5 ms·
Eminent domain is unfair. If you want the land, pay for it.
by zeroer 10y ago
Eminent domain is unfair. If you want the land, pay for it.
- jacobolus 10y agoNote that eminent domain requires just compensation. Land seized does get paid for.
- sverige 10y agoAnd it's really the only way to overcome NIMBYism. Don't want a power line running through your land? Don't want light rail a half block away? Too bad, here it comes.
- DannyBee 10y agoand who decides exactly what is right here? Don't want new jobs in a new mall running through your land? Too bad, here it comes.
- idlewords 10y agoSome kind of democratically elected board of soulless government bureaucrats. Basically the same configuration as makes the decisions now, except on a regional rather than community scale. The point is not to remove accountability, but to prevent small municipalities from having veto power on things that would vastly improve people's quality of life regionwide (like a BART line to Marin, for example).
- Tempest1981 10y agoCheck out this poor home owner near the new SJ BART station -- not compensated: http://imgur.com/GtAo1Ry http://imgur.com/GtAo1Ry The houses left of his were taken.
- idlewords 10y agoTheir commute just got way easier, though.
- sverige 10y agoYeah, not saying it's right, just that it is how things get done. Usually the people who get screwed on compensation are the ones who hold out and fight. There was a homeowner in Denver who refused to sell to make way for Coors Field who got what he was originally offered, minus all the money spent on legal fees fighting it. Power lines, airports, highways, rail lines, sure. Stadiums, outlet malls, casinos, not so much.
- baddox 10y agoIt's hard to define "just compensation" as anything other than a market price, meaning the price that a buyer and seller agree upon when the buyer isn't "negotiating" using the threat of force.
- jacobolus 10y agoI have no dog in this fight. I’m just responding to the comment “If you want the land, pay for it.” which makes it sound like land is seized with no compensation.
- zeroer 10y agoAlmost by definition, eminent domain is seized at under-market rates, because if it was the market rate, you wouldn't need eminent domain.
- Certhas 10y agoWhat makes you think market prices are just? This might not be an easy problem to solve, but it's not an impossible one either. ED would be used when people are unwilling to sell. If you can buy 20 plots of land from people willing to sell for price X and then the two hold outs who are unwilling to sell have to EDed, you know perfectly well what just compensation is. This is a perfect case where leaving it to the market does not generate the most welfare or the most just outcomes. A form of rent seeking behaviour.
- shostack 10y agoExcept in a fair market, if a developer managed to get all but a couple holdouts, those remaining would likely be able to command higher prices as they would have leverage. ED robs then of the extra money they could have made, and it can be considerable.
- Spooky23 10y agoThere's an obvious defect in that approach. The incentive there is to delay the transaction as long as possible. Worst case scenario, the public project fails and you keep your stuff.