Trump's Disregard for Private Property

Townhall.com ^ | February 3, 2016 | Star Parker

[Reagan Disciple]

I understand the tax angle, but if the local gov’t wants to run a road through my house for the benefit of their local budget and they force me to sell my house or worse, consider it blight and simply run it over, then where are we?

For every nice payout there's a blight issue. You can't just have one and forget the other.

[ManHunter]

Just a minor misstatement there. Using the first part of your analogy (the second part of which is nonsensical), in this case, the attack on your house was facilitated by an extra-constitutional government - all three branches; ordered by the executive, concurred with and funded by the legislative and ignored by the judicial.

[xzins]

Then you agree that the country is in danger?

[Albion Wilde]

Mark Calabria estimates that since the Kelo decision in 2005 more than 1 million households "have been displaced by government action." Of these households, Calabria estimates 29 percent were black and 32 percent households in poverty.

So, 0.3% of the population affected over ten years, or .03% per year. And she laid down the race card, too! Those figures indicate that one-tenth of one percent of African-Americans were affected per year, on average, even though blacks are overrepresented in poor areas, and poor areas are more (by the above figures) somewhat more likely to be targeted for renewal. Where does the Constitution guarantee that blight is always preferable to a fairly compensated buy-out?

If the housing was so poor that a local government wanted to compensate the people who would then be able to move, in order that their neighbors would have a grocery store or a new strip mall nearby, don't the neighbors' interests count for anything as well?

[ManHunter]

Absolutely! And trust me, as a career counterterrorism officer, I know what danger is.

What I disagree with is that any single person - not Donald Trump, not Ted Cruz, nor any of the others alone - can lift us from that danger, no matter how pleasing or exciting his or her rhetoric might be. Thus, I contend that only a return to a constitutional government in which there are three co-equal branches, not a supremely powerful chief executive, a supreme court that has the final word on anything or a weak, pliant legislature that surrenders its constitutional powers, can bring us closer to the federal republic we were prior to 1868.

The decline of America didn’t begin with Barack Obama, he just accelerated it while we and most of our elected representatives stood by and watched. Likewise, it won’t end with the election of the next president. However, the right president can put us on the track to a return to a country of laws, the fundamental element of which is the Constitution, and, in the process, show America that it is the right path.

[GeaugaRepublican]

It would seem that even for Kelo like situations there should be a “use it or lose it” principle in effect. Otherwise waste is invited.
_____________

I don’t disagree with you. We as a people and the govt. should show restraint and due process in its use, but to say its all, bad all the time. Rejecting eminent domain as a development for depressed urban areas (Atlantic City was) its just madness and would have a really deleterious effect, especially for people too poor to move.

But all govt. action bears watching..I mean that.

[IMR 4350]

What is the gravity of the oil those refineries will be refining compared to the Canadian oil?

Didn’t know there was a difference in oil did you?

Not all refineries can refine the same oil.

[Trumpinator]

You would think the Canadians would speak to the new refineries just next door to them - but instead want to send oil all the way to an export location. Why? Export.

[IMR 4350]

Cheaper.

You would still need to build multiple pipelines to move the finished products.

Just admit you are a Clintonite and you are against the pipeline.

[Trumpinator]

Just admit you are a Clintonite and you are against the pipeline.

----

For Christ's sake. I am for the pipeline - but that will require eminent domain to take people's property away from them for a private non govt enterprise to benefit a Canadian company. I am for it because of the jobs it creates. For you to be for this pipeline but attack Trump means at best you have cognitive dissonance and at worst a hypocrite.

[IMR 4350]

Again, only a Trumpster would claim a pipeline and a Trump casino are equally beneficial to the country as a whole.

[arl295]

It wasn’t a casino

He was knocking down a boarding house and building a parking lot for limos

A better use in my opinion

However, eminent domain should never been used

But if you want to know who really owns your house, stop paying property taxes on it...... The government will foreclose on you, yes foreclose, it just isn’t for mortgages....