Cool. Now citizens can't own property

Page 3 of 6 First 12345 ... Last

  1. Hey, I know what we should do. We should all of us, the people, get together and pass an ammendment to the Constitution that protects the rights of property owners ...

    Oh ... wait ...


  2. Well, private industry can't do it. It still requires an action by a government body, and those are people in elected positions who can't abuse this power too much or they will be out of a job come next election.
    Multi-millionaire industry tycoons have much more influence on politicians than the average joe. You're right though, if something like this got too out of hand someone in the government would have the sense to shut it down.


    Some people end up getting screwed in the process, but that is never completely avoidable
    It's the fact that a law like this is actually on the books that is frightening to me. What if that was your house? Or my house? I dont think either of us would be looking at it objectively.

    And you know, if whatever land developer/corporation/etc was offering these people enough for their property, it wouldnt be a problem. They don't want to be fair, they want to get these houses for as little expense to them as possible. That's business, it's all about the bottom line and always will be.

    The fact that there is a law that could allow a private interest to take someone's land for developments that may positively affent the greater good and just maybe will end up making them millions of dollars just isnt right.

    I know in this case, the city has a clear cut plan for developent that will result in 1000+ jobs in the community, and in a sense I can see their reasoning. But who knows, in other cases where this law may be applied it may not be so clear cut.

    And then, this average American Citizen who just got 'fair market value' for his hard earned property has to find money to get a lawyer to protect his rights, in addition to taking time off work to find a new house and move, etc.

    And who has more resources to fight this battle? The Corporate entity with near-unlimited financial resources and an in-house team of highly paid lawyers, or some poor sod making $40k a year trying to feed a family of 3?

    That's the kind of situations you'll see because of this law, in the not-so-extreme case. The fact that its possible just isnt right.
    •   
       


  3. First they take your property and next goes your supplements ........

  4. Well here are the people that started this whole cluster.. so feel free to write them and tell them how you feel about it
    http://ci.new-london.ct.us/nlpages/F...max=all&-find=

  5. Charley Daniels said it best when he song "all this world needs is a few more rednecks"


    The next presidential election in 2008 I'm going to vote for Larry the Cable Guy

    GET 'R DONE!!!!
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix rising
    Charley Daniels said it best when he song "all this world needs is a few more rednecks"


    The next presidential election in 2008 I'm going to vote for Larry the Cable Guy

    GET 'R DONE!!!!
    Oh Geez...
  7. Just compensation...


    From Newsday:

    The city [New London, CT] has budgeted $1.6 million to pay for the 15 homes. Von Winkle said he's been told he will get $638,000 for his three houses. Von Winkle figures that's not even close to fair. He owns the homes mortgage-free and says he earns about $120,000 a year in rent.

    The holdouts and their 15 homes were all that stood in the way of plans to build a hotel, office space and upscale homes.


    I saw an interview with one of the homeowners. His property is a 10 bedroom house on 1/2 acre 200 feet from the waterfront. The city originally offered him $60K, but upped it to $150K. He said that local market value was actually more than $300K.

    These people aren't getting just compensation, these people are getting BONED!! The horrific part is that any one of us could be next.

    Sad day for our system.
  8. Talking


    Quote Originally Posted by BigVrunga
    Oh Geez...
    I'm glad you could appreicate my post reply BigVrunga

  9. In TN and Texas I believe it is legal to use deadly force in order to remove a trespasser from your property. Back at my parents house which is way off the road. All we'd have to do is let the dogs on them and if they came back and messed with the dogs well then they'd be messing with the "persuader" and he doesn't listen to much bull ****.

    In all honestly if some smart ass corporate guy came out and after I tell him no your not getting my house and then the show up with a bull dozer. Some body will die plain and simple and then I will use my life savings to declare my inocence to the jury, which I am sure they could relate. Just my .02cc's not as an educated answer to the problem but it sure as hell would make a much louder outcry to the twisted government, politicians, courts, and corporations.

  10. Quote Originally Posted by jrkarp
    Well, private industry can't do it. It still requires an action by a government body, and those are people in elected positions who can't abuse this power too much or they will be out of a job come next election. /karp
    This is a pretty naive stance. Private industry controls the government in this country. Who do you think pays to put these people in office? Do you really think the 'common man' could run a grass roots campaign against the corporate establishment, with their multimillion dollar campaigns, and win? Try it, I bet a few friends might vote for you, unless the recognized your opponents name from a TV ad saying what a great person he is or because his father was a politician before him.

