Property is Liberty, and Regulation Is Theft

[Skull Pilot]

Private company buying land not the governemnt

Against the will of the landowners? Forced by the government?

ARe they? being forced by the government? Do you know this?

Is keystone paying generous leases?

I want to hear you deny that eminent domain is or would be used to build the Keystone Pipeline that YOU support,

despite your claim that all eminent domain is THEFT.

I don't know if it would do you?
It's not being built so we might as well talk about beanstalks

But I do know that many people are getting very well paid by oil companies for land leases

This what you support:

Eminent Domain & The Keystone Pipeline - Black Diamond NOW

The other you opposes it. lolol

Still not contradictory

I said I would support it if the company negotiated with the land owners to buy or lease the land

But like I said it's not being built and most likely never will be

 

[there4eyeM]

An exploding gas bag is a dubious image to present in these circumstances.

 

[billyerock1991]

A firearm aimed at a child could and should be taken away. A fortune aimed at destroying a culture isn't any different.

Another post which serves as an explanation for the fate of the Hindenburg.

At one time you provided somewhat intelligent posts.


What has happened to you???

we're still waiting for some sort of intelligence to come from you ...

 

[billyerock1991]

An exploding gas bag is a dubious image to present in these circumstances.

is that what politicalbullchit is and exploding gas bag

 

[Skull Pilot]

And you won't answer a simple question about eminent domain

Eminent domain is sometimes justifiable. And it's constitutional.

It is theft theft is never justifiable

The Constitution does not call it theft. The Constitution proclaims eminent domain as a lawful function of government.

So because of that I can't disagree?

Sorry I'm not a sheep

You are welcome to disagree, but as things stand today, you are way off base and in fact, incorrect about many of your assertions. Faulty facts contaminate opinions. SCOTUS settled the question that eminent domain can not just be used to hand over a property from one private owner to another in Kelo vs. New London without there being a recognized public interest. Fierce fights regarding eminent domain have been front page news in regards to Texas and Nebraska.

stateimpact.npr.org/texas/tag/eminent-domain/

Sorry but eminent domain is abused all the time

Especially like in CT were the perceived public interest was a nothing but a higher tax base

 

[billyerock1991]

1. Here, once again, that apocryphal tale of boiling the frog: put it in cold water, and raise the temperature so slowly that it fails to recognize the threat: boiled frog.

That's what 'regulation' is....the threat is the destruction of the right to private property.



2. Why is 'private property's so important?
Before the Founders settled on 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,' ....

"Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" is a well-known phrase in theUnited States Declaration of Independence.[1]The phrase gives three examples of the "unalienable rights" which the Declaration says has been given to all human beings by their Creator, and for which governments are created to protect. ....In 1689, Locke argued in hisTwo Treatises of Government that political society existed for the sake of protecting "property", which he defined as a person's "life, liberty, and estate"
Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



3. While our founding documents memorialize our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the Virginia Declaration preceded it by several months. In same, George Mason had written “…the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.…” Virginia Declaration of Rights, 1776

1. The emphasis on property came from philosopher John Locke, who believed that all men had the natural rights to acquire, protect, and dispose of property.
2. Jefferson preferred the shift from material property and toward the pursuit of happiness: by such, morality became uppermost.

4. Private property is the physical dimension of capitalism, the free market.

"A fundamental principle of our society is property rights. In nations were property rights have not been formally established, the costs of legally validating ownership of a home, a farm, or a business may be prohibitively expensive relative to the average income level, a crippling handicap for those seeking to rise from poverty to prosperity. Without property rights, one with entrepreneurial talents loses the access to other people’s money: homes or other assets not recognized by a legal system cannot be used as collateral."
Sowell, “Economic Facts & Fallacies,” chapter seven.


a. Even OWS, who oppose private property can learn: “Who’d have thought that a crowd of people demanding the seizure of wealth from banks, corporations, and the wealthy might also have a few thieves? I’m shocked,shocked to find theft occurring in a group that has hijacked private property it refuses to leave. I can’t imagine that a crowd that demands free higher education and the forgiveness of tens of thousands in student debt would also think of someone’s Mac or an iPhone as equally as communal as a college education…. Law and order! Get tough on crime! Defend private property!” Celebrated redistributionists discover healthy respect for private property - Hot Air



5. Even Liberal political philosopher John Rawls agreed, as he offered the idea that the two basic principles necessary for a just society:

a. Political liberty (i.e., to vote and run for office), freedom of speech and assembly, liberty of conscience, freedom of personal property; and freedom from arbitrary arrest.

b. Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that (Rawls, “A Theory of Justice,” 1971, p.303): they are to be of the greatest benefit to the least-advantaged members of society (the difference principle). A Theory of Justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




So....we've established the essential nature of private property in a free society. Compare same to a feudal or communist one.

Which would you choose?

I kind of like watching politicalbullchit trying tp push bull chit ... I never seen someone so full of her self then she... ... she puts this crap out and believes it shows us she's real stupid ... she will believe anything she reads from right wing sources, thats because she has her lips all over right wing extreamly nut job asses that not peanut butter on her nose

And yet one more Liberal intellectual midget providing a post rife with puerility, woefully short on ability.

While the import of the thread alludes to history, economics and politics, this post, and so very many Liberal posts, are chock full of barnyard references and bodily functions and second grade sexual suggestions.

As a result....the post is more an essay on an IQ test than a response to anything in the thread.

i trying to sound like you republicans ... thats what they write when they disagree... so I see you understood what you are ... now you are responding like a liberal would ... good job liberal

 

[PoliticalChic]

When the government can take the land you own or the house you live in at any time what do you call it?

Trumpism.

Trump????

How about Democrat elected officials.....

And, some education for you, too.....


The dictator-wannabe Franklin Roosevelt had followers like this:

The attitude of the FDR government can be seen in these words of A.B. “Happy” Chandler, a former Kentucky governor: “[A]ll of us owe the government; we owe it for everything we have—and that is the basis of obligation—and the government can take everything we have if the government needs it. . . . The government can assert its right to have all the taxes it needs for any purpose, either now or at any time in the future.”
From a speech delivered on the Senate floor
May 14, 1943 Happy Chandler’s dangerous statism

Note the date, the middle of WWII. The administration is forced to plead for funding even as the war raged. The war in the Pacific was raging and Australia was being bombed by the Japanese. US ships were being sunk in the Atlantic and the US had entered the bombing campaign in Europe with huge casualties and aircraft losses. Victory against the Axis was very uncertain. Just a note to put some perspective on the situation when Chandler was addressing the Senate.

The date is aside from the point.

Fascists like you bow to government and vote Democrat.


If you imagine that it isn't the same doctrines by Liberals/Progressives/Democrats today......

1. "Not Baking a Wedding Cake Leads to $135,000 Fine for Hurting Couple's Feelings
Devastating emotional wreckage from being told no by somebody."
Not Baking a Wedding Cake Leads to $135,000 Fine for Hurting Couple's Feelings



2. And....so much for the first amendment...
"State Silences Bakers Who Refused to Make Cake for Lesbian Couple, Fines Them $135K"
Ore. Silences Bakers Who Refused to Make Cake for Lesbians


And....in a related story:


3. ".... Nazi Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one. And ... socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production, positively requires a totalitarian dictatorship.

It is far more common to believe that it represented a form of capitalism, which is what the Communists and all other Marxists have claimed. The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands.
Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian

I guess with your anoplogy, if a black person comes into your business and you don't believe in equal rights for all, I guess with your delusional thinking, you shouldn't have to give that black person service HUH !!!! if you are a public company and you serve the public you don't get to pick and choose ...you have to offer your service to all ...thats the law commie if you don't like our laws politicalbullchit then leave the country ... I feel he should have to been find a million dollars then these religious nuts will think twice before the become racist

Earlier, I commented on your post thus:
And yet one more Liberal intellectual midget providing a post rife with puerility, woefully short on ability.

