August 17, 2005

Unmitigated Greed

It isn't enough that the New London Development Corporation won their case to condemn several homes for a new development project. Now they and the city, want to charge rent to the homeowners that contested the case, on top of only being willing to offer the 2000 buyout values for their homes.

If they sound like greedy assholes to you, Max Sawicky has their handy, dandy contact information so you can call them up and tell them yourself.

This is why the well-off should pay more in taxes. See, the government makes laws that allow rich jack-offs with god complexes and a lot of lawyers to do things that would otherwise be called stealing. They get to steal, they get their ill-gotten gains protected by the power of the state and goddammit, they should pay for that protection. If they lived someplace like Brazil, they'd be spending that cash on a platoon of private bodyguards, armored cars and private helicopter gunships anyway. They can at least pay for the courts that back them up and the public transportation that gets their increasingly impoverished workers to their poorly compensated jobs.

Posted by natasha at August 17, 2005 03:06 PM | Law/Justice | Technorati links |
Comments

...the phrase "you've got to f...ing be sh..ing me" seems somehow to do pale justice to this story. If I were one of those homeowners, you'd have to burn me out of my house now. While I have been surprised at the approval of some lefties of the outcome of Kelo vs. New London (I assume these folks must not be property owners), this is the sort of endgame that should just about drive everybody nuts...

...and they wonder why people buy firearms and shoot up offices...

Posted by: Jack K. at August 18, 2005 09:12 AM

The issue of eminent domain is kind of a sticky one, imo. There are good reasons why the government needs to be able to appropriate land, and a good argument to be made that there's no inherent right to profit from real estate speculation, which is often brought up in discussions of the subject.

But I think it's important, very important, for a solid case to be made for the necessity of exercising eminent domain and even more important for the government to deal fairly with property owners. It seems particularly important when they're dealing with individuals who simply can't absorb a loss. For the government to expect to keep its powers intact in a democracy, it can't act with impunity without risking the base of support for its authority.

Posted by: natasha at August 18, 2005 02:42 PM