Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Limits of Property Rights
NY Times ^ | 6/24/05 | OP-ED

Posted on 06/23/2005 7:25:32 PM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 next last
To: ClearCase_guy

I see The New American Revolution looming on the not to distant horizon myself. We pay property taxes till we bleed...then the Government says that anyone with a larger bankroll than you can come along and take your land for the lamest of reasons. What would the State and Federal Gov'ts do if everyone just flat out stopped paying their property taxes? It would shut them down, period!

I used to think that it would be way cool if I could afford to pay my property taxes in advance for life, but now consider that being in arears might be the best couse after all...

Taxation without true representation and Government protection has finally shown it's ugly head!


21 posted on 06/23/2005 8:04:49 PM PDT by Birdsbane (If You Are Employed By A Liberal Democrat...Quit!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: mindwasp
you can't fight city hall

That thought process has gotten US into to the mess we're in. We can either live with it, change it, or move.

I hope enough knowledgeable people want to fight, and share ideas on how to do so.

22 posted on 06/23/2005 8:05:13 PM PDT by easonc52
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
The idea that a private developer -- with friends in government -- could just reach out and take property away from a private owner is so totally ludicrous and un-American.

You got that one right! It's a good description of corruption in gov't. You know, a lot of that goes on in Africa and other backward areas. We shouldn't be involved in that practice unless we intend to become backward ourselves.

23 posted on 06/23/2005 8:07:09 PM PDT by RightWhale (withdraw from the 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: andie74
How about starting with the state and local elected thieves who are actually doing the stealing? Throw the bums out! Then we can worry about the crap judges who collude with our legislative and executive branches.
24 posted on 06/23/2005 8:07:17 PM PDT by ellery (The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts. - Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NavVet
Yes but that is the essence of their entire movement. Socialism/Communism works if the right people are running it. Of course when they refer to "the right people" it always means the altruistic and benevolent people known to them as "myself." Elitists one and all.
25 posted on 06/23/2005 8:08:34 PM PDT by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mindwasp

I am for development and desire to see more in my economically depressed town in Ohio. Yet I find this ruling absolutely outrageous. I find it very scary that the people have no say in what the Supreme Court does. Yes we do have the option of impeachment but how likely is it that the Senate would ever do what is right for the people? We need to abolish the current Federal Court system. The Constitution only calls for a Supreme Court with as many inferior courts as needed. We are not obligated to have the current form of federal courts. I think we need to seriously urge a change.


26 posted on 06/23/2005 8:09:28 PM PDT by LandofGrant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

This NY Times editorial will live in INFAMY. Just like their early 1900s editorial against the income tax.


27 posted on 06/23/2005 8:09:34 PM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/canadahealthcare.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ellery

Absolutely. And this includes so-called Republican conservatives who support these decisions with their silence.

I am with you. Let's put them on notice.


28 posted on 06/23/2005 8:13:16 PM PDT by andie74 (I am not leaving my country; my country is leaving me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

I wonder how they feel about other ways in which land might be used to greater economic benefit such as, say, drilling in ANWR and other reserves for oil and gas.

Fire 'em up! Get those drills going! Time's a wastin' and the Supremes just said it was OKAY!


29 posted on 06/23/2005 8:14:17 PM PDT by SlowBoat407 (A living affront to Islam since 1959)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection; ntnychik; devolve; MeekOneGOP; Happy2BMe; PhilDragoo; Smartass; Boazo
I think it's wrong except in VERY extraordinary circumstances. But then, I live in Texas where the wide open spaces are WIDE!

Image hosted by Photobucket.com

30 posted on 06/23/2005 8:14:22 PM PDT by potlatch (Does a clean house indicate that there is a broken computer in it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snowsislander
I found this sentence especially cavalier: New London's development plan may hurt a few small property owners, who will, in any case, be fully compensated.

Perhaps not a one of these folks will be hurt; perhaps none of them have treasured family memories of the locale; perhaps not a single one had hoped to leave the home to their loved ones.

Right...it's just the little people. Remember...all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

31 posted on 06/23/2005 8:14:49 PM PDT by andie74 (I am not leaving my country; my country is leaving me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

The pinheads at the NYT have been whining and wringing their hands over the Patriot Act allowing the FBI to check out their "libury" cards. Now, here they are cheering the government for taking away some of our rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. ((Shrug)).


32 posted on 06/23/2005 8:15:26 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (We did not lose in Vietnam. We left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Mao se Tung understood the limits of property rights.

Law of the jungle says bigger gorilla wins. Government is the bigger gorilla.

33 posted on 06/23/2005 8:17:54 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

David slew Goliath...


34 posted on 06/23/2005 8:18:52 PM PDT by Birdsbane (If You Are Employed By A Liberal Democrat...Quit!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Birdsbane
Atlas shrugged.

I hear you bro'. This was a(nother) bad decision. Many things are not meant to be reduced to money. What's the verse? IIRC, "The love of money is the root of all evil."

35 posted on 06/23/2005 8:23:41 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

If this kind of uproar continues to escalate, The US Neoprene Court, will begin to feel the heat of agitated millions. They are bitting the hands that feed them.


36 posted on 06/23/2005 8:29:45 PM PDT by Birdsbane (If You Are Employed By A Liberal Democrat...Quit!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Birdsbane

It is time for a Constituti0onal Amendment to protect property rights!!!!!!


37 posted on 06/23/2005 8:45:26 PM PDT by Laserman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
If a city (or the NYT) can't exist without stealing peoples' property, then maybe it is time, like Babylon, Carthage, Ephesus, USSR, and untold others, to fade away.

They exist for those they serve, not the other way around, and do not have an intrinsic right to exist.

I expect to be evicted if I don't pay my annual rent to Da Gubbmint; but now my landlord can even kick me out onto the street at whim.
38 posted on 06/23/2005 8:56:37 PM PDT by ApplegateRanch (The world needs more work horses, and fewer Jackasses!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: etcetera
Is this why we have the 2nd Amendment?

Yup.

39 posted on 06/23/2005 8:59:37 PM PDT by Marauder (Politicians use words the way a squid uses ink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

Article 3 section 2 paragraph 2 gives The Congress the Power to limit any and all matters before any court including the Supreme Court. All Congress has to do for ANY LAW is to put "The Supreme Court Shall Remain Silent on This Issue" at the end.Now getting Congress to exercise their authority over the judiciary is another matter. The are a bunch of spineless whimps.

"In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make. "


40 posted on 06/23/2005 8:59:43 PM PDT by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson