Sure am glad I don't own property in the US (1 Viewer)

[Jeff Ulmer]

The big problem I see here is corporate influence. It is one thing if the government wants your property for a new military installation, roadway, park or wildlife preserve, but allowing local governments to decide what is in the "public good" - meaning what will bring in cash - is just asking for corruption.

I do like the scenario with Hilton vs WalMart - I wonder if these laws extend to corporate holdings and not just private citizens.

Another question I have is whether it is normal for regular landowners in the US to have rights to anything other than the surface? I know I have run into properties here where mineral or other rights belonged to a mining company, but the surface didn't. basically if they decided you had oil/gold/whatever on your land, they were free to come in and get it, and you have squat to say about it, nor any claim to the profits from findings.

 

[Joe Szott]

Hehe, good point David. Enjoy the irony of the white Americans arguing displacement...

 

[Holadem]

Loving it .

--
H

 

[Brian Perry]

I think it's a disturbing ruling. It's one thing to allow eminent domain for building public facilities (roadways, airports, etc.) or even extending it to "blighted" areas that need to be revitalized. But what this ruling seems to say is that your house and land can be taken over by a private developer as long as he can claim the new building or complex will result in a few extra tax dollars. Scary.

 

[Mort Corey]

Gotta love it......but now you can always build a casino, take all the white eyes' money, then give it back in bribes, or use the political clout it buys, and level the playing field a little. With enough capital you CAN fight city hall.

Mort

 

[Marc S Kessler]

In the last several months all I've heard from the "crazy" politicians was "judicial activism". I can't think of any decision that could be more activist than this. It goes directly against the meaning and spirit of our constitution.

 

[Michael Warner]

Well the only good part of the ruling is that the justices stated that this decision in no way precludes the states from enacting their own tougher regulations. This is the case in Michigan. The bad part of this state by state approach is that those states that are willing to step up and protect their citizens also make themselves less attractive to business investment since the legal hurdles to grabbing land for development are much higher. Of course in Michigan we're so used to being unattractive to business that we just don't give a hoot anymore.

 

[Claude M]

My advice:

1. Purchase current issue of Shotgun News.

2. Stockpile serious cache of guns, ammo, bottled water and MRE's!

 

[Garrett Lundy]

Nah, they'll just gas you while you sleep. The real way is to spend the next 5 years putting all of your spare money into blackpowder and ballbearings, then turn your garage into the worlds largest homemade claymore explosive.

then wait for the demolition team to get real close..........

 

[JonZ]

I saw something on the news just yesterday about a couple hundred people loosing their homes in favor of Corp offices (that will prob hire contractors instead of actual corp employees saving the trouble of paying benefits,etc)

F*ckin Corporations.

I work for one right now and am trying to get out.

We cant get political here but when I sell my house in about 5years, Im seriously considering leaving the country.

I dont like whats its become the past decade.

 

[Garrett Lundy]

I want to move to Mexico and open a 24hr cantina/bare knuckled boxing arena. Should be really popular with the tourists.

 

[DaveF]

The biggest problem with people who say they are going to leave America is that they don't.

Pardon me while I get my flag out... The U.S.A. is an imperfect nation, filled with flawed citizens making bad choices. But it's also a great country! (I think it's the best in the world, and possibly the best in history.) You can choose your preferred climate, geography, cultural and ethnic surroundings, and one of four timezones. Worship according to your religion (or not). The opportunities for personal fulfillment and economic prosperity are incredible. And our freedoms are nearly unparalled (though not unlimited).

You don't like it here? Think it's a terrible place to live, unfixable, and not deserving of you? Fine. Leave. At least you'll enjoy one American opportunity on your way out.

 

[Matt Stieg]

No one said the US was a bad country, I for one love this country and love living it. At the same time, however, I agree with JonZ in that I don't like the fact that at anytime some asshole corporation that wants my land can just kick me out of my house. That is flat-out wrong and immoral, there's no justification for that. There needs to be some serious revising and re-thinking about eminent domain laws.

