Racing Past the Constitution

[Canceled2]

Racing Past the Constitution
by George Will

WASHINGTON -- Rampant redistribution of wealth by government is now the norm. So is this: It inflames government's natural rapaciousness and subverts the rule of law. This degeneration of governance is illustrated by the Illinois Legislature's transfer of income from some disfavored riverboat casinos to racetracks.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

the socialists/liberals here will never get this.

another good article from George.

 

[apple0154]

Article: The Fifth Amendment says private property shall not "be taken for public use without just compensation"

In 1954, in a case arising from a disease-ridden section of Washington, D.C., the court broadened the "public use" criterion. It declared constitutional takings for the purpose of combating "blight" that is harmful to the larger community.

People are given “just compensation”. As far as I know people who have had homes and land confiscated have been compensated quite fairly.

Article: …..the U.S. Supreme Court should take the Illinois case and reject the preposterous idea that money is not property within the scope of the takings clause -- an idea that licenses legislative confiscations.

The government takes money all the time through taxes. When one pays sales tax do they consider it taking property?

Article: The Supreme Court has held that "one person's property may not be taken for the benefit of another private person without a justifying public purpose."

People who are too poor to support their family will resort to crime. That’s why there are social programs. The public purpose of welfare is to prevent crime.

There is nothing rapacious about government using all the resources at it’s disposal for he benefit of society. The socialists/liberals understand this all too well. All one has to do is look at history.

Some people talk about the redistribution of wealth as something “dirty”. From schools to fire departments to roads people pay according to their ability to pay through taxes. The unemployed person paying no tax can drive on the same road as the wealthy person who pays high taxes. That’s how civilization works and it’s works quite well that way.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Article: The Fifth Amendment says private property shall not "be taken for public use without just compensation"

In 1954, in a case arising from a disease-ridden section of Washington, D.C., the court broadened the "public use" criterion. It declared constitutional takings for the purpose of combating "blight" that is harmful to the larger community.

People are given “just compensation”. As far as I know people who have had homes and land confiscated have been compensated quite fairly.

in cases where residents refuse outright offers and fight takings, it is hardly considered 'just compensation' to have the city government 'blight' the property to make it easier to take at 20% of its former value.

Article: …..the U.S. Supreme Court should take the Illinois case and reject the preposterous idea that money is not property within the scope of the takings clause -- an idea that licenses legislative confiscations.

The government takes money all the time through taxes. When one pays sales tax do they consider it taking property?

yes. A lot of us do. I understand you liberals think it's patriotic to pay higher taxes.....well, for others to pay higher taxes, that is.

Article: The Supreme Court has held that "one person's property may not be taken for the benefit of another private person without a justifying public purpose."

typical liberal redefinition of very specific and exact terms. A new york state supreme court case in the 40s rewrote the takings clause in a decision from public use to public benefit. An act of judicial tyranny.

There is nothing rapacious about government using all the resources at it’s disposal for he benefit of society. The socialists/liberals understand this all too well. All one has to do is look at history.

and history dictates that the liberals are very adept at using government resources to steal from the populace.

Some people talk about the redistribution of wealth as something “dirty”. From schools to fire departments to roads people pay according to their ability to pay through taxes. The unemployed person paying no tax can drive on the same road as the wealthy person who pays high taxes. That’s how civilization works and it’s works quite well that way.

if civilization works so well that way, why are we in the total shitmess we are in right now?

 

[Cancel3]

Article: The Fifth Amendment says private property shall not "be taken for public use without just compensation"

In 1954, in a case arising from a disease-ridden section of Washington, D.C., the court broadened the "public use" criterion. It declared constitutional takings for the purpose of combating "blight" that is harmful to the larger community.

People are given “just compensation”. As far as I know people who have had homes and land confiscated have been compensated quite fairly.

Who gets to decide what is "just compensation"?

There was a case in Alabama that a woman's home was confiscated and she was given the low end of the market value. She did not want to sell and fought it until she had spent her life savings.

The city then sold her property to WalMart. The reasoning was that the tax revenue from WalMart was more valuable than her modest property taxes.

This woman lost her home where she and her late husband had lived their lives, raised their children, and played with their grandchildren. All because WalMart wanted to build a new supercenter.


That is nothing more than extortion.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Who gets to decide what is "just compensation"?

There was a case in Alabama that a woman's home was confiscated and she was given the low end of the market value. She did not want to sell and fought it until she had spent her life savings.

The city then sold her property to WalMart. The reasoning was that the tax revenue from WalMart was more valuable than her modest property taxes.

This woman lost her home where she and her late husband had lived their lives, raised their children, and played with their grandchildren. All because WalMart wanted to build a new supercenter.


That is nothing more than extortion.

more like legalized theft by government.

 

[belme1201]

if civilization works so well that way, why are we in the total shitmess we are in right now?

You should ask that question of the folks that had the keys for the past 8 years.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

You should ask that question of the folks that had the keys for the past 8 years.

I have been. They aren't providing too many answers either.

 

[evince]

I saw you lick its ass but never saw you question it.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

shut up, crack whore. you didn't see jack shit because your head was up every democrats ass.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

the socialists/liberals here will never get this.

another good article from George.

Oh I get it alright. I just laugh at it.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Actually I said that before I read it.

Illinois's property transfer is definitely ridiculous.

 

[TuTu Monroe]

This has been going on for years and the government never gives fair market value for the properties.

Who gets to decide what is "just compensation"?

There was a case in Alabama that a woman's home was confiscated and she was given the low end of the market value. She did not want to sell and fought it until she had spent her life savings.

The city then sold her property to WalMart. The reasoning was that the tax revenue from WalMart was more valuable than her modest property taxes.

This woman lost her home where she and her late husband had lived their lives, raised their children, and played with their grandchildren. All because WalMart wanted to build a new supercenter.


That is nothing more than extortion.

 

[Canceled2]

the socialists/liberals here will never get this.

another good article from George.

The most disturbing thing about this grab for power and the tyrannical assertion of government authority over private ownership is that as Will, states, it is becoming the norm and readily accepted by seeming dull witted partisans who are actually defending it!

 

[apple0154]

in cases where residents refuse outright offers and fight takings, it is hardly considered 'just compensation' to have the city government 'blight' the property to make it easier to take at 20% of its former value.

Are you talking about before or after the refusal?

typical liberal redefinition of very specific and exact terms. A new york state supreme court case in the 40s rewrote the takings clause in a decision from public use to public benefit. An act of judicial tyranny.

The courts are there to interpret laws so as to be beneficial to all. The "can't yell fire in a theater" example.

The people who wrote the Constitution could not have conceived of the type of society we have today. The principals remain but surely people understand the necessity of applying the Constitution to the reality of the day.

and history dictates that the liberals are very adept at using government resources to steal from the populace.

When looking back on history regarding governments and imposing taxes the money went to the government. It was not given to other members of society. There is a big difference.

If civilization works so well that way, why are we in the total shitmess we are in right now?

Because there wasn't enough government control. It's due to people having fought against government control.

 

[Cancel3]

Because there wasn't enough government control. It's due to people having fought against government control.

Not enough government control? Are you kidding???

Look at the scandals that our government officials have been involved in.

If you trust the government to do what is in OUR best interest, then you cannot possibly have been paying attention to what they have been doing.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Are you talking about before or after the refusal?

mostly after, though I have read a few cases where the cities didn't even make an offer, just an outright blight designation and then condemnation.

The courts are there to interpret laws so as to be beneficial to all. The "can't yell fire in a theater" example.

which is a bullshit example and i've debunked it numerous times on here

The people who wrote the Constitution could not have conceived of the type of society we have today. The principals remain but surely people understand the necessity of applying the Constitution to the reality of the day.

the 'living' constitution theory needs to die a bloody and horrible death. The founders KNEW that technology would always advance society, therefore they wrote the basic principles in the powers assigned to the government to be static and constant.

When looking back on history regarding governments and imposing taxes the money went to the government. It was not given to other members of society. There is a big difference.

another bullshit example and almost certainly an outright lie.

Because there wasn't enough government control. It's due to people having fought against government control.

like we did in the 1770s?

 

[Cancel4]

Times change and those who deny change get left behind.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Actually the legal standard that was advocated by "You can't yell fire in a theater" isn't actually in use anymore. They've much limited the conclusion that that court came too. The example is overused today.

 

[uscitizen]

Not enough government control? Are you kidding???

Look at the scandals that our government officials have been involved in.

If you trust the government to do what is in OUR best interest, then you cannot possibly have been paying attention to what they have been doing.

Yeah and look at what private industry has done as well...
Neither bunch can run things worth crap.