This is not at all unprecedented...happens all the time, in communities all over America. Eminent domain is a standard governmental device in cases such as this.
Pfizer did not cause the downturn in the economy that torpedoed this project. Additionally, the homeowners displaced received market value or better for their homes.
Nothing to see here, folks...just your sensationalist, loyal-to-trashy stories media pushing your buttons for ratings.
Moderate Voice of the People wrote:This is not at all unprecedented...happens all the time, in communities all over America. Eminent domain is a standard governmental device in cases such as this.
You're right, this is not new, and just because it "happens all the time" doesn't mean it is acceptable either.
Quote:
Additionally, the homeowners displaced received market value or better for their homes.
That's another problem right there. Market value is usually lower then what you can sell for. As of today, it may be different.
Furthermore, I would not be surprised if their local government actually lowered their property value for that year too.
Quote:
Nothing to see here, folks...just your sensationalist, loyal-to-trashy stories media pushing your buttons for ratings.
You call it that, I call it the "little people being heard." It is easy to pick on the weak, nature "does it all the time," we're no different.
THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.
The fact that it happens all the time is pertinent in the following ways:
1. This means it is accepted practice. In this case, it's a practice that dates back hundreds of years. You will not change it by drawing attention to it.
2. The fact that it is accepted practice means that you are wasting you time wringing your hands over it...doing so achieves nothing.
3. Your time could thus be better spent popping off about things you might actually be able to help others with.
-----------
The little people being heard. Awww...I just get all warm and fuzzy bear when you talk like that.
Let me ask you...do you think those little people like jobs? I mean, that's how they pay for houses like the ones so horribly wrenched from them here (with big fat checks and NO realtor fees, lol)...
The economic development planned would have made MANY more jobs than the families the eminent domain affected. The overall effect to the area would have been far more positive than negative, to a degree of many many times. That's what economic development does...it DEVELOPS THE LOCAL ECONOMY (pardon the caps, but you didn't seem to get this important non-nuance).
See how things start to make sense when you look past such panicky "news"-tabloidism and actually analyze all sides?
Oh, by the way...your "wild-ass guess" (cause that's all it could have been!) about the
sinister government intentionally torpedoing the property values to give the homeowners a good screwin...man, that's dark. You are truly paranoid.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Sunday, November 22, 2009 5:10 PM
Any corporation or government mandate that tries to force me out of my home will be in for a rude awakening... In the form of a shotgun blast to the face. Eminent domain is one of the few things that I cannot fathom as acceptable in any way, shape or form. Noone should be forced from their home. Sometimes money cant replace a home no matter the amount. I am dead serious too. If they want my home, they'll be dragging my cold dead body out through the front door along with more than a few of their fellow officers, officials, comerades,Ect.
Currently #4 in Ecotec Forced Induction horsepower ratings. 505.8 WHP 414WTQ!!!
Currently 3rd quickest Ecotec on the .org - 10.949 @ 131.50 MPH!!!
LOL, Big words indeed...see you on the evening news! Advice: Don't take out too many cops when it goes down...you'll want your family to not be hunted or hated once you're gone.
Seriously though...It's just a fact of life, folks. @!#$ happens in the name of progress. Eminent Domain helped make this nation great. Sometimes, it's all that will work, and it's usually only implemented when people refuse to move on their own.
It's far from some rallying cry against government trampling of rights. Get over it!
Moderate Voice of the People wrote:The fact that it happens all the time is pertinent in the following ways:
1. This means it is accepted practice. In this case, it's a practice that dates back hundreds of years. You will not change it by drawing attention to it.
Accepted by whom? A determined business owner, I'll give you that.
Quote:
In this case, it's a practice that dates back hundreds of years. You will not change it by drawing attention to it.
You have to have a large amount of capitol to stop it, unfortunately the ones with the resource, do not face this issue to actually care to stop it.
Quote:
2. The fact that it is accepted practice means that you are wasting you time wringing your hands over it...doing so achieves nothing.
Exposure sometimes gets the wheels to move. If the public sees this, a backlash could happen and could boycott the product/service, that is if the public doesn't forget. That's one example.
Quote:
3. Your time could thus be better spent popping off about things you might actually be able to help others with.
You really have no say on that.
Quote:
The little people being heard. Awww...I just get all warm and fuzzy bear when you talk like that.
Let me ask you...do you think those little people like jobs? I mean, that's how they pay for houses like the ones so horribly wrenched from them here (with big fat checks and NO realtor fees, lol)...
Case-in-point on the facility to pick on the weak. You really don't know what they received compared to what they would've received (if owner sells). Judging by passed circumstances here locally, I will bet it was well below "book value."
Quote:
The economic development planned would have made MANY more jobs than the families the eminent domain affected. The overall effect to the area would have been far more positive than negative, to a degree of many many times. That's what economic development does...it DEVELOPS THE LOCAL ECONOMY (pardon the caps, but you didn't seem to get this important non-nuance).
There are thousand on miles across this nation that is not developed, pick one, don't use existing residential locations.
Quote:
See how things start to make sense when you look past such panicky "news"-tabloidism and actually analyze all sides?
Sorry, but you failed to prove that point.
Quote:
Oh, by the way...your "wild-ass guess" (cause that's all it could have been!) about the sinister government intentionally torpedoing the property values to give the homeowners a good screwin...man, that's dark. You are truly paranoid.
You call it paranoia, I call it being informed, pick up a newspaper once in a while when this happens. To think that it does not happen, is a gullible practice.
Quote:
Seriously though...It's just a fact of life, folks. @!#$ happens in the name of progress. Eminent Domain helped make this nation great. Sometimes, it's all that will work, and it's usually only implemented when people refuse to move on their own.
Looks like you're not aware of "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
The private sector taking over your home, did not make this nation great.
Quote:
It's far from some rallying cry against government trampling of rights. Get over it!
More like how the business uses government to pirate your home, so it can be called, as you say: "acceptable practice."
THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.
Oh god. Quotey boxes. And look at them all! Yes, screw inherent context and subtle meanings...Goodwench got quotey boxes to rule the world, using the smaller bites he can actually chew and swallow.
I answer them all, and the silly rants that follow them, with this simple sentiment:
Progress has to happen, and the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
Goodwench: Next time you are enjoying an interstate highway through an urban area, pull over and shed a tear for the thousands of houses it displaced. Or, when you are at the airport, wistfully stare out the window at the tarmac and think of all the poor little kids who used to play in the back yards that were once there. Then get back in your car, or on the airplane, and enjoy the modern America eminent domain built...but try not to feel like a total hypocrite while you do!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Sunday, November 22, 2009 6:30 PM
Oh yes! Before I leave this thread to Goodwench's silly (but apparently endless!) pontifications about how offended he is at how our systems work (aka: Yawn)...
I shall simply reiterate that his Target (Pfizer) as named in his Thread Title, did
not cause the economic downturn that halted progress on the development in question. As such, his entire Thread Title point of the ruthless corporation gobbling up the common man...is rendered moot.
Had the downturn not happened, the development would have continued, hundreds of jobs (along with the hundreds of houses said jobs can buy) would have been added, and the local economy would have flourished, thus negating ANY opportunity for Goodwench to heap abuse on Pfizer.
Problem is this: us supreme court ruled the governments can force you out of your ho
e if they so much as want to demolish an old neighborhood in order to put up luxury homes that produce more taxes.
Yeah, the public good my as. Doesn't e en have to be "blight" to justify it. Anything that could reace the current taxes with bigger taxes is fair game. Just ask owners of homes in der well-kept neighborhood who lost their homes to make way for condos, casinos, sports arenas etc. They are given a "fair" price for a home they don't want to sell, but may have to move some distance away to find property they can afford with their fat check.
And billhahn, you seem in many issues, to take the stand of "meh, been that way forever...happens all the time etc". So just take it up the tailpipe dude, cuz that's your bag apparently.
And you, wasted as much time as goodwrench with your crtique of his time-wasting, so in the end, who gives a flying flip a out who coulda better utilized their time building a tinker toy space shuttle replica.
“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
Moderate Voice of the People wrote:Oh god. Quotey boxes. And look at them all! Yes, screw inherent context and subtle meanings...Goodwench got quotey boxes to rule the world, using the smaller bites he can actually chew and swallow.
Hey Billy the "Moderate voice of no reasoning." Don't like how I respond, click the back button or X. (Your) problem solved.
Quote:
Goodwench: Next time you are enjoying an interstate highway through an urban area, pull over and shed a tear for the thousands of houses it displaced. Or, when you are at the airport, wistfully stare out the window at the tarmac and think of all the poor little kids who used to play in the back yards that were once there. Then get back in your car, or on the airplane, and enjoy the modern America eminent domain built...but try not to feel like a total hypocrite while you do!
Although that is a fact that it does happen, but a multiplying population together with a terrible future outlook dictates those measures. Had the government "built it for the future," you would've avoided 75% of those issues.
Private sector doing this, no excuse to defend it; Build elsewhere in the nation.
Quote:
Oh yes! Before I leave this thread to Goodwench's silly (but apparently endless!) pontifications about how offended he is at how our systems work (aka: Yawn)...
Yawn all you want, but here you are searching to be heard. Oh the irony.
Quote:
I shall simply reiterate that his Target (Pfizer) as named in his Thread Title, did not cause the economic downturn that halted progress on the development in question. As such, his entire Thread Title point of the ruthless corporation gobbling up the common man...is rendered moot.
Had the downturn not happened, the development would have continued, hundreds of jobs (along with the hundreds of houses said jobs can buy) would have been added, and the local economy would have flourished, thus negating ANY opportunity for Goodwench to heap abuse on Pfizer.
Terrible twist you did there on this issue, or you can't read. Whether the economy went up or down, the point was the displacement of residence by the private sector. I specifically said that:
There are thousand on miles across this nation that is not developed, pick one, don't use existing residential locations.
No matter how you want to twist on government's fault, it was Pfizer that initiated it and wanted the property. Fascism anyone?
To look at it into perspective, if Ford decided on it wants to have your business property, and you say no. A year later Ford is at your door with $50K check and a bulldozer behind it...take it and leave or we bulldoze. You decide to fight it, government says, nope it's" Eminent Domain," deal with it. I can almost guarantee you would not be so accepting and so pacifist as you try to make yourself out be.
Sometimes people are so cloudy with all sorts, that they would have to be in the situation to understand what others go/went through.
THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.
wow, scottawhite and mr. goodwrench in agreement for once? never thought i'd see the day.
about the whole, "its been that way for years so deal with it" argument: human sacrifices were accepted for hundreds of years too, but do we still kill a person for the sake of the harvest? no. just because it's been happening for years doesn't make it right. as goodwrench stated, why not develop in an undeveloped location. why does it have to go where there are houses?
I'm sure if the government tried forcing you out of your home, you'd change your tune.
Declaration of Independence wrote:
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
i'd say going out and claiming people's houses is a little more serious than taxing tea. forcing people out of their homes in no way furthers the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. i don't get how more people don't see that the government no longer represents us. this is the exact government our forefathers warned of.
Check out my build thread!
You all can whine about the things you can't change all you want. It achieves nothing. That's my point with these funny but tragic threads.
You nitwits take one news story that shows one biased side of a typically useless tale, then bring it here and try to blow it all up like you've somehow transcended reality and will save the world if only some people would listen to you bleat this nonsense. Wake up. If you want to make a difference...DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. Else all you are doing is whining about things you don't like. Boo f-in hoo! Whining is not action. Not researching your points prior to presentaiton leaves you wide open for scathing, competent rebuttal, such as I present. It's not my fault you make it so easy!
As for this latest bit of hilarity: Do yourselves a favor. Study eminent domain. Understand it. See both sides of this story. Don't be a tool of a silly ABC TV report designed to make you foam at the mouth about alleged injustices, and then come here and expect others to be the tools of ABC's tool (which is you).
