Comments on: This just in – Kelo not popular http://www.saysuncle.com/2005/07/11/this_just_in_-_kelo_not_popular/ Remember, I do this to entertain me... not you. Sun, 22 Nov 2009 03:00:16 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: The Save Ardmore Coalition http://www.saysuncle.com/2005/07/11/this_just_in_-_kelo_not_popular/comment-page-1/#comment-17196 The Save Ardmore Coalition Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:19:32 +0000 /?p=5971#comment-17196 At the Save Ardmore Coalition, we urge everyone to go to www.IJ.or and/or www.castlecoalition.org web site and check out the "Hands Off My Home" campaign. Join in, or pass it to someone fighting eminent domain. At the Save Ardmore Coalition, we urge everyone to go to http://www.IJ.or and/or http://www.castlecoalition.org web site and check out the “Hands Off My Home” campaign. Join in, or pass it to someone fighting eminent domain.

]]> By: GunGeek http://www.saysuncle.com/2005/07/11/this_just_in_-_kelo_not_popular/comment-page-1/#comment-17109 GunGeek Tue, 12 Jul 2005 20:38:19 +0000 /?p=5971#comment-17109 I've always felt that "fair market value" and "just compensation" are two entirely different things. If I spend $200K buying the home my grandad built and then spend another $100K fixing it up, but it only has a "fair market value" or $250K, should the gov really be allowed to pay me only FMV? If I wouldn't take $500K from another private party to buy it, shouldn't that factor in somehow? I’ve always felt that “fair market value” and “just compensation” are two entirely different things. If I spend $200K buying the home my grandad built and then spend another $100K fixing it up, but it only has a “fair market value” or $250K, should the gov really be allowed to pay me only FMV? If I wouldn’t take $500K from another private party to buy it, shouldn’t that factor in somehow?

]]> By: SayUncle http://www.saysuncle.com/2005/07/11/this_just_in_-_kelo_not_popular/comment-page-1/#comment-17064 SayUncle Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:16:12 +0000 /?p=5971#comment-17064 It's not the best solution but it does show that politicos and people are paying attention. It’s not the best solution but it does show that politicos and people are paying attention.

]]> By: Manish http://www.saysuncle.com/2005/07/11/this_just_in_-_kelo_not_popular/comment-page-1/#comment-17057 Manish Tue, 12 Jul 2005 00:06:53 +0000 /?p=5971#comment-17057 I agree with Paul..that kind of law would be ripe for abuse. If the .gov made it known that it was interested in a particular piece of land, the value would rise atleast 2x meaning that it could be argued that the government would be forced to pay 6x of the true market value. I agree with Paul..that kind of law would be ripe for abuse. If the .gov made it known that it was interested in a particular piece of land, the value would rise atleast 2x meaning that it could be argued that the government would be forced to pay 6x of the true market value.

]]> By: tgirsch http://www.saysuncle.com/2005/07/11/this_just_in_-_kelo_not_popular/comment-page-1/#comment-17056 tgirsch Mon, 11 Jul 2005 21:25:52 +0000 /?p=5971#comment-17056 How about requiring the landowner be compensated with the greater of fair market value or another, comparable plot of land in the same vicinity? How about requiring the landowner be compensated with the greater of fair market value or another, comparable plot of land in the same vicinity?

]]> By: Paul http://www.saysuncle.com/2005/07/11/this_just_in_-_kelo_not_popular/comment-page-1/#comment-17054 Paul Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:47:48 +0000 /?p=5971#comment-17054 If the state will take property at 3x market rate, there will be a lot of people who will WANT their property taken. Some of them will be wealthy or powerful enough to get the State to take their land for whatever reason, and make a huge profit. Better to make it illegal to take land for other than 'public' use. The state cannot benefit from higher taxes on such taken land, since it owns it and doesn't pay property tax on it. If the state will take property at 3x market rate, there will be a lot of people who will WANT their property taken. Some of them will be wealthy or powerful enough to get the State to take their land for whatever reason, and make a huge profit.

Better to make it illegal to take land for other than ‘public’ use. The state cannot benefit from higher taxes on such taken land, since it owns it and doesn’t pay property tax on it.

]]>