From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In a message dated 6/23/2005 8:41:02 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party,
but
the fallout from this decision will not be random," O'Connor wrote
Oh hell yes.
I don't think the law on civic improvements has changed either. In Phoenix
a
big developer put up a 20 story tower in what was a residential area. The
homes on the other side of the street had to pay for a part of the new
sewer
that had to be put in. Payment was based upon property frontage to the
street.
Ten homes had to pay half of what was needed for 400 offices.
So it goes. So it goes.
I know. I got chapter and verse on "You [EMAIL PROTECTED] LIBERALS! did this" on the
Fourth Turning website, along with a smarmy editorial in the New York Times
online and and a more thoughtful but wrongheaded one in the Washington Lost
online. I have written to them, the Albuquerque Journal, my three
Congresscritters, my state legislators, and my city councilman protesting
this decision, and in the case of the politicians, asking for laws banning
the taking of private property for nongovernmental purposes. As I said to
one of them, now my home is my home only until Megalomart wants it. Cheap.
It's enough to send someone running back to Ayn Rand who outgrew her 20
years ago. This is straight out of Atlas Shrugged.
Pat, disgusted
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
