Do We Have a Right to Our Property--Or Not??

[Bonnie]

The qusetion is: Does the Constitution empower governments to seize a person's most presious property--a home, a business--and give to to more wealthy interests so that the government can reap, in taxes, ancillary benefits of that wealth? Connecticut's court says yes, which turns the fifith form a protection of the individual against overbearing government into a license for government to coerce individuals on behalf of society's strongest interests. Henceforth, what home or business will be safe from grasping governments pursuing thier own convenience??

www.townhall.com/columnists/georgewill/printgw20040919.shtml

Once again we have a BIG problem with judges bastardizing the constitution, specifically the 5th Amendment.

 

[onedomino]

The qusetion is: Does the Constitution empower governments to seize a person's most presious property--a home, a business--and give to to more wealthy interests so that the government can reap, in taxes, ancillary benefits of that wealth? Connecticut's court says yes, which turns the fifith form a protection of the individual against overbearing government into a license for government to coerce individuals on behalf of society's strongest interests. Henceforth, what home or business will be safe from grasping governments pursuing thier own convenience??

www.townhall.com/columnists/georgewill/printgw20040919.shtml

Once again we have a BIG problem with judges bastardizing the constitution, specifically the 5th Amendment.

Bonnie, you mean income tax? Nothing about that in the Constitution. First national income tax did not appear until the Civil War.

 

[DKSuddeth]

The 'eminent domain' law is abused more and more every year that goes by.
When you hear the 'tinfoil hat' people accuse the government of being run by the corporations, consider this issue alone. It should easily convince you that they are not 'theorizing'.

 

[Mr. P]

The qusetion is: Does the Constitution empower governments to seize a person's most presious property--a home, a business--and give to to more wealthy interests so that the government can reap, in taxes, ancillary benefits of that wealth? Connecticut's court says yes, which turns the fifith form a protection of the individual against overbearing government into a license for government to coerce individuals on behalf of society's strongest interests. Henceforth, what home or business will be safe from grasping governments pursuing thier own convenience??

www.townhall.com/columnists/georgewill/printgw20040919.shtml

Once again we have a BIG problem with judges bastardizing the constitution, specifically the 5th Amendment.

Wal-mart has been involved in this "land grab" scam for awhile now.
I remember hearing even Time attempted it in NYC, I can't remember if they were successful.

So the answer to the thread topic question is...Increasingly NO.

The local county gov. see big tax revenue from a super Wal-mart
vs. the lowly home owner...Guess who wins.

Time to fight back.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Once again we have a BIG problem with judges bastardizing the constitution, specifically the 5th Amendment.

would that we could just blame the judges in this issue, but politicians local to federal are the abusers of this.

 

[Bonnie]

would that we could just blame the judges in this issue, but politicians local to federal are the abusers of this.

It's actually going on in my own town right now to a horse farm that has been there for some 80 years. The township mayor is using the courts to have the property condemned so that he can build townhomes and a strip mall, to this date the courts have ruled in favor of the township. essentially the township only offered the family about 1/2 what the property is actually worth, and so reasonalby the family declined the offer.