Eminent domain has done more to move this nation's interests forward than just about any other policy. It is invoked where and when needed to Advance Community Interests. And no, of COURSE we don't build developments out in the middle of nowhere...THERE ARE NO PEOPLE THERE TO STAFF THEM OR BENEFIT FROM THEM! Geez...I feel like I'm talking to children sometimes. Hmmm...nah, never mind.
Oh, and by the way...nice sidestepping you all did on my point about how this case of eminent domain would have added hundreds of jobs, and created a need for more homes than it has taken. Woops...nice dodge, but as usual, I caught ya. If you want to do something other than continue to hear yourself whine (cause I'd sure like you to!), then address THAT. If you don't, you can just keep crying on each other's shoulders about the Big Bad Wolf huffin an' puffin and blowin your house of cards down. If you dont address this highly relevant question, then I'm not interested in hearing any more whining.
Here's how much I care about you guys...I'll even help you gain some perspective:
In the US, eminent domain (ED) first became law via the 5th Amendment and, to a lesser extent, the 3rd Amendment to the US Constitution. The most common reason ED is exercised in the US is for building new or larger roadways, airports or government buildings.
The power of governments to take private real or personal property has always existed in the United States, being an inherent attribute of sovereignty. This power reposes in the legislative branch of the government and may not be exercised unless the legislature has authorized its use by statutes that specify who may use it and for what purposes. The legislature may so delegate the power to private entities like public utilities or railroads, and even to individuals for the purpose of acquiring access to their landlocked land. Its use was limited by the Takings Clause in the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1791, which reads, "...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation". The Fifth Amendment did not create the national government's right to use the eminent domain power, it simply limited it to public use.[5]
The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently deferred to the right of states to make their own determinations of public use. For instance, in 1832 the Supreme Court ruled that eminent domain could be used to allow a mill owner to expand his dam and operations by flooding an upstream neighbor. The court opinion stated that a public use does not have to mean public occupation of the land; it can mean a public benefit.[6] In Clark vs. Nash (1905), the Supreme Court acknowledged that different parts of the country have unique circumstances and the definition of public use thus varied with the facts of the case. It ruled a farmer could expand his irrigation ditch across another farmer's land (with compensation), because that farmer was entitled to the "the flow of the waters of the said Fort Canyon Creek... and the uses of the said waters... [is] a public use." Here in recognizing the arid climate and geography of Utah, the Court indicated the farmer not adjacent to the river had as much right as the farmer who was, to access the waters.[7] However, until the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, the limitations on eminent domain specified in the Fifth Amendment applied only to the federal government and not to the states. That view ended in 1896 when in the Chicago B. & Q. Railroad v. Chicago case the court held that the eminent domain provisions of the Fifth Amendment were incorporated in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and thus were now binding on the states. This was the beginning of what is known as the "selective incorporation" doctrine.
An expansive interpretation of eminent domain was reaffirmed in Berman v. Parker (1954), in which the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed an effort by the District of Columbia to take and raze blighted structures, in order to eliminate slums in the Southwest Washington area. After the taking, held the court, the taken and razed land could be transferred to private redevelopers who would construct condos, private office buildings and a shopping center.
The Supreme Court ruled against the owners of non-blighted properties within the area on the grounds that the project should be judged on its plans as a whole, not on a parcel by parcel basis. In Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff (1984), the Supreme Court approved the use of eminent domain to transfer a land lessor's title to its tenants who owned and occupied homes built on the leased land. The court's justification was to break up a housing oligopoly, and thereby lower or stabilize home prices, although in reality, following the Midkiff decision, home prices on Oahu escalated dramatically, more than doubling within a few years.
The Supreme Court's decision in Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005) affirmed the authority of New London, Connecticut, to take non-blighted private property by eminent domain, and then transfer it for a dollar a year to a private developer solely for the purpose of increasing municipal revenues. This 5-4 decision received heavy press coverage and inspired a public outcry that eminent domain powers were too broad. As a reaction to Kelo, several states enacted or are considering enacting state legislation that would further define and restrict the state's own power of eminent domain. The Supreme Courts of Illinois, Michigan (County of Wayne v. Hathcock (2004)), Ohio (Norwood, Ohio v. Horney (2006)), Oklahoma, and South Carolina have recently ruled to disallow such takings under their state constitutions.
The redevelopment in New London, the subject of the Kelo decision, proved to be a failure and as of the fall of 2009 (over four years after the court's decision) nothing has been built on the taken land in spite of the expenditure of some $80 million in public funds. The Pfizer corporation, who would have been the primary beneficiary of the additional development, elected to close its New London research facility in November 2009. Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005)was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another to further economic development. The case arose from the condemnation by New London, Connecticut, of privately owned real property so that it could be used as part of a comprehensive redevelopment plan.
The Court held in a 5–4 decision that the general benefits a community enjoyed from economic growth qualified such redevelopment plans as a permissible "public use" under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
And there it is, boys...the Supreme Court verified this case as Constitutional, for the reasons I have stated above...THE BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY OUTWEIGHED THE COST. Oh, I'm sorry...was I to believe that Pfizer also "paid off" the most high court in the land? You guys may think you know more about our nations' laws and their meanings than the Supreme Court. I, however, trust these folks.
Now, read some
Eminent Domain Success Stories. Do NOT expect me to participate further if you choose not to read this.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edited Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:42 PM
Moderate Voice of the People wrote:LOL, Big words indeed...see you on the evening news! Advice: Don't take out too many cops when it goes down...you'll want your family to not be hunted or hated once you're gone.
Seriously though...It's just a fact of life, folks. @!#$ happens in the name of progress. Eminent Domain helped make this nation great. Sometimes, it's all that will work, and it's usually only implemented when people refuse to move on their own.
It's far from some rallying cry against government trampling of rights. Get over it!
Once again, try to take my property, you better be prepared to risk your life for it, because I will be too. Simple as that. At least I would die for standing up for what I believe in, which is more than I would expect you to do with your $#!T happens, laid back attitude. Grow a @!#$ing set of testicles.
Some "progress" seeing all that land sitting there undeveloped when it was perfectly good before. Pretty convenient that now that Pfizer is losing it's comfy tax breaks it back tracking and closing up shop intead of "progress". Boo hoo on the piss-poor "economy" excuse. Look it up, Pfizer isn't hurting one bit. As a matter of fact, I'll do it for you, Pfizer made
2.878 BILLION DOLLARS in PROFIT Q3, 2009.
Currently #4 in Ecotec Forced Induction horsepower ratings. 505.8 WHP 414WTQ!!!
Currently 3rd quickest Ecotec on the .org - 10.949 @ 131.50 MPH!!!
Roofy wrote:Moderate Voice of the People wrote:LOL, Big words indeed...see you on the evening news! Advice: Don't take out too many cops when it goes down...you'll want your family to not be hunted or hated once you're gone.
Seriously though...It's just a fact of life, folks. @!#$ happens in the name of progress. Eminent Domain helped make this nation great. Sometimes, it's all that will work, and it's usually only implemented when people refuse to move on their own.
It's far from some rallying cry against government trampling of rights. Get over it!
Once again, try to take my property, you better be prepared to risk your life for it, because I will be too. Simple as that. At least I would die for standing up for what I believe in, which is more than I would expect you to do with your $#!T happens, laid back attitude. Grow a @!#$ing set of testicles.
