The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » The Battle for Brooklyn and Eminent Domain (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5021 Posts

Profile of landmark
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/06/t......rooklyn/

New film out about the abuse of eminent domain in my neck of the woods. Nothing like the muck of local politics to reveal just how corrupt the system is from bottom to top. I know Lobowolf focuses on this issue in his practice--I'd be curious to hear his take.
Marlin1894
View Profile
Special user
565 Posts

Profile of Marlin1894
Where were you in 2005 when your pals on the Supreme Court were clearing the way for this kind of thing? This is no surprise whatsoever.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Incidentally, the Kelo vs New London property deal has completely collapsed, the project that the developers promised the city would bring in tons of new tax revenues is a vacant lot being used as a dump. Sic transit gloria mundi . . .
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5021 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On 2011-09-07 09:35, Marlin1894 wrote:
Where were you in 2005 when your pals on the Supreme Court were clearing the way for this kind of thing? This is no surprise whatsoever.

Don't know who you think my pals are, but you'd be hard pressed to find any decision that I agreed with concerning concerning redistributing property for private benefit. Of course, if you are consistent, you will be fighting for limiting corporate contributions to legislators as these deals are a direct result of corporate lobbying.
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
That was weird.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16228 Posts

Profile of tommy
There is nothing wrong with that law it seems to me. Except that its far too open to abuse by corrupt politicians. In my opinion such decisions should be left to a jury to decide.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5021 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On 2011-09-07 17:37, critter wrote:
That was weird.

Very.
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1192 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2011-09-07 17:36, landmark wrote:
Quote:
On 2011-09-07 09:35, Marlin1894 wrote:
Where were you in 2005 when your pals on the Supreme Court were clearing the way for this kind of thing? This is no surprise whatsoever.

Don't know who you think my pals are


I suspect that he was referring to the perhaps counterintuitive fact that in Kelo, it was the liberal justices (plus Kennedy) who sided with the wealthy developer, and the conservative ones who were on the side of the "little guy". I haven't weighed in on this one yet because it's hard for me to write just a little about eminent domain.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
What sticks in my craw about Kelo is that the power of eminent domain was used to take property away from one private owner in favor of another, not for some public purpose. That seems to me to be the very essence of governmental corruption.
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5021 Posts

Profile of landmark
Agreed 1000% Wolie.
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5021 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On 2011-09-07 20:13, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On 2011-09-07 17:36, landmark wrote:
Quote:
On 2011-09-07 09:35, Marlin1894 wrote:
Where were you in 2005 when your pals on the Supreme Court were clearing the way for this kind of thing? This is no surprise whatsoever.

Don't know who you think my pals are


I suspect that he was referring to the perhaps counterintuitive fact that in Kelo, it was the liberal justices (plus Kennedy) who sided with the wealthy developer, and the conservative ones who were on the side of the "little guy". I haven't weighed in on this one yet because it's hard for me to write just a little about eminent domain.

Yes, I knew that. They still ain't my pals, though I am somewhat surprised about the way it played out.
You can't give us even a little outline?
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1192 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2011-09-07 21:44, Woland wrote:
What sticks in my craw about Kelo is that the power of eminent domain was used to take property away from one private owner in favor of another, not for some public purpose. That seems to me to be the very essence of governmental corruption.


The stated public purpose in Kelo was the economic benefit to New London - the jobs and increased tax base that the project (not the Pfizer plant, but a full-scale retail development planned to be built for the Pfizer employees) would bring. That brought about an interested "public use" vs. "public purpose" discussion.

However, private-for-private eminent domain had been used in the past and approved by SCOTUS. What was new about Kelo was that there was nothing wrong with the property being subjected to eminent domain; in previous cases, there were specific findings of blight on the property being acquired.

The opinions in Kelo were interesting. There were 4. Souter wrote the majority opinion (5-4). Kennedy wrote a concurrence that, as I recall, didn't differ all that much; I think he just tried to justified splitting off from the conservative bloc. O'Connor wrote the main dissent, which was that the previous cases (mainly the previous private-for-private cases...IIRC Midkiff and one other) were decided correctly, but the lack of blight made this case a step too far. Thomas wrote a separate dissent in which he said that the previous private-for-private cases were improper, and that Kelo was the logical continuation to the bad trajectory that the Court had been on for decades with respect to eminent domain.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1192 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
I was a little sloppy about it being built "for the Pfizer employees". The development was basically going to be built as a nice, modern shopping area, because in the absence of it, Pfizer wouldn't want to operate there because there employees (mostly) wouldn't want to live there. So the new modern mall, riverfront shopping, international restaurants, etc were planned so Pfizer could convince a bunch of middle to upper-middle class biotechies that it would be cool to move (and bring their families) to New London, which they wouldn't otherwise be too keen on. And New London, in turn, which wasn't in the greatest economic shape, would benefit from the Pfizer money cycling into New London through all its new residents. The best laid plans...


As for private-for-private in general, man...it'd be hard to watch a baseball game without it.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Thanks, Lobo. Sometimes I think that Clarence Thomas is the greatest living American jurist.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Baseball has always been a special case, with if I am not mistaken, special privileges, granted by Congress, that were never intended to apply to other endeavors.
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5021 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On 2011-09-08 02:08, LobowolfXXX wrote:
I was a little sloppy about it being built "for the Pfizer employees". The development was basically going to be built as a nice, modern shopping area, because in the absence of it, Pfizer wouldn't want to operate there because there employees (mostly) wouldn't want to live there. So the new modern mall, riverfront shopping, international restaurants, etc were planned so Pfizer could convince a bunch of middle to upper-middle class biotechies that it would be cool to move (and bring their families) to New London, which they wouldn't otherwise be too keen on. And New London, in turn, which wasn't in the greatest economic shape, would benefit from the Pfizer money cycling into New London through all its new residents. The best laid plans...


As for private-for-private in general, man...it'd be hard to watch a baseball game without it.

If you're talking about building stadia, I believe most studies have shown that that too, is a bad outcome for the public in terms of local jobs and homes lost, as well as overall economic activity. The baseball guys always welsh on the rent deals or get huge tax breaks, the jobs created for the locality are generally low wage, and only the big guys seem to benefit.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
There was a study I think in the Wall Street Journal that showed just how bad those stadium deals were. And they were a lot worse in some cities than in others. However, I was thinking more of the fact that organized baseball was allowed to be a congressionally-protected monopoly in the first place, with special rules regarding employment, etc -- some of which changed after Curt Flood's lawsuit.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » The Battle for Brooklyn and Eminent Domain (0 Likes)
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.12 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL