Urban:
First of all, _________________ and the horse you road in on.
Second, leave the United States. And I mean that, Mr. big government socialist. Go live in Canada, or Great Britain, or China, or North Korea. I think you'd be at home in those countries knowing the government is taking "care" of everything and that individual rights are completely unimportant.
Duuuhhhh, what's this constipation thingy you talk about urban? Please, enlighten me oh great and condescending one.
When I asked, "What gives you the right..?" I wasn't referring to the legal right. Heaven knows, the government has a very broad interpretation of the constitution and, therefore, very broad powers (thanks to the fascist totalitarians who occupy all branches of our government and the freedom-hating civilians who allow them to do so). I'm talking about the moral right. What gives you the moral right to say society (and all its whims) is more important than the individual? But you don't have to answer that question, because I know what you will do - simply point back to the constitution and its open to interpretation preamble, court rulings and state/federal laws as all the moral authority you need to destroy the rights of others. Because of course, our individual rights come from the government – they are certainly not inherent.
Let's take a closer look at eminent domain, shall we?? There is actually no specific provision for eminent domain in the constitution ("...and congress shall taketh thy urine-soaked property and giveth it to Josiah Zeiden for the purpose of shoving it up his assh@%e."). Nope, there is only an implicit allowance in the 5th (14th) amendment (due process), which demands (yes, it’s actually a limit on government) just compensation for property taken. What constitutes proper usage of eminent domain is left up to us, the people. Sadly, many years ago, the courts decided they have a right to interpret the constitution (yep, I believe they don't, or shouldn't - suck on that one for a while); and the people’s role as the arbiter of what’s constitutional was relegated to the garbage heap. The courts ruled, as long as it is for public benefit (Broad Definition Alert!), eminent domain is OK. This gives government (state and local governments, especially) a lot of power to crap on the rights of individuals. Thankfully, we still have the power to elect representatives and (in California) the right to pass propositions through the referendum/initiative process. I happen to think eminent domain is misused. Honestly, I believe the only acceptable public benefit is for national defense (I may be willing to accept ED for transportation purposes, but I’m not even halfway sold), and even then, eminent domain should be met with strong skepticism. Now, is that OK with you, urban? Am I allowed to think that way? I know my thoughts don’t benefit the general welfare as you define it (more on that later). So do you wish to eminent domain my thoughts? Anyway, I am more than happy to vote for Prop 98. In fact, as I said earlier, I can’t wait to vote for it. Now, it is not perfect, but I’ll take it.
What I find laughable is many think a cleaned up 700 K Street block will cause Sacramento to become a great city. Those people are morons. Sacramento’s current condition is not that bad. In fact, I’d say it’s fine the way it is. Can the city get better? Of course, but let’s leave that up to the market. Let’s leave that up to private developers. Let’s allow an organic, untainted by government development process. Unfortunately, we don’t have the market to pay for all the extra stuff people want (hip, urban villages with people drinking fair-trade coffee and reading Harper’s magazine). So, our master-planning city leaders think they can force the issue by subsidizing proposal after proposal, making useless master plans and scapegoating Moe. People need to wake up. No amount of public action and eminent domain is going to turn Sacramento into something it’s not. Patience and faith that the market will grow at its own pace is what we need.
Now, please understand, I’m not a big fan of K Street. I think it needs work - a lot of work. However, in a free society that work has to be stimulated by private demand and development. I guess I am just patient enough to wait for it. Also, I’m not a big fan of Moe. He has had his subsidy-loving hand out for 20+ years. I don’t respect that. However, I understand the inability to get his land developed “properly” (who defines properly?). The money just ain’t there. Where is he supposed to get millions of dollars? (The only way you are able to own land down town is if you can afford to develop it? I don’t think so.) Hell, Zeiden can’t even afford to do it – he requires a massive government handout.
Urban, you excerpted a part of the constitution mentioning “general welfare” of the public as a goal for our government. I don’t dispute that; I can read despite my public education. However, I do dispute your definition of “general welfare”. I really doubt the framers had the forced fixing of blight properties, or social security, or health care, or affordable housing, or wacko environmentalism (a nod to you, neuhicky) in mind when they included “general welfare” in the preamble. Socialist, totalitarian elitists have interpreted “general welfare” to include those things (and more), but people who actually believe in liberty don’t have the same view. Instead, we think the protection of our liberty (National defense and strong boarders to prevent the tyranny of other nations from invading and taking over) and the pursuit of justice (punishing those (only after a defendant-favored process) who steal, kill, maim, rape, etc.) benefits the general welfare just fine. In addition, we believe all those things you love don’t benefit general welfare, because they sacrifice individual liberty. After all, what good are clean neighborhoods, retirement benefits, cheap prescriptions, nice little housing blocks for the “masses” (as I’m sure you call them, urban), and clear air if little freedom exists to enjoy them? Liberty first. Everything else is gravy. Now, this very limited form of government is not without it’s problems. I agree. It means having to accept annoyances and worse without government interference. It means “Blighted” districts (really, go to the Tenderloin in SF and tell me K Street is blighted) will have to remain that way until the market decides to fix them. Too bad. But at least Moe keeps his liberty (property), and that means way more to me than some master planned block of dumb stores.
Oh by the way, just so you know, I am fully against all drug laws, and I believe I do have the right (whether the constitution or the laws specifically say so or not) to own and operate a crack house. Of course, if government allowed people to exercise their individual right to use and sell drugs, one could probably operate his business a lot more legitimately, and not out of his house. Also, many of the problems that come with operating a black market business would vanish.
Ron Paul for President!
Prev
With all the failed projects in the past few years, this is like a ray of sunshine! LOL!! Lets hope it will get built in 2 years they say it is scheduled to be.
Linear Mode