    In the beautiful city of Philadelphia, where I live, we have been going through a nasty 'pay to play' scandal where city officials where taking kickbacks to give out city work to private contractors. How hard do you think it will be for a developer to buy his way into the land he wants through the city? Throw in a generous donation to the reelection bid and the average person is screwed again in favor of corporate interests. Especially when the politician can easily justify his actions by saying, "The new shopping/housing will generate ten times more tax revenue for the city than before." Is the government in the business of making money also? Or, are they there to represent the people.

    Now, I'm not saying that corporations have no right to make money, or that our system of government is run by charlatans. However, this seems to be an issue of moral fairness on every level, and it is not remotely fair. This is a utilitarian dream, it is a move that makes a group of people very happy at the expense of another, smaller group. I am happy to see so many posts that are riled up about this, I do not believe it is a 'hot-button' issue with people overreacting. I think it is the 'straw the broke the camel's back', and people are beginning to wake up to see that our rights are being trampled upon.

  11. It's not naive at all. I am very much aware of the corporate influence in politics. I am also aware that most of the people who elect these officials are not involved with the corporations, and that given the hysteria that this court ruling has generated, politicians that use this power are going to be on very thin ice.

    Is the government in the business of making money also? Or, are they there to represent the people.
    Where do you think that the money comes from that pays for services like education, health care, police, snow removal, etc? From taxes. So yeah the government is in the business of making money so that they can provide services for the people.

    /karp

  12. Quote Originally Posted by BigVrunga
    Or when Dubya himself gets busted for cocaine ends up president of the United States.
    BTW Bush never got arrested for cocaine.

    He got a DWI.

    /karp

  13. Quote Originally Posted by Funny Monkey
    In TN and Texas I believe it is legal to use deadly force in order to remove a trespasser from your property. Back at my parents house which is way off the road. All we'd have to do is let the dogs on them and if they came back and messed with the dogs well then they'd be messing with the "persuader" and he doesn't listen to much bull ****.

    In all honestly if some smart ass corporate guy came out and after I tell him no your not getting my house and then the show up with a bull dozer. Some body will die plain and simple and then I will use my life savings to declare my inocence to the jury, which I am sure they could relate. Just my .02cc's not as an educated answer to the problem but it sure as hell would make a much louder outcry to the twisted government, politicians, courts, and corporations.
    Once again the condemnation comes from the local government, not a "corporate guy." It still has to comport with requirements of procedural due process, meaning a notice and an opportunity to be heard.

    If there was going to be a problem it would be police, not corporate types, who were removing you from your property. And shooting police officers most certainly does not go over well in Tennesee or Texas.

    /karp

  14. People, what I'm saying here is not that this ruling is a good thing.

    What I am saying is that the media is turning it into this huge thing and a lot of people are going off half cocked without knowing what it really means or even what it really says. You can't trust the media to lay it all out for you.

    /karp

  15. BTW Bush never got arrested for cocaine.

    He got a DWI.
    Yeah that statement was in error...

    he was "allegedly arrested for cocaine use"

    BV

  16. AFAIK that never even happened. I never read anything about even an alleged cocaine bust, but I could be wrong. Where have you read that?

    /karp

  17. Quote Originally Posted by jrkarp
    This ruling is far less significant than many people are making it out to be. There is not suddenly going to be a rush of people losing their homes. And use of eminent domain still requires a court to rule on the taking of land.

    My posts above were to try to get people to calm down instead of going off half cocked.

    /karp
    No good. I'm always half cocked.

  18. AFAIK that never even happened. I never read anything about even an alleged cocaine bust, but I could be wrong. Where have you read that?

    /karp
    Do a google search on 'George Bush Cocaine" and a bunch of stuff comes up. Most if it is all heresay and speculation though.

