On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 16:26:10 -0400, someone wrote:


.... I would certainly happy to sell my house
for 120% of market value, and find an equivalent house nearby and pocket
that difference.

How many years have you lived in your home? How many generations of
your family have owned that land? You speak as if a home was only an
investment in real property. There ARE other factors.

I don't think anybody is arguing that there should not be eminent
domain at all, but rather under what circumstances it can properly be
used.

There is much more sensitivity to forcibly taking people's property,
than merely the price. This kind of litigation has been going on for
a long time. It might have been 30 years ago that there was a Detroit
case where a "White ethnic" neighborhood was being "taken" so as to
allow a manufacturer to expand. It sure is a "slipperly slope" with
plenty of incentive and opportunity for corruption (and racial
discrimination), when it is OK in principle to "take" homes in order
to accomplish a profitable development.



Reply to NG only - this e.mail address goes to a kill file.