST
    0

  • 1589
    I believe ... not sure, though ... that "eminent domain" really took hold during the construction of the national highway system.

    It is also commonly used to place easements on properties, in order to run underground utilities.

      January 8, 2019 9:43 AM MST
    1

  • 56627
    That was due to Ike and was a very good thing. And underground utilities benefit people as well. But a BORDER WALL? Or so a builder can build another strip mall or parking lot or apartment building to get richer and richer? Bah Humbug! Thank you for your reply Walt and Happy Wednesday! :)
      January 9, 2019 3:34 AM MST
    0

  • 3776
    Con.  Because it is not respectful of private property.  Which is a conservative principle.  Now even when there is an issue of the public good still if they take your land they have to negotiate with you or your lawyers over price which can be dragged on for years. 
      January 8, 2019 10:01 AM MST
    0

  • 56627
    So the border wall is a scam con sleazy crappy reason to confiscate land. Thank you for your reply og and Happy Wednesday to thee. Well the ultimatum boy sure ain't a Conservative. What is he?
      January 9, 2019 3:35 AM MST
    0