More fuel for the eminent domain fire - Page 9

Jdanz · #81 10-04-2005, 11:57 PM

i agree with that example, however i do believe that one person cannot value a piece of land more then everyone else in the world values anyhting, but i do believe one person might not sell a piece of land for any price.

Therefore i do not believe value is explained completely by the free market.

tylerdurden · #82 10-05-2005, 12:11 AM

[ QUOTE ]
and society as a whole suffers.

[/ QUOTE ]

We can try to justify all sorts of atrocities in the name of "society" but they are still atrocities.

There are some people in the hospital. Two that each need a kidney, two that each need a lung, one that needs a heart, one that needs a liver, and one guy that has a broken leg.

Let's make it more interesting. The people in need of organs are nobel-winning scientists and they all have families, and the guy with a broken leg is a drunkard bum with no family, but has never hurt a fly.

The people that need organs are going to die within the hour if they don't get transplants. A miracle doctor can perform all the transplants in time, but the only prospective donor is the guy with the broken leg.

Those people NEED those organs, more than anyone ever needed some crappy piece of land. Should the doctor kill the one broken leg patient to save six others?

lehighguy · #83 10-05-2005, 12:15 AM

If a person won't sell land at any price then it probably has some non-monetary value. Take my own experience. I grew up in my house. My grandmother died in my living room. I want my parents to die in this house as well. Despite the fact that you can get a very nice price in the current housing market, I wouldn't sell. The house is worth more then wood and nails to me.

There is a price I'd sell it. If someone offered me a million dollars I would. But there are some people out there with even stronger ties to thier homes that wouldn't take that much.

As doubtful as I am of the governments ability to value financial value, I am frieghtened by attempts to value what I'll call "human value". If you sell your home you lose a place with memories, you have to move your kids to a new school, make new friends, maybe get a new job. How do you value those things?

Government is ill equipped to make such value judgements. It has less data and analytical tools.

P.S. Try to resist the urge to put a financial price on human value. Someone might offer your mother a million dollars for sex, but she might refuse. Are you arguing the government should set a price for her dignity? If not, why are people's friends, nieghbors, memories, or relationships any different.

Jdanz · #84 10-05-2005, 12:24 AM

not really, but i think there are values completely untied to the market.

For instance there is a man with some small emotional tie to a piece of land, he is a very rich man.

There are a massive number of people who would benifit greatly in a material way from this piece of land.

The guy won't sell it because of the diminishing value of money to him, and a lot of money isn't worth the small emotional attachment.

Yet the people are deprived of a huge amount of value because we're talking only on a scale of money, when in fact money is not the only thing worth value.

I'm not saying the government is perfect, nor that we should make emminent domain easy to use, simply that the market simply DOES NOT account for everything in a way that produces more value NECCISSARILY.

In my mind what the market does is provide efficently for the production of greater material wealth.

I don't think that expresses the totality of value. Not that it isn't a powerful and useful tool.

lehighguy · #85 10-05-2005, 12:57 AM

How can you claim to determine a value to his emotional attachment. Are you psycic? You state it is small, but he is unwilling to accept any amount of money for it. Seems pretty valuable. If money is of no value why not offer him sand or pebbles. They are equivilant in your example. Should we force him to accept the sand or pebbles. Why offer him anything at all? (of course, the more engenious solution would be to find what he does value and offer it in trade)

Perhaps a more direct example. A doctor has been a doctor for 40 years. He has never really had a chance to be with his family. In his old age he has finally reconnected with them and spends a great deal of time with them. He closes down his practice to pursue this.

A great plauge sweeps through the society. Doctors are needed badly and his services could save countless lives. However, he is tired of such things. He wants to spend his remaining years in peace with his family. He is afraid he may bring the illness home. There are any number of reasons for his refusal.

Are you in a posistion to value his desires against the desires of the sick and dying? Will you order him forced into slavery against his will to serve society?

Jdanz · #86 10-05-2005, 01:29 AM

no i'm not, and i'm not saying that i can evaulate every situation, however there are situations i do feel capable of evaluating.

I say it's a small attachment, and the man himself could have said so. I didn't say any amount of money but a large amoutn of money.

I don't think emminent domain is the correct way to set prices, in general i think the free market is the right way. There are however situations in which the free market doesn't work correctly in determining value, and that some subsect of these problems can be resolved via emminent domain.

in your world any individual can value something so much that it superscedes the needs of the rest of the world. I find that ludicrous, as just because that's the way the market values things, doesn't mean that's what their value IS.

For the example i posed it need not be a tiny attachment or an enormous amount of money, just a situation in which people don't value the same things.

#87 10-05-2005, 05:22 AM

I don't get why you are in favor of eminent domain.

tylerdurden · #88 10-05-2005, 08:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think emminent domain is the correct way to set prices, in general i think the free market is the right way. There are however situations in which the free market doesn't work correctly in determining value, and that some subsect of these problems can be resolved via emminent domain.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong. There are situations where *you* don't *like* the results of market operation. That doesn't mean it "doesn't work correctly."

Boil it down to simple terms (and I'll try to use non-inflammatory words for you). You just don't like the fact that people can have a opinion different from your own. It bothers you that someone might not agree with you about the value of something they own. You want to coerce them into doing what you want.

jaxmike · #89 10-05-2005, 10:12 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Florida city considers eminent domain

Florida's Riviera Beach is a poor, predominantly black, coastal community that intends to revitalize its economy by using eminent domain, if necessary, to displace about 6,000 local residents and build a billion-dollar waterfront yachting and housing complex.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Democrats racism shines through yet again. How anyone with a brain can vote for a modern Democrat is beyond me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm a Libertarian. My parents are Republicans. To say something like that, you, sir, are an idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the words. What did I say that was actually incorrect?

jaxmike · #90 10-05-2005, 10:14 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Florida city considers eminent domain

Florida's Riviera Beach is a poor, predominantly black, coastal community that intends to revitalize its economy by using eminent domain, if necessary, to displace about 6,000 local residents and build a billion-dollar waterfront yachting and housing complex.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Democrats racism shines through yet again. How anyone with a brain can vote for a modern Democrat is beyond me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm a Libertarian. My parents are Republicans. To say something like that, you, sir, are an idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree (and am a Libertarian, too). Republicans would use the eminent domain laws to seize lands when in their interest as well, as is being done in Illinois (Repub governor) to seize lands for a 3rd Chicago airport. The farm lands they are seizing from folks are those held for generations by good fellow red-state Americans who will not sell for "assessed" value. The lands will provide the state and local economy probably billions in revenuye and be a boon for the area -- so why don't they buy these folks out at what they are asking? Simple. Because they don't have to when the govt can just point a gun at them and say "take our offer or go to jail". Use the eminent domain laws to steal the lands at "assessed" values and boot those farmers on their asses.

[/ QUOTE ]

At no point did I say anything about Republicans. I KNOW they would do the same thing. Apparently reading things that are not there is a skill many on this forum have, too bad they make themselves look stupid using the skill.