[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [at-l] More Saddleback
- Subject: Re: [at-l] More Saddleback
- From: "Bucky" <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 19:12:13 -0500
<< This isn't an issue of sympathy, but of ethics and justice. >>
> Ethics, yes.
> The owner couldn't sell at his price over a long period. Perhaps
> his asking price was too high.
> Once he saw the Government as a potential buyer he jacked his price
> 3 fold. Now he's attempting ( quite successfully) to paint the issue
> into a "poor little guy v. the mean ol' Government so I need your
> sympathy" thing.
> Justice? Justice would be the seller getting about 80% of his
> original asking price. ( That's the rule of thumb in real estate )
> Justice is not the seller getting 300% of his original asking
> price because the buyer is the Government. It's NOT about emminent
> domain, it's about an individual's greed.
So justice in your mind is for the government to take the land
against the owner's will and pay whatever amount it declares is
Got it. :)
I hope you people don't exercise this kind of "justice" during
the course of your everyday lives. Fortunately, town meetings
and general elections don't occur very often.
firstname.lastname@example.org; Northern Franklin County, Maine $
The Constitution is the white man's ghost shirt. }>:-/> --->
* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List | http://www.backcountry.net *