Phoenix44 said:
IMO, Feisty Mouse is dead on. This is not about "liberalism" or "conservativism." Follow the money! This is about CORPORATISM.
Again, take a look at the orignal article about the case. The local goverment is taking this guys house for, "riverfront hotel, health club and office." There is no mention of Starbucks, Wal-Mart, or any other corportation.
No, the winner in this case is the idea that the group is more important than any individual parts.
The winner is the idea that the goverment is somehow responsible for all of us and can do with us as they will. The winner is the idea that the needs of the many outweigh the desires of the few. Of course, the many get to determine their needs that the few will pay for. And the goverment will carry out the greedy desires of the majority.
This is about tax revenue- not anything like a road or a military base. The goverment can say that one business or property is not as valid as another and take that away if it raises more money. And lets face it- basic services are probably not in danger here. The higher tax base this things will raise probably will go for something like a day care center rather than police forces.
People want more. They vote for goverments that give them more. But when people go to the goverment with their hands outstretched chanting 'gimme, gimme, gimme' that money has to come from somewhere. Well, in this case it is coming from the jobs, tourist dollars and taxes this project will raise.
And the people are fine with it. It benifits them at the expense of this poor guy.
C'mon- think! The local goverment let this go to the highest court knowing that doing so would let the entire world know what they were doing, let alone the local voters. Obviously they are not worried about being voted out of office. I can tell you that the majority of voters in that area probably would say, "it is too bad about the guy, but we really need this....."
Put the rights of one individual in one hand, and the chances of jobs, tourist money and goodies from the local goverment in the other and concern for that guy's rights will drop faster than a prom dress at midnight.
Of course, people just can't admit that to themselves, so they have to have some sort of great need or justification for giving someone the shaft. Maybe they will say something about the children. If this tax money lets them send their kids to a new community college for free they can think that they are doing good for everyone and not just their own greedy desires.
Oh yeah, don't worry about the corporations. Think about the politicions and the voters that gave us the idea of pork barrel spending and worry about how they are going to look for small targets to pay off the voters. The founding fathers first ammended the constitution with a number of ammendments that said what the people by means of the goverment
can't do just for this reason. America truely has fallen if the idea that the people can elect political hacks to take from one person to give to another. Because the people will always demand more. And in a world where the goverment is not just a passive protector of the rights of individuals, but rather an active judge of what is "best" for the group, you are either one of the predators or prey.