  19. Quote Originally Posted by joecski
    "The new shopping/housing will generate ten times more tax revenue for the city than before." Is the government in the business of making money also? Or, are they there to represent the people.
    And of course no one thinks of the issue from this angle: why is it such a good thing for the state to get more money? They do nothing but waste most of the money they have, they'll do no different with any more money that comes in. What, generate more tax revenue for them so they can have another year or two of of hearings on whether or not we should be able to buy creatine? Plus such 'plans' always end up backfiring and costing taxpayers more than planned because the new malls/stadiums/whatevers always get a healthy government subsidy and always end up going way over budget and never seem to bring as much business in as they predict. Which is actually common sense, because if these plans really were going to bring in that much business private industry would have been able to fund it on their own. They wouldn't need the city to do a land grab for them. The basic premise is that a bunch of political whores know better what will be good for the economy than the people who actually make up the economy. It's central planning at its most idiotic.

  20. Quote Originally Posted by BigVrunga
    Do a google search on 'George Bush Cocaine" and a bunch of stuff comes up. Most if it is all heresay and speculation though.
    Yeah, I've seen all that, I was just wondering if you had seen something more concrete.

    /karp

  21. Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    And of course no one thinks of the issue from this angle: why is it such a good thing for the state to get more money? They do nothing but waste most of the money they have, they'll do no different with any more money that comes in. What, generate more tax revenue for them so they can have another year or two of of hearings on whether or not we should be able to buy creatine? Plus such 'plans' always end up backfiring and costing taxpayers more than planned because the new malls/stadiums/whatevers always get a healthy government subsidy and always end up going way over budget and never seem to bring as much business in as they predict.
    You know that your roads, schools, police, snow removal, airports, plus free clinics, public transportation, and dozens of other things are paid for by tax revenue, right?

    Which is actually common sense, because if these plans really were going to bring in that much business private industry would have been able to fund it on their own. They wouldn't need the city to do a land grab for them. The basic premise is that a bunch of political whores know better what will be good for the economy than the people who actually make up the economy. It's central planning at its most idiotic.
    Um, the private industry does fund it on their own. They pay the "just compensation." The problem is that they need the land, which is where the government comes in.

    /karp

  22. Quote Originally Posted by jrkarp
    Once again the condemnation comes from the local government, not a "corporate guy." It still has to comport with requirements of procedural due process, meaning a notice and an opportunity to be heard.

    If there was going to be a problem it would be police, not corporate types, who were removing you from your property. And shooting police officers most certainly does not go over well in Tennesee or Texas.

    /karp
    corporate guy, politician, police officer, fireman, army, old lady, little children. If they are trying to take my home just so a mall, store, or facility can go there I am going to use whatever means to protect my property and my family. I could care less if you are wearing a uniform or not.

  23. All of this is simply not right. It is not ethical or moral. Politicians should have some ****ing balls and say "well these people do not want to sell so either make them a higher offer or find somewhere else". We need people to stand up no matter the cost.

  24. I don't entirely disagree with you.

    But everyone acts like this is something new.

    Eminent domain condemnations have been going on since this country was founded and long before that. The constitution specifically authorizes it.

    /karp

  25. new jobs and increased tax revenue
    Yeah right....Bush and co. keep saying that they've increased jobs and all this crap, well these are the wrong KIND of jobs. All these takenover homes are taken over so that mini malls and shooping centers can be built, nothing more. How the **** are you supposed to support yourself, nonetheless raise a family when all of these jobs pay minimum wage? So waht it boils down to is they're kicking out these families, taking away their homes, and replacing htem with minimum wage jobs....yeah, that's a GREAT way to up the economy.

    All this is, is a front to try and lower the deficit....nothing more...and they threw in "increasing jobs" in order to sugar coat it.....bull**** man, this country keeps shooting itself in the foot. And I mean cmon, is it really that shocking when you got arnold ****ing schwartzenegger as gov? OR how about all these other idiots that just happen to be "popular" and run for office and the the ignorant people of this country elect them...my god...political corectness, the deficit, the war in iraq, are all examples of how this country is turning to **** and they all could have been avoided or lessened to a considerable degree with a little more thinking and a lot less greediness.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Replies: 47
    Last Post: 09-18-2009, 02:19 PM
  2. Replies: 29
    Last Post: 12-11-2008, 06:42 PM
  3. i just ran a cycle of trimax can i run clen now
    By bigrich954rr in forum Supplements
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-09-2005, 10:00 PM
  4. Now that you can make your own transdermals....
    By good_guye28 in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-02-2004, 11:14 AM
  5. Conceptions-I've been owned and now I'm banned!
    By Conceptions in forum General Chat
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 03-24-2003, 12:18 PM
Log in
Log in