And that's wrong. If private property can be taken by the state simply to generate more tax dollars, it really isn't private property any longer - and we have no real property rights and are one step closer to serfdom.
If you actually believe what you just wrote, we really don't have much of anything in common to discuss. Even O'Connor viewed Kelo as an abomination.
There's two issues with Kelo. One is Constitutional - whether the government can do it. The other is more philosophical or pragmatic - whether they should be able to do so? The first issue is satisfied as long as the government gives sufficient process and pays for the property they take. This was the focus of Kelo, and on that narrow grounds, I agree. The government can do that.
On the second issue, whether they should do that, well, not even Breyer (the author of the decision, IIRC) thought it was good policy. But the Supreme Court's job is not to determine whether a duly elected State government's policy is a good idea. SCOTUS is authorized only to say if the State can do it.
the latest move on long island now - they are seizing a private golf course to move housing developers in. its going to court of course, but the local gobvernment officials are all getting greased by the real estate developers to make this happen.
Dear Jude24:
I disagree completely with your assertions as being good and proper activity for the public sector.
I don't give a rip if the Gov grabbed acreage back in 1777, I believe it is wrong...and means there is no true private property!