Just saw some guy spit onto the pavement while making his way out of a FedEx vehicle. If it is a territorial thing, it's not working because I'm a guy and my reaction was nothing more than a shake of my head and the following thought: "What a moron..."
I noticed some guy spit while walking up to a hotel yesterday as well, after which he proceeded to ask for directions. If he had asked me I probably would have walked off, to be honest.
I don't get it, but I think it's pretty stupid.
Five years ago then Rep. Guthrie and I started work on this bill in response to the Portneouf Greenway wanting to take land away from people along the river in Pocatello when there was and still is a perfectly good alternate route which utilizes land already owned by the city and county. The argument against the bill was that "we need this tool to effectively negotiate." It was a lie then and is now. We purposely restricted the bill to not impact the enumerated uses of eminent domain in the Idaho Constitution.
good points all. It seems to me eminent domain is a socialist program. And for another viewpoint ask the American Indians what they think of "eminent domain"...
I can see both sides here. One person's social benefit is another person's imposed implement. This is the classic dialectic of old that pits social goods vs private freedoms. Try this on....ask Wayne Hoffman if he supports the use of eminent domain to build the Keystone Pipeline. You might get a different answer. You can't call yourself a libertarian unless you keep corporations from using government for it's wants, too.
These are the three fundamental principles of modern society,
established one after another:
1. SOVEREIGNTY OF THE HUMAN WILL; in short, DESPOTISM.
2. INEQUALITY OF WEALTH AND RANK.
3. PROPERTY--which is above JUSTICE and always invoked as the
guardian angel of sovereigns, nobles, and proprietors; JUSTICE, the
general, primitive, categorical law of all society.
If you wish to enjoy political equality, abolish property.
Every argument which has been invented in behalf of property, WHATEVER IT MAY BE, always and of necessity leads to equality; that is, to the negation of property.
The causes of social inequality are three in number:
1. GRATUITOUS APPROPRIATION OF COLLECTIVE WEALTH;
2. INEQUALITY IN EXCHANGE;
3. THE RIGHT OF PROFIT OR INCREASE.
Since this threefold method of extortion is the very essence of the
domain of property, property is robbery.
Communism is inequality, but not as property is. Property is the exploitation of the weak by the strong.
In property, inequality of conditions is the result of force, under whatever name it be disguised: physical and mental force; force of events, chance, FORTUNE; force of accumulated property.
Property is born of selfishness which results from the universal obsession with ‘Me, My, Mine’.
I work with the eminent domain law every day with utility companies, mostly pipelines and power lines. Without eminent domain, America would be a 3rd world country. I do think that some cities go too far with making a determination on whether a structure is or isn't in the "best interest" of the community, but on the other hand there are police laws on the books for rathole/dangerous/health buildings and their removal. It's like anything else, one can go too far with a rule or regulation and ruin the intent and spirit of the law. It's a mixed bag, but without eminent domain, nothing that is determined to be "for the public good" would ever get accomplished.
"These powers have been working effectively in the state for decades." Hmmm.. For who? I am the most liberal, socialist leaning and community mined person one might find. But when it comes to eminent domain I am almost a Montana Freeman.. I don't like this power of the state. I have some personal experience of the negative side of this power. It reminds me of the issue of the "value" of Wilderness. The true value of many things cannot be rendered to a dollar amount.. Yes Boise Cascade can tell you the value of a 300 year old ponderosa pine, but who can say what the intrinsic value is? Or the value of a part of land where a persons grand parents and great grand parents have grown grapes on for 100 years? Can "market value" cover the true value? No..
Sheesh. The concept of eminent domain is in the US Constitution. Admittedly the power can sometimes be abused; however, I think there are effective ways to guard against the abuse without stripping the power completely from cities.
While I promote more freedom this bill is quite limiting and certainly a costly way to provide more greenbelts. One land owner can torpedo the whole plan. But a person has a right to their property and what is on it. Jerks are just that.
© 2015 Boise Weekly
Website powered by Foundation