I have a bit of a problem with that because here is Kansas we have a case where eminent domain was used to acquire land for a private developer to build the Kansas Speedway. The goal of the Wyandotte County government was to spur economic development in the area hoping that higher sales tax revenues would lead to lower taxes - at the time Wyandotte had the highest property and personal property taxes in the state. To make a long story short, the goal of attracting additional economic development succeeded far beyond anyone's wildest dreams - stores, hotels, water parks, theaters, minor league ball park, all built as a result of the Kansas Speedway being there - and all the residents of the county have had their taxes lowered every year and the level of their services increasing over the same period.
I'm not in favor of using eminent domain willy-nilly, but this is a case where using those powers to aid a private developer led to real benefits for everyone in the county. According to this law, the county would not have been able to do that and odds are the race track and all its benefits would have been lost. I think that this is a decision best left to the states and that the Supreme Court was right in refusing to overturn the Connecticut court decision. Right or wrong, its for the states to decide.
*******************
Not everyone, if the "right" of eminent domain was required.
“I have a bit of a problem with that because here is Kansas we have a case where eminent domain was used to acquire land for a private developer to build the Kansas Speedway. “
This is how basic rights get lost. People point to exceptions to the rule and say “but we bent the rules this time because it was for a really good cause.” Once you start creating exceptions to a rule, the rule ceases to exist.
George Bush said “I have abandoned free market principles to save the free market.” Do you really think he saved the free market, or did he just open the door so Obama could step through and destroy the free market?
I’m not in favor of using eminent domain... EVER!
Taking someone’s home or land when they don’t want to give it up because the public will benefit is just as wrong as if you reach into their wallet to take their money.
How much do you have in retirement accounts? With your logic it would be fine for the government to take your pension, IRAs, and 401k to spread it around to others who may not have retirement money. The public would benefit so it must be alright, eh?
So big government uses a big government solution and it happens to work. Care to guess the ratio of government incentives that work to those that don't?
Chicago opened, closed, limited and reopened State Street a major shopping district downtown. None of it worked.
Read Bastiat. The trouble is between the seen and the unseen. Wyandotte could have lowered taxes, cut spending, and encouraged development by reducing regulations and zoning restrictions. All of which are pro-individual liberty. Using force successfully to get your economic way is not an American value. At least not originally.