While the import of the thread alludes to history, economics and politics, this post, and so very many Liberal posts, are chock full of barnyard references and bodily functions and second grade sexual suggestions.

As a result....the post is more an essay on an IQ test than a response to anything in the thread.


Then you began a post...."I guess with your anoplogy,....."

WHAT?????


Now....i must alter my post....with this:
IQ, when it applies to you, should be written in lower case.

 

[there4eyeM]

Eminent domain has surely been abused at times. Collective power is dangerous and must be supervised rigorously. History, however, shows that social action is unavoidable and often highly desirable.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. Here, once again, that apocryphal tale of boiling the frog: put it in cold water, and raise the temperature so slowly that it fails to recognize the threat: boiled frog.

That's what 'regulation' is....the threat is the destruction of the right to private property.



2. Why is 'private property's so important?
Before the Founders settled on 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,' ....

"Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" is a well-known phrase in theUnited States Declaration of Independence.[1]The phrase gives three examples of the "unalienable rights" which the Declaration says has been given to all human beings by their Creator, and for which governments are created to protect. ....In 1689, Locke argued in hisTwo Treatises of Government that political society existed for the sake of protecting "property", which he defined as a person's "life, liberty, and estate"
Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



3. While our founding documents memorialize our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the Virginia Declaration preceded it by several months. In same, George Mason had written “…the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.…” Virginia Declaration of Rights, 1776

1. The emphasis on property came from philosopher John Locke, who believed that all men had the natural rights to acquire, protect, and dispose of property.
2. Jefferson preferred the shift from material property and toward the pursuit of happiness: by such, morality became uppermost.

4. Private property is the physical dimension of capitalism, the free market.

"A fundamental principle of our society is property rights. In nations were property rights have not been formally established, the costs of legally validating ownership of a home, a farm, or a business may be prohibitively expensive relative to the average income level, a crippling handicap for those seeking to rise from poverty to prosperity. Without property rights, one with entrepreneurial talents loses the access to other people’s money: homes or other assets not recognized by a legal system cannot be used as collateral."
Sowell, “Economic Facts & Fallacies,” chapter seven.


a. Even OWS, who oppose private property can learn: “Who’d have thought that a crowd of people demanding the seizure of wealth from banks, corporations, and the wealthy might also have a few thieves? I’m shocked,shocked to find theft occurring in a group that has hijacked private property it refuses to leave. I can’t imagine that a crowd that demands free higher education and the forgiveness of tens of thousands in student debt would also think of someone’s Mac or an iPhone as equally as communal as a college education…. Law and order! Get tough on crime! Defend private property!” Celebrated redistributionists discover healthy respect for private property - Hot Air



5. Even Liberal political philosopher John Rawls agreed, as he offered the idea that the two basic principles necessary for a just society:

a. Political liberty (i.e., to vote and run for office), freedom of speech and assembly, liberty of conscience, freedom of personal property; and freedom from arbitrary arrest.

b. Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that (Rawls, “A Theory of Justice,” 1971, p.303): they are to be of the greatest benefit to the least-advantaged members of society (the difference principle). A Theory of Justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




So....we've established the essential nature of private property in a free society. Compare same to a feudal or communist one.

Which would you choose?

I kind of like watching politicalbullchit trying tp push bull chit ... I never seen someone so full of her self then she... ... she puts this crap out and believes it shows us she's real stupid ... she will believe anything she reads from right wing sources, thats because she has her lips all over right wing extreamly nut job asses that not peanut butter on her nose

And yet one more Liberal intellectual midget providing a post rife with puerility, woefully short on ability.

While the import of the thread alludes to history, economics and politics, this post, and so very many Liberal posts, are chock full of barnyard references and bodily functions and second grade sexual suggestions.

