Legal quibbling over what does or does not constitute a “public purpose” doesn’t really mean very much in the real world
you lost the argument because you use the word purpose when the constitution says “use”. words have meaning. you seem to be a socialist by my definition.
The public purpose is defined as something a legitimate public entity defines it as.
no
The difference between “use” and “purpose” is semantics. Did you think that when government seized property in order to lay down the Transcontinental Railroad, the land did not ultimately go to private entities? When they seized land for utilities, do you think there weren’t private-owned utilities that ended up as owners?