do u think that the government should be allowed to take your property even if they have a good public reason to do it, and the government full compensates you for the taking?
cutelildevilsmomportsmouth, New Hampshire USA7,772 posts
not if its a private developer greasing the hands of local government officials with graft....no one should have their home taken from them .dont fool yourself either,the government does not pay fair market value.
I'm for progress and all... but, I just don't think government should have the power to take what they want and call it good... Less and less true neighbourhoods exist, and from things I've seen, very few new jobs come into play because of it now days...
If there is no right of eminent domain there will be no new roads, airports, new parks, new schools....
Property ownership is always conditional. For example, property ownership does not convey sovereignty to the owner? Why not? For the same reason, we have eminent domain.
True, individual property owners can get displaced, but they do receive compensation, and often far more than the property is worth. The people I feel sorry for are those who live next door to a public construction -- like an airport or expanded highway -- who don't get any compensation though their property value may take a nose-dive due to the noise or other nuisance of the facility.
If they could not, then one person could hold up a project that would be for the better of the country or public. Progress would be stopped for the sake of one persons self centered wants or even greed.
If a man had a chicken house right where a road HAD to built in order to better the whole area with jobs. Should he keep his chicken house while all his fellows lose all they own for lack of work.
Good question, Jax. Well, several reasons to buy a house, I think.
1. To receive the value of its appreciation 2. To have freedom within zoning requirements to modify the house and proerty 3. To have a sense of being 'at home'
What other reasons might there be?
And yes, this is all conditional upon overriding laws: sovereignty, eminent domain, sanitation laws and regulations, air rights, mineral rights...my gosh! Lots of things constraining property rights now that I think about it!
No wonder I am liquidating real estate and making myself mobile!
One of the truly free places on this planet is the ocean, outside the territorial waters of the various states. Once asea, a boat's skipper can dispense medications and perform marriages, among other responsibilities and duties.
Great thread, Lonely Walker! Great comments, everyone!
I do believe in eminent domain, as long as there is a fair compensation to the owner. houses and lands can be replaced, plus if there is a well justified public interest
LaL35p4dNx79p3dWSanford, North Carolina USA440 Posts
LaL35p4dNx79p3dWSanford, North Carolina USA440 posts
I like the idea of being able to live on the sea, seens there would be many advantages. I do not have the expertise, though, to figure out how to deal with the weather.
Right. Well, the vast majority of people never get displaced. A few people do, due to the reasons noted above -- but at least they do get compensated and sometimes quite generously. In some countries, of course, property ownership protection is non-existent.
Hernando de Soto wrote a fascinating book about this.
The situation in the US is pretty good about this, I think.
I know a couple of property owners who have deliberately bought land in the way of expected roads or other public needs. They expect to cash in big-time. The one I know in Colorado has just received a massive settlement ruling from the courts where an eminent domain case was adjudicated. He will make a massive profit.
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).