As a result....the post is more an essay on an IQ test than a response to anything in the thread.

i trying to sound ;like you republicans ... thats what they write when they disagree... so I see you understood what you are ... now are responding like a liberal would ... good job liberal

This is a classic.

"i trying to sound ;like you republicans .."

No doubt you received a grade of 100 in your government school essay course.



The education industry is a wholly owned subsidiary of Liberalism, Inc......and the result is clear and evident.

Consider this post my 'thank you' for your help in presenting the case against Liberals being in any position of power in our society.

 

[billyerock1991]

Against the will of the landowners? Forced by the government?

ARe they? being forced by the government? Do you know this?

Is keystone paying generous leases?

I want to hear you deny that eminent domain is or would be used to build the Keystone Pipeline that YOU support,

despite your claim that all eminent domain is THEFT.

I don't know if it would do you?
It's not being built so we might as well talk about beanstalks

But I do know that many people are getting very well paid by oil companies for land leases

So in the space of five minutes you've changed your mind,

or did you just get busted?

I didn't change my mind at all

Keystone is a private company building a for profit enterprise I would never support government getting involved in that in fact I don't even know why they are involved now. If a business can come to terms with private landowners and but or lease the land for a project why should the government get involved at all?

The fact is there are no plans for it to be built

i personally don't like eminent domain laws ... in your post you implied if the came to terms ... what if this person who owns the land says under no certain terms will I sell or lease my land then what??? explain yourself out of that one

 

[PoliticalChic]

An exploding gas bag is a dubious image to present in these circumstances.

Pertinent....not dubious.

I'm certain you got the point.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Eminent domain has surely been abused at times. Collective power is dangerous and must be supervised rigorously. History, however, shows that social action is unavoidable and often highly desirable.

See if you feel that way if the government in your town decides to kick you out of your home to build an office building for no other reason than to raise the tax base

 

[Timmy]

Against the will of the landowners? Forced by the government?

ARe they? being forced by the government? Do you know this?

Is keystone paying generous leases?

I want to hear you deny that eminent domain is or would be used to build the Keystone Pipeline that YOU support,

despite your claim that all eminent domain is THEFT.

I don't know if it would do you?
It's not being built so we might as well talk about beanstalks

But I do know that many people are getting very well paid by oil companies for land leases

So in the space of five minutes you've changed your mind,

or did you just get busted?

I didn't change my mind at all

Keystone is a private company building a for profit enterprise I would never support government getting involved in that in fact I don't even know why they are involved now. If a business can come to terms with private landowners and but or lease the land for a project why should the government get involved at all?

The fact is there are no plans for it to be built

Sure they can buy off some land owners wh leases . But not all.

There's no way you can build a pipeline clear across the country wh out ED.

Just think how they could be stopped by any enviro group that buys a well placed plot of land .

 

[Skull Pilot]

ARe they? being forced by the government? Do you know this?

Is keystone paying generous leases?

I want to hear you deny that eminent domain is or would be used to build the Keystone Pipeline that YOU support,

despite your claim that all eminent domain is THEFT.

I don't know if it would do you?
It's not being built so we might as well talk about beanstalks

But I do know that many people are getting very well paid by oil companies for land leases

So in the space of five minutes you've changed your mind,

or did you just get busted?

I didn't change my mind at all

Keystone is a private company building a for profit enterprise I would never support government getting involved in that in fact I don't even know why they are involved now. If a business can come to terms with private landowners and but or lease the land for a project why should the government get involved at all?

The fact is there are no plans for it to be built

i personally don't like eminent domain laws ... in your post you implied if the came to terms ... what if this person who owns the land says under no certain terms will I sell or lease my land then what??? explain yourself out of that one

Then it's up to the private company to solve that problem

Keystone is not a government project like a road or a school it is a for profit enterprise for a private company that clearly does not fall under eminent domain

 

[billyerock1991]

1. Here, once again, that apocryphal tale of boiling the frog: put it in cold water, and raise the temperature so slowly that it fails to recognize the threat: boiled frog.

That's what 'regulation' is....the threat is the destruction of the right to private property.



2. Why is 'private property's so important?
Before the Founders settled on 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,' ....

"Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" is a well-known phrase in theUnited States Declaration of Independence.[1]The phrase gives three examples of the "unalienable rights" which the Declaration says has been given to all human beings by their Creator, and for which governments are created to protect. ....In 1689, Locke argued in hisTwo Treatises of Government that political society existed for the sake of protecting "property", which he defined as a person's "life, liberty, and estate"
Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



3. While our founding documents memorialize our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the Virginia Declaration preceded it by several months. In same, George Mason had written “…the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.…” Virginia Declaration of Rights, 1776

1. The emphasis on property came from philosopher John Locke, who believed that all men had the natural rights to acquire, protect, and dispose of property.
2. Jefferson preferred the shift from material property and toward the pursuit of happiness: by such, morality became uppermost.

4. Private property is the physical dimension of capitalism, the free market.

"A fundamental principle of our society is property rights. In nations were property rights have not been formally established, the costs of legally validating ownership of a home, a farm, or a business may be prohibitively expensive relative to the average income level, a crippling handicap for those seeking to rise from poverty to prosperity. Without property rights, one with entrepreneurial talents loses the access to other people’s money: homes or other assets not recognized by a legal system cannot be used as collateral."
Sowell, “Economic Facts & Fallacies,” chapter seven.


a. Even OWS, who oppose private property can learn: “Who’d have thought that a crowd of people demanding the seizure of wealth from banks, corporations, and the wealthy might also have a few thieves? I’m shocked,shocked to find theft occurring in a group that has hijacked private property it refuses to leave. I can’t imagine that a crowd that demands free higher education and the forgiveness of tens of thousands in student debt would also think of someone’s Mac or an iPhone as equally as communal as a college education…. Law and order! Get tough on crime! Defend private property!” Celebrated redistributionists discover healthy respect for private property - Hot Air



5. Even Liberal political philosopher John Rawls agreed, as he offered the idea that the two basic principles necessary for a just society:

a. Political liberty (i.e., to vote and run for office), freedom of speech and assembly, liberty of conscience, freedom of personal property; and freedom from arbitrary arrest.

b. Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that (Rawls, “A Theory of Justice,” 1971, p.303): they are to be of the greatest benefit to the least-advantaged members of society (the difference principle). A Theory of Justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




So....we've established the essential nature of private property in a free society. Compare same to a feudal or communist one.

Which would you choose?

I kind of like watching politicalbullchit trying tp push bull chit ... I never seen someone so full of her self then she... ... she puts this crap out and believes it shows us she's real stupid ... she will believe anything she reads from right wing sources, thats because she has her lips all over right wing extreamly nut job asses that not peanut butter on her nose

And yet one more Liberal intellectual midget providing a post rife with puerility, woefully short on ability.

While the import of the thread alludes to history, economics and politics, this post, and so very many Liberal posts, are chock full of barnyard references and bodily functions and second grade sexual suggestions.

As a result....the post is more an essay on an IQ test than a response to anything in the thread.

i trying to sound ;like you republicans ... thats what they write when they disagree... so I see you understood what you are ... now are responding like a liberal would ... good job liberal

This is a classic.

"i trying to sound ;like you republicans .."

No doubt you received a grade of 100 in your government school essay course.



The education industry is a wholly owned subsidiary of Liberalism, Inc......and the result is clear and evident.

Consider this post my 'thank you' for your help in presenting the case against Liberals being in any position of power in our society.

don't ya love it when she losses it ... now calm down liberal politicalbullshit ... I wouldn't want you to stroke out ... we need our good laugh in the mornings

 

[Skull Pilot]

ARe they? being forced by the government? Do you know this?

Is keystone paying generous leases?

I want to hear you deny that eminent domain is or would be used to build the Keystone Pipeline that YOU support,

despite your claim that all eminent domain is THEFT.

I don't know if it would do you?
It's not being built so we might as well talk about beanstalks

But I do know that many people are getting very well paid by oil companies for land leases

So in the space of five minutes you've changed your mind,

or did you just get busted?

I didn't change my mind at all

Keystone is a private company building a for profit enterprise I would never support government getting involved in that in fact I don't even know why they are involved now. If a business can come to terms with private landowners and but or lease the land for a project why should the government get involved at all?

The fact is there are no plans for it to be built

Sure they can buy off some land owners wh leases . But not all.

There's no way you can build a pipeline clear across the country wh out ED.

Just think how they could be stopped by any enviro group that buys a well placed plot of land .

Again that's a concern of the private business not the government

 

[there4eyeM]

Who governs least, governs best. Simple and true, but the devil is in defining.

 

[billyerock1991]

I want to hear you deny that eminent domain is or would be used to build the Keystone Pipeline that YOU support,

despite your claim that all eminent domain is THEFT.

I don't know if it would do you?
It's not being built so we might as well talk about beanstalks

But I do know that many people are getting very well paid by oil companies for land leases

So in the space of five minutes you've changed your mind,

or did you just get busted?

I didn't change my mind at all

Keystone is a private company building a for profit enterprise I would never support government getting involved in that in fact I don't even know why they are involved now. If a business can come to terms with private landowners and but or lease the land for a project why should the government get involved at all?

The fact is there are no plans for it to be built

i personally don't like eminent domain laws ... in your post you implied if the came to terms ... what if this person who owns the land says under no certain terms will I sell or lease my land then what??? explain yourself out of that one

Then it's up to the private company to solve that problem

Keystone is not a government project like a road or a school it is a for profit enterprise for a private company that clearly does not fall under eminent domain

and they solve it by using eminent domain laws ... that's why they are there ... some here will say this is a republican law, some will say its a liberal law ... ether way its the law deal with it ...

 

[billyerock1991]

I want to hear you deny that eminent domain is or would be used to build the Keystone Pipeline that YOU support,

despite your claim that all eminent domain is THEFT.

I don't know if it would do you?
It's not being built so we might as well talk about beanstalks

But I do know that many people are getting very well paid by oil companies for land leases

So in the space of five minutes you've changed your mind,

or did you just get busted?

I didn't change my mind at all

Keystone is a private company building a for profit enterprise I would never support government getting involved in that in fact I don't even know why they are involved now. If a business can come to terms with private landowners and but or lease the land for a project why should the government get involved at all?

The fact is there are no plans for it to be built

Sure they can buy off some land owners wh leases . But not all.

There's no way you can build a pipeline clear across the country wh out ED.

Just think how they could be stopped by any enviro group that buys a well placed plot of land .

Again that's a concern of the private business not the government

eminent domain laws aren't just for the government to use its also for private sector to use

 

[Camp]

I want to hear you deny that eminent domain is or would be used to build the Keystone Pipeline that YOU support,

despite your claim that all eminent domain is THEFT.

I don't know if it would do you?
It's not being built so we might as well talk about beanstalks

But I do know that many people are getting very well paid by oil companies for land leases

So in the space of five minutes you've changed your mind,

or did you just get busted?

I didn't change my mind at all

Keystone is a private company building a for profit enterprise I would never support government getting involved in that in fact I don't even know why they are involved now. If a business can come to terms with private landowners and but or lease the land for a project why should the government get involved at all?

The fact is there are no plans for it to be built

Sure they can buy off some land owners wh leases . But not all.

There's no way you can build a pipeline clear across the country wh out ED.

Just think how they could be stopped by any enviro group that buys a well placed plot of land .

Again that's a concern of the private business not the government

The whole point of the SCOTUS rulings is that the government can determine what is of public interest to the degree that eminent domain becomes a legal and valid action by the government. No matter how much anyone disagrees with the ruling, it is the law, constitutional law. The law has been blunted with state legislation, but the law is still there lurking and waiting for a challenge to those state legislative stop gaps and neutralizers.