|I'll admit that I haven't read all 39 other posts on this thread but from what I have read, I'd like to make a couple of comments. Sarah H., the Lost Liberty Hotel is a joke to show how flawed the Supreme Ct. ruling was. I'd bet the majority of people who have signed the pledge to stay there did so to prove a point, not to support the use of eminent domain. |
Jon L., you stated, "as the project is really good, (like a highway that will get me home thirty minutes faster) and the property is sufficiently shitty, like a hotdog stand." It's interesting that you stated that you approved of the use of eminent domain as long as it benefited you (since you would get home faster). It's a clear example of diffused costs (to all taxpayers) and concentrated benefits (to you and your immediate neighbors). Also, you mitigated the use of eminent domain if "the property is sufficiently shitty" but that is subjective. Do would be responsible for making that ascertation, the government? I think Ethan D. and Robert M. had some of the most clear and just responses on this issue.
Matthew G. and Aaron have it correct. While you, Jon, may be willing to sell your property for 1.5-3X the value of your property, not everyone else in the path of the highway, power-line, dam resivor etc. would choose the same course of action. As James Donald said, "The usual road to slavery is that first they take away your guns, then they take away your property, then last of all they tell you to shut up and say you are enjoying it."