Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Is Expropriation "Right"?

tulle
Posts: 4,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2012 2:57:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I'm hoping to get more than just the typical Libertarian "no".

I just heard of this yesterday http://www.thestar.com...

For those who would like a shortened version, a man owns acres of property but the government would like to extend a highway (freeway) and would need a portion of his land to do so. He turned down their initial offers and now they're using legislation to just take it, whether he wants to or not.

There's more to the story but basically my question to you all is this: Do the benefits of expropriation outweigh the risks? Thoughts?
yang.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2012 3:01:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I would say that:

First. He must be properly compensated.

Second. It depends on the necessity of the road.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
tulle
Posts: 4,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2012 3:07:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/9/2012 3:01:46 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I would say that:

First. He must be properly compensated.

Second. It depends on the necessity of the road.

I personally don't believe it's necessary. Even in the busy areas of Toronto this highway is always empty because it's a toll road. I honestly don't even know where Ajax is and I can't imagine it's busier than Toronto. I don't know if they forsee it becoming more busy with the inreasing population or what...
yang.
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2012 4:06:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The problem with allowing exceptions for the State that one wouldn't allow for individuals is that there's no non-arbitrary point of demarcation where on one side, it's okay if circumstance permits, and on the other, it's never okay. If it's okay for the State to do this, why not a Walmart who thinks it's "necessary" that they build where someone's house is? It's all about special pleading i.e., government logic.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2012 4:09:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/9/2012 3:07:57 PM, tulle wrote:
At 10/9/2012 3:01:46 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I would say that:

First. He must be properly compensated.

Second. It depends on the necessity of the road.

I personally don't believe it's necessary. Even in the busy areas of Toronto this highway is always empty because it's a toll road. I honestly don't even know where Ajax is and I can't imagine it's busier than Toronto. I don't know if they forsee it becoming more busy with the inreasing population or what...

I live in Southwest rural Devon, and there's still certain roads which are really busy most times of the day. I guess it depends where it is.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2012 4:42:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/9/2012 4:06:53 PM, socialpinko wrote:
The problem with allowing exceptions for the State that one wouldn't allow for individuals is that there's no non-arbitrary point of demarcation where on one side, it's okay if circumstance permits, and on the other, it's never okay. If it's okay for the State to do this, why not a Walmart who thinks it's "necessary" that they build where someone's house is? It's all about special pleading i.e., government logic.

I personally think this logic is totally sound but I imagine those who don't might say something about how people pay taxes to the government and not to walmart, how the government and not walmart is supposed to "represent the people" via elected officials, and how government provides certain necessary programs for all of society to benefit from, or whatever.
thett3
Posts: 14,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2012 4:46:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
He was there first and is entitled to hold off all trespasses on his land, including government workers. It's plain and simple theft--if I point a gun at you and force you to buy a candy bar from me it's theft even if I sold it to you for a "fair" value. I see little difference in the government pointing its guns at a landowner and making him move. inb4 "but the government isnt attacking him!" if he attempted to defend his property with physical force he would be restrained or killed
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2012 11:06:36 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/9/2012 2:57:40 PM, tulle wrote:
I'm hoping to get more than just the typical Libertarian "no".

I just heard of this yesterday http://www.thestar.com...

For those who would like a shortened version, a man owns acres of property but the government would like to extend a highway (freeway) and would need a portion of his land to do so. He turned down their initial offers and now they're using legislation to just take it, whether he wants to or not.

There's more to the story but basically my question to you all is this: Do the benefits of expropriation outweigh the risks? Thoughts?

If you are dealing with morality you should try the philosophy forum. No it's not right politically, because its unconstitutional. "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle