It's not BDSM, but it's important to BDSMers, too

*sighs*
This is just wrong.
People are being paid for thier homes/property right? Its not just, oh we're the city and we're taking it all. You've 20 days to be out.
 
Vixandra said:
*sighs*
This is just wrong.
People are being paid for thier homes/property right? Its not just, oh we're the city and we're taking it all. You've 20 days to be out.

They will be paid "just compensation," but, as Boortz says, there's no way they'll get what they could get if they sold it themselves, if they wanted to sell. They'll get what the local/state/federal government determines is "just." And therein lies the rub: SCOTUS has said that any governmental body can determine that they want your property in order to raise tax revenues or increase employment, etc., and you can't do a damned thing about it. You have to sell it to them at a price they determine is fair.

And for this, so many of us enlisted in the military arms of our government... to protect our freedoms?
 
Sir_Winston54 said:
The #1 lie in today's U.S.A.: "We're from the government... and we're here to help you."

My dad always said if he ever heard that at his door it was time to shoot first and ask questions later...the gov't is NEVER there to help you.

This ruling is utter bullshit but can anyone say that they are surprised by it?
 
Ok, this is just damned corruption to the highest level. Corruption and/or tyranny.
 
Et tu brute?

Then fall Caesar.



Oh, just practicing for when we become Roman Empire, version 2.
 
Marquis said:
What. The. Fuck. Is. Going. On.

Yeah, I read all about it in USA Today at the hospital. What were those judges thinking? Good God. The implications are downright scary.
 
I am quite literally getting a tummy ache thinking of all those people who'll be turned out of their homes. :(
 
I don't even know what to think of this it's so mind boggling. Anyone up for a mass migration?
 
I'll call my mum and have her put more water in the soup. Floor space is available on a first come first serve basis, but she'll deal for good chocolate.
 
snowy ciara said:
I'll call my mum and have her put more water in the soup. Floor space is available on a first come first serve basis, but she'll deal for good chocolate.

Offer appreciated, snowy, but I for one will have to pass. If the Tennessee winters are almost too much for me, Canadian winter would probably kill me. No... if I were to emigrate, it would likely be to Oz.
 
A little additional information that may help mitigate (to some extent) this unconscionable decision:

"Justice John Paul Stevens... was joined in his opinion by other members of the court's liberal wing — David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer, as well as Reagan appointee Justice Anthony Kennedy, in noting that states are free to pass additional protections if they see fit.

The four-member liberal bloc typically has favored greater deference to cities, which historically have used the takings power for urban renewal projects.

At least eight states — Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Montana, South Carolina and Washington — forbid the use of eminent domain for economic development unless it is to eliminate blight. Other states either expressly allow a taking for private economic purposes or have not spoken clearly to the question."
 
Sir_Winston54 said:
Offer appreciated, snowy, but I for one will have to pass. If the Tennessee winters are almost too much for me, Canadian winter would probably kill me. No... if I were to emigrate, it would likely be to Oz.

But I was practising my puppy dawg eyes and everything! "But mum, they all followed me home, can't I keep 'em, please?" I mean, there are ways to keep warm up there, y'know.
 
This is one more thing to add to the list of "if these ten things happen, I am seriously considering Canada"
 
Woohoooo!!!!


I mean, thank you Ma'am, You'd be welcomed here.

curtsying pretty in my shorts and cleats and preparing to block Xelebes and Aeroil
 
Ohhhh, YESSS!

This story indicates that Justice Souter (one of the five who voted in favor of the expanded eminent domain ruling) is about to be bitten on the ass for his vote. (In Fark.com, the label is "HERO," and I'd have to agree!)
 
Sir_Winston54 said:
This story indicates that Justice Souter (one of the five who voted in favor of the expanded eminent domain ruling) is about to be bitten on the ass for his vote. (In Fark.com, the label is "HERO," and I'd have to agree!)

OMG good for him!!! I hope the town Selectmen give him the go ahead and take Souters land. It's about time people in power felt the effects of their decisions. Next time maybe he'll think twice about how he makes a decision in court.
 
It's common here.
In West Australia I know of 2 semi rural properties that were taken by compulsary acquisition, for planned projects that never even eventuated.
And then resold when the value went up...
One was zoned a sensitive green area, restricting what he could actually clear and use when he owned it, then rezoned 3 years later as residential when the local government had aquired it.
One owner is still waiting for his full compensatory payment, theres no time limit for them to do so....and guess what?
The government doesnt have to pay current value, or interest. Just the compensation price.
Happens in urban areas too, Sydney home owners were shafted to build a motorway that cut through the suburbs.
 
I got a book on starting your own country, its getting a little to tempting to try with stuff like that going down.
 
That's just sick. Schools are dealing with not enough space, the entire county is dealing with not enough water and they want to build townhouses to ship more people in there. Who the hell issued this his judge a brain, it's obviously defective!
 
Back
Top