« Taking Freenet Seriously: A Response to Picker on Peer-to-Peer | Main | "Legislating from the Bench" »

October 05, 2005


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

George Petruck

In some hindsight, Kelo might be a good thing. Let’s not forget that ED is used for not only farms and factories but also transportation and certain infrastructure necessities. In an area like New Orleans, different set of circumstances, but for a small town that does depend on tourism dollar and where the families have lower than average necessities, Kelo creates an opportunity for the system to recreate the damaged infrastructure, upgrade and will hopefully allow the return of the much need tourism dollar or welcome the new opportunity.


I think you may be mistaking a general anti-corporate attitude for an intuitive understanding of public choice economics. To distinguish, you'd need to look at a potential taking on behalf of, say, a union -- a party that is a political overachiever but not an object of public antipathy. (But I don't know of any takings on behalf of unions, so the distinguishing case might be hard to find.)

Dave Meleney

Kelo opens a pretty big door -- to ease the politicization of your property whatever it may be. All over the world we see the struggle of 3rd world nations to close that very door, and it often takes many decades to get it even half done. Tom Friedman describes how countries from Singapore to S. Korea to China have increasingly restrained the prerogatives of bureaucrats with his term "the golden straitjacket" ... and the wonderful results that ensue. I had relatives in Guangzhou China receive a reconstituted deed almost 50 years after their family's property had been "reassigned" by the PRC!

Meanwhile, in the US we travel in the other direction, with Kelo- New London authorities forcing sale of citizen's properties and attempts to pay something like half the current market values.

Reading Hernando de Soto-- human beings need reliable title and dependable legitimacy. The other road leads to increasingly expensive land use battles, constant and intense political fund raising, cronyism, and full employment for fixers, hacks, and bag men. Next time you are traveling in the developing world ask the entrepreneurs you meet about their battles with arbitrary edicts and bribes and why they keep their businesses small. Whether it's a cop in Tijuana who needs $50 when you produce your drivers license... or a former Sacramento legislator in pinstriped suit who knows how to get you a "hearing" with the relevant authorities, the world of bribery and arbitrary power is not a humane place to go.

Johanna McArthur

Please help me if you can. I own a house jointley with someone. I want to sale and they don't want to . can I file a partisan to force a sale on my own?

Lew Elion

"A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have". Gerald Ford
Since when is it government's agenda to increase tax revenue at the expense of private property? (Private property is the basis of our democracy, not cradle to grave service and ever increasing rates of taxation).
A bridge, a road, not really a problem, but private to private exchanges? Where is the common sense that built America? I have neither seen nor heard the phrases;
"reduce or eliminate expenses" by anyone in government at any level in several years."
The old reduction of services scam just worked in Chicago last week with an infusion of state funds to prop up public transportation. No one in any sound bite I was aware of offered the prospect that;
"our expenses have been cut to the bone"
"We have reduced routes in the slowest traffic areas"
Did I miss any of these or other frugality gems? Or was the crash of all services the only sound. Pulllleeeeeeze. Barnum extrapolated was right, and I'm not even a libertarian!

The comments to this entry are closed.