I don’t really have much respect for all the “property rights” that are preventing there being a goddamned direct train to LGA and JFK from Grand Central, which ought to be one of the most reasonable concepts in the history of urban planning.
Like, we’ve just emerged from a whole half-century of lefties using “property rights” as a fig leaf for killing progress and assaulting the regular old ACTUAL property rights that people have to build whatever they want on their property.
“Use property rights to protect us from big bad corporations” seems like it’s barking up the wrong tree. Sorry, I’d rather strip NIMBYs of their “right” to stop the aforementioned airport trains from getting built, let alone the 10-20 million housing units that we desperately need just for the housing market to have its sanity restored to it.
This framing of eminent domain through the Kelo case is incredibly powerfull. The fact that Pfizer never even built what they promised, and Susette Kelo's property ended up being sold to OTHER people not named Susette Kelo is peak absurdity. I think about how many modern infrastructure projects use "economic development" as a trojan horse for displacing working-class neighborhoods while enriching developers. The tension between necesary infrastructure and protