So, through that whole screed, you’re not denying Trump’s pro-seizure stance on property rights, then.
......................................................
My position is mixed. If a little piece of property is blocking an immense project which will raise the employment figures for the community, allow some people to get off welfare, and lift an area into a beautiful scenario for the future AND the property owner is offered a price substantially higher than the property is worth.....which was the case in the instance you refer to....
then I do not see that the stubborn stupidity and selfishness of the property owner should prevail any more than blocking a highway or freeway which would improve traffic should. I am all for property rights when they are reasonable, but i do not see selfishness and stupidity as a saving grace for the property owner. EVERY highway in this country has necessitated the loss of some private property rights. Deny that!
In the case if Vera Coking, it had nothing to do with job creation. Trump wanted space for his limousines.
What you may see as “stubborn stupidity” of the lowly landowner may be in their view a desire to hold onto something that had been in the family’s ownership for decades. What some people fail to understand is not everyone is a worshipper of the almighty dollar and might like to liven out their years in quiet enjoyment of their property. I know that sounds obnoxious and abhorrent, but it’s just a quirkiness some people have.
I find that interesting you respect property rights “when reasonable.” The unfortunate part of the equation is the that power elites like Trump enlist the aid and influence of local officials to do their bidding.
I remember the highly negative reactions of FReepers when the Kelo decision was handed down by the SCOTUS. Fascinating how things change when one of Kelo’s most prominent proponents happens to be the candidate of favor in a presidential contest. Suddenly that opposition to Kelo is so much more “tempered.”