Beware, homeowners, the government wants money

Kanchou · 06-07-06, 09:11

Here's a real american tragedy, Imminent domain being used by the government to take land from an individual, and give it to a developer. The excuse is that what the developer will build will bring in more tax money. Don't read these if you're not ready to become very angry.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.as...20060607c.html
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...adlines-nation

This is bigger than your gay marriage, illegal immigration, net neutrality, employee union, tax the rich, social security in trouble, fair tax issue can ever be.

Thanks to the last supreme court ruling, a developer can come along, look at your property & decide "i could build a condo/mini mall/warehouse and make a killing, but I don't want to buy the land from these homeowners at market value." Then goto the local government, have them condemn the property and take it from you and the only legal reason they need now is "it will bring in more tax money."

TortoiseAWD · 06-07-06, 10:34

Yep, the Kelo ruling was a travesty. On the upside, I understand generators are being hooked up to the graves of the various Founding Fathers . . . apparently, the energy created by them spinning in their respective coffins is significant.

Tort
(fears that the Tree of Liberty is thirsty)

Picus · 06-07-06, 10:47

I think my blood pressure actually went up while reading that.

Tasty · 06-07-06, 06:36

I remember when this ruling came down and I was the only one I knew that had heard about it or cared. Very scary the things that happen while we piddle around with whether or not there should be an Amendment on same sex marriage. Who the hell cares, just don't take my stuff!

Danase · 06-08-06, 02:47

It sucks! I know they will be taking approx. 300 homes from Detroit (actually Delray) to build another bridge to Canada. However, in this case those 300 homes are probably crack homes and whore houses.

Super · 06-08-06, 03:54

The county in which I live buys new police cars equipment and so on from ceased property, ATV's, cars and a lot more from pot growers. Only thing wrong is they ceased property which out a trial first.
DUI the Gov makes a lot of money on, one DUI can run you 10 thousand dollars.

TortoiseAWD · 06-08-06, 06:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Super

The county in which I live buys new police cars equipment and so on from ceased property, ATV's, cars and a lot more from pot growers. Only thing wrong is they ceased property which out a trial first.
DUI the Gov makes a lot of money on, one DUI can run you 10 thousand dollars.

Yeah, don't get me going on asset forfeiture . . .

The gov't can seize your money/property on the suspicion that it came from illegal dealings. No warrant, no proof, no hearing required. Want your stuff back? You have to post a 10% bond (10% of what the gov't took) to start the proceedings. Oh, and the burden of proof is on you to show that your property isn't the result of criminal activity.

http://www.fear.org/
http://www.fear.org/victimindex.html

Scary stuff.

Tort

mdsmithers · 06-08-06, 09:34

http://www.stolemyland.com/images/cartoon2.jpg

http://www.stolemyland.com/

Near my house, hope he wins

GearHead_1 · 06-08-06, 10:41

This is a shame but it isn't new. Local, County, State and Federal governments have been condemning and seizing properties for the betterment of the community for decades. An example of this is take a look at this nations highway grid, these roads went through lots of people's properties. In circumstances like this one Market Value is a very fluid concept and it doesn't usually benefit the owner of the property. It's the idea that the good of the many out weigh the good of the few. There's no question that morality plays a part in what happens because many times there are alternatives. It ain't right but it's not new.

TortoiseAWD · 06-08-06, 11:21

Well, yeah, eminent domain has been around for a long time, and when properly applied, it serves its purpose.

What the Kelo ruling did, though, is allow a government to sieze a property "if the transfer would boost the community's economic development and its tax base." (quote taken from Kanchou's link). Although none of us would want to be on the receiving end of having your home taken to make way for a bypass, that, at least, seems a valid reason to me. But to throw someone out of their home, or take their business because the government thinks it can squeeze more money from the tax base after the developer has done his thing? That's not serving the public or the greater good; that's thumbing your nose at property rights, and serving the interests of the politicians and their land developer cronies.

Tort

GearHead_1 · 06-08-06, 11:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by TortoiseAWD

Although none of us would want to be on the receiving end of having your home taken to make way for a bypass, that, at least, seems a valid reason to me.

I'm not arguing the point. That's why I included the statement about morality. The "valid reason" is too often in the eyes of the beholder. Cities eyes are behind the rose colored glasses.

Tasty · 06-08-06, 11:37

This thing and the immigration thing really get me irritated. Politicians, once elected, don't listen to the constituency that put them in office. It all becomes a money trail and who is going to donate the most to them so they can stay up on the Hill the next time elections roll around. They become so beholden to these morons that fill up their war chests that they are blind to the mandate that the voters gave them in the first place.