Some "progress" seeing all that land sitting there undeveloped when it was perfectly good before. Pretty convenient that now that Pfizer is losing it's comfy tax breaks it back tracking and closing up shop intead of "progress". Boo hoo on the piss-poor "economy" excuse. Look it up, Pfizer isn't hurting one bit. As a matter of fact, I'll do it for you, Pfizer made 2.878 BILLION DOLLARS in PROFIT Q3, 2009.
going to die over your house? keep your oh godly high ground, a house is a house, youlle be dead and they will just take it from you. your point will not be heard, you will be remembered as the fruit who holed himself up in his home and got shot by the police, you won't be a marty to anyone. nothing will be accomplished and youlle still be dead.
did you check on phizers earning for the last year or just one quarter? it sounds like allot of money, but if you find out they spend 100 billion to earn that 2.87 billion, then its really not much at all. not to mention if you dont look up what was earned for the last 4-5 quarters how do you know if they didnt lose money that 3 quarters and this was there first gain in this year? 2.87 billion may sound allot but if they had lost 5 billion in the first two quarters then they are in the hole big time and that earnings doesnt really mean sqat.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
Goodwrench wasn't suggesting that companies build in the middle of a wilderness, at least I dont think he was.
Give em and inch and they'll take a mile. That is what's happening here.
Billhahn, Lets say some company, or some local municpal agency wants your home or the land on which sits your place of business.
They come by and tell you they'll give your "fair market value", but your aren't interested in selling. The house is paid for, you've done some recent improvements etc / family owned business with a good location etc.
They come again with the same offer, this time mentioning they'll pursue eminent domain.
At this point, since it is you were talking about....do you fight back or "meh, here's the keys" ?
People nearly ALWAYS change their tune when they are the subject of an injustice.
If there is available property for sale elsewhere, then no one should be forced to sell. Its happening because spineless judges are allowing rights to be trampled on.....because in the end, its all about the money.
“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
Moderate Voice of the People wrote:You all can whine about the things you can't change all you want. It achieves nothing. That's my point with these funny but tragic threads.
Much how you were in hiatus for four years in not responding on this section, what's one more week? If this bothers you when people brings issues to talk about, a simple solution would be:
.
You're on a public forum, accept the fact that people will talk/type what ever they feel like; Exercising their first amendment right, as we are entitled too. Your bitching on what is your opinion that nothing will change, is no different when one brings a issue up, both will get heard. Difference I see, one is being informative on issues that happens in the world, the other are just flat out opinions, and once again you're entitled too.
Quote:
You nitwits take one news story that shows one biased side of a typically useless tale
No, a tale would be that we have absolute and total freedom. This is a fact on how some businesses work and how they manipulate government to get what they want. You should know by now, "money talks."
Quote:
If you want to make a difference...DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. Else all you are doing is whining about things you don't like. Boo f-in hoo! Whining is not action.
Don't confuse whining with informing. Dialogue is what get things started, then after it is up to the individual to make a stand. If you want to kneel, you have the right to do so, but don't think by doing so is an acceptable practice.
Quote:
As for this latest bit of hilarity: Do yourselves a favor. Study eminent domain. Understand it. See both sides of this story. Don't be a tool of a silly ABC TV report designed to make you foam at the mouth about alleged injustices, and then come here and expect others to be the tools of ABC's tool (which is you).
Practice what you preach when it comes to educating Billy. Now, if you have the mentality of being "high and mighty" and "
it will never happen to me, so therefore dissent is peasantry" that's a issue you'll have tackle on your own. Just don't expect people to think like you.
Quote:
Eminent domain has done more to move this nation's interests forward than just about any other policy. It is invoked where and when needed to Advance Community Interests. And no, of COURSE we don't build developments out in the middle of nowhere...THERE ARE NO PEOPLE THERE TO STAFF THEM OR BENEFIT FROM THEM! Geez...I feel like I'm talking to children sometimes. Hmmm...nah, never mind.
That's false on eminent domain moving "nation's interest forward." It is obvious that you're not aware on, "if you build, they will come." A case of many on that is Walt Disney. The man built in the middle of nowhere plagued with swamps, reptiles, mosquitos. But some how achieved to lunge forward his business without displacing the disenfranchised folks. But you don't need to move in the middle of nowhere to achieve that goal, take empty or abandon lots in the city for starters. You can find one everywhere, why a occupied residential poor area?
Quote:
Oh, and by the way...nice sidestepping you all did on my point about how this case of eminent domain would have added hundreds of jobs, and created a need for more homes than it has taken.
That's sometimes wishful thinking, case-in-point the story on this thread.
Quote:
Woops...nice dodge, but as usual, I caught ya.
Speaking of dodging, you placing sole blame on government, is avoiding the fact that the private sector is demanding the territory to begin with.
Quote:
Now, read some Eminent Domain Success Stories.
To show your belief is not always painted with a rosy paint brush.
Quote:
If you don't, you can just keep crying on each other's shoulders about the Big Bad Wolf huffin an' puffin and blowin your house of cards down. If you dont address this highly relevant question, then I'm not interested in hearing any more whining. Do NOT expect me to participate further if you choose not to read this.
Don't let the door hit you out. But I have a strong feeling that you will lie and will be back to bitch on people having dialogue.
THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.
ScottaWhite wrote:Goodwrench wasn't suggesting that companies build in the middle of a wilderness, at least I dont think he was.
Give em and inch and they'll take a mile. That is what's happening here.
Billhahn, Lets say some company, or some local municpal agency wants your home or the land on which sits your place of business.
They come by and tell you they'll give your "fair market value", but your aren't interested in selling. The house is paid for, you've done some recent improvements etc / family owned business with a good location etc.
They come again with the same offer, this time mentioning they'll pursue eminent domain.
At this point, since it is you were talking about....do you fight back or "meh, here's the keys" ?
People nearly ALWAYS change their tune when they are the subject of an injustice.
If there is available property for sale elsewhere, then no one should be forced to sell. Its happening because spineless judges are allowing rights to be trampled on.....because in the end, its all about the money.
OK, that's a calm enough question. I'll answer it. Goodwench, on the other hand...you may enjoy regurgitating your points over and over. Perhaps you like seeing your ideas in print so much that you can't resist rephrasing them endlessly, and prefer that to actual conversation. Me, I get bored fast. You've bored me.
Scotta: Having been a property owner and lessor for some 25 years now, in an area that's seen massive growth, the subject of eminent domain has come up often in my region. In most instances I can recall (and there have been many), the properties the government targeted are acquired at fair market value, and eminent domain never actually enters the situation. Sure, it can be argued that the landowners, knowing full well that eminent domain COULD be invoked, thus choose to go with the flow. Who could blame them...the law is the law, and so long as they get fair market value, as they typically will, they really are out nothing beyond sentimentality.
Around here, we tend to see it as "taking one for the team". For us, massive growth demands massive infrastructure improvement. Such improvement is impossible without impacting local property. The sacrifice is not unlike any other sacrifice a citizen makes to suit the common good, whether it be paying taxes, military service, even community volunteerism.
Most projects where eminent domain come into view are just that...infrastructure improvements, government owned. Only rarely do local governments invoke eminent domain to also assist commercial purposes, but when they do, it's always a project that will net improvements for the locals...typically jobs and tax revenues. Yes, I'd also hate to be in those crosshairs of eminent domain, but when faced with my needs (the few) being put above the needs of the community (the many), well...I know where I stand. Pfizer's planned facility was but a portion of the overall development whose ultimate recession-induced downfall triggered the ABC bashing that triggered this thread. The development also included many other aspects of infrastructure and support. It's easy to see why the community played ball at first...the potential gain was enormous, as landing a fish this big for your town is ALWAYS the right thing to do.
So, what would I do? I'd find the best path to the best price possible for my property, which means not railing against the system, but working within it. I'd forego an expensive and time-consuming legal fight, for the highest courts in the land have upheld this law over and over...why should I waste my time and money? I'd work the situation to my best advantage, kissing political ass as needed to get the most effective settlement for myself. Had I done recent improvements, I'd expect to be compensated for them, and I'd provide exhaustive documentation as to why I am due that money. I'd also use the move as a way to improve my own little world in some fashion...there's always room for some improvement, and moving is the best time to make good changes.
Most folks who rail against being forced to move in these circumstances bemoan development as a cancer, and wish for simpler, less cluttered times. For me, that's the best reason why they
should take the money, pull up stakes and move to a less busy region, for they will not be happy staying where they are anyway. As such, their decision to stand and fight is not so logical, and is more about stubbornness and protest than actual practical considerations. They should just move away and get on with their lives in a place where they'll be more comfortable. Take one for the team, and make some lemonade out of the lemons.