 

[JonZ]

......

 

[Jeff D Han]

It sucks that property owners can be run off
of their land if local government thinks it
can make more money from that land. Completely
unfair.

Unfortunately government is getting more dominating
and more money hungry.:frowning:

 

[Carl Miller]

A year ago, a friend of mine was living in a house next door to a shuttered gas station. She purchased the house for $250,000 6 or 7 years earlier. CVS came in, wanting to buy the gas station property and contacted my friend making an offer to purchase her house...which they wanted to level and use for a parking lot.

She said no to their offer, which was about 10% above fair market value at $330,000. They came back with a counter offer of $380,000, and again, my friend said no. She has two kids in school, and didn't want to uproot them.

CVS came back yet again, offering $420,000 and again my friend said no. She heard nothing from them for about 2 months and figured the situation was over. Then, CVS contacted her again and asked her to name her price.

She said $600,000, and two months later the deal was done.

Turns out that CVS wanted the house so badly for two reasons. First, because they had already purchased the gas station having taken for granted the idea they could easily buy from my friend. And second, because her property was large enough that it would allow CVS to have the legally required buffer space between their planned parking lot and the house next door.

This is in spirit with American capitalism...If corporate America wants someone's property, let them and the owner agree on a price, or not.

Allowing corporate America and government at any level to team together and usurp people from their homes at a price less than what the owner would willingly sell for is decidedly un-American.

 

[DaveF]

JonZ - I apologize for my ill-considered and insulting comment. I don't know your situation and inferred incorrectly what you were saying.

 

[Francois Caron]

I was thinking recently what it would take to become a homeowner in the US if I ever decided to try a new career there. With this decision, even as a property owner I'll now feel as if I'm just "renting" the surface and keeping it warm for the first big corporation that wants to move in.

Even worse, this opens the door for foreign corporations to move into communities, forcibly buy out currently owned property, and render Americans homeless in a land where they HAD a home, but were kicked out against their will. The similarities with what happened to American indians are pretty striking. It's as if history is repeating itself.

But as was already mentioned, the Supreme Court decision is based on the current interpretation of the laws. There's nothing stopping anyone from fixing the laws that created this mess in the first place.

 

[Glenn Overholt]

This is by far the worse thing I've ever seen come out of DC! I hope they get it changed before it backs up.

I am hoping too that someone will find out where these judges live, and offer to buy up their homes. I wonder how far that one would go?

Someone can correct me if I heard this wrong, but the homeowner that started this said that his house was worth between $400,000 to $500,000, and he was offered $60,000. So much for fair market value.

Look, if anyone on the block sells, the local government can come in and condem it. The value of any property in the neighborhood is going to fall drastically. What is so hard about sending someone out and re-valuing the property in the area? They could even send out new tax notices, and even send them refund checks from the previous year. I can't see any way to stop this - and just hope that it gets fixed sooner, rather than later.

Glenn

 

[andrew markworthy]

Indeed - those of us unfortunate enough to live outside the USA [newsflash to those of you solely reliant on the US popular media for all your news - there's a lot of us] look to your record on slavery, racial segregation and your citizens' enlightened acceptance of scientific fact over dogma with envy.

Sorry, just had the annual experience of buying my wife's birthday present and that always puts me in a funny mood. And I promise you, Dave, I love you really.

Back on thread: as a non-American, let's see if I've got this right:

(1) a big company wants to buy land for some evil purpose like bringing employment to the area

(2) local individuals can no longer block this by holding companies to ransom for extortionate amounts of money, but instead can only be paid a fair market price plus a generous allowance for the upheaval, finding a new house, etc.

(3) the net result is that companies can bring more employment into an area whilst a few greedy individuals no longer get a massive amount of money for no reason than they lived on the site of a proposed development.

I'm not trying to pick a fight, just trying to get a different slant on the situation. I agree that I would be mightily annoyed if someone wanted to knock down my house for a store to be built, but equally I, like most people, live in well-defined residential areas and the chances of this happening are remote.