You call it an injustice. I say, that's a misnomer...our Justice System keeps saying it's been Constitutional as long as we've had a Constitution. I see it as the latest Tempest in a Teapot. Life ain't fair. Expecting it to continuously be fair is a recipe for continuous disappointment.
Edited 4 time(s). Last edited Monday, November 23, 2009 10:37 AM
Quote:
I'll answer it. Goodwench, on the other hand...you may enjoy regurgitating your points over and over. Perhaps you like seeing your ideas in print so much that you can't resist rephrasing them endlessly, and prefer that to actual conversation. Me, I get bored fast. You've bored me.
Surprise-surprise...you're back! (?)
Nope, it is called being consistent. Sorry, but I do not align to stupidity, and I stand my ground. If you want to twist it, to prove your point, you are entitled too. But remember there are others that know how to read/comprehend and know when the fact is bent to support a cynical point of view.
But continue tip-toeing out of the focal point, all you are doing is pruning the limbs instead of attacking the root. Consequently, the root of of the problem is aligned to your beliefs, hence the new road you are trying to take. Like I said before, until this happens to you, you will never understand.
Edited 936 time(s). Last edited Today 4:20 AM
THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.
Let me try this quotey box thing. It looks like fun!
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:...hence the new road you are trying to take.
New? eh? Elaborate please. I'm old, man...my convictions are pretty fully formed.
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:
Like I said before, until this happens to you, you will never understand.
Then it falls to logic that since you believe you understand (and I don't)...then eminent domain DID in fact happen to you. Am I right?.
You should hope I am, for if I am wrong...then you are just as blind as you allege me to be, and most exquisitely...by your own definition
Moderate Voice of the People wrote:
New? eh? Elaborate please. I'm old, man...my convictions are pretty fully formed.
New as in business (private sector) does not take residential property. And you can be old as dirt, apparently wisdom does not go along with your age.
Quote:
Then it falls to logic that since you believe you understand (and I don't)...then eminent domain DID in fact happen to you. Am I right?.
Nope you're wrong, guess I was not to clear. The lack of caring and diverting this as if this is normal and acceptable on your part, only show that something like this needs to happen to you in order for you to get a perspective. And no again, this did not happen to me, but I saw this when a occupied trailer park was demolished to put a Home Depot. It was less than 10 miles from where I lived at the time. Even though a Home Depot is about 7-8 miles away. So I saw how it ruined people's lives.
But hey it's nature, the animal kingdom and humans love to pray on the weak.
Quote:
You should hope I am, for if I am wrong...then you are just as blind as you allege me to be, and most exquisitely...by your own definition
Please do not place me under your category, as I do not defend these business tactics as you do. And I don't think you are blind, I think since you
are business (although a small one at that) and that you have a obligation to back these immoral actions. It's fine, to think that, as it is your opinion, just don't tell us/me that it is acceptable and correct practice.
Oh and a word of advice Billy, your title "of the People" is really false advertising, you may want to consider a revision.
THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:Oh and a word of advice Billy, your title "of the People" is really false advertising, you may want to consider a revision.
I think it's a lot closer to the truth than you are capable of realizing
But that's, of course, the problem I address when I pull down the pants of these threads and spank them so severely. Bad thread! Naughty thread!
What lies between extremism and inaction is the middle, the moderate, the Pragmatist. He laughs at those who torture themselves at the extremes. He goes about his business in a careful, effective fashion, getting things done while extremists blow their wads on uselessness. He is America, and you are his Entertainment.
Instructor Billy now graces you with further edification:
prag·ma·tism [ prágmə tìzzəm ]
noun
Definition:
1. way of thinking about results: a straightforward practical way of thinking about things or dealing with problems, concerned with results rather than with theories and principles.
2. way of evaluating theories: a philosophical view that a theory or concept should be evaluated in terms of how it works and its consequences as the standard for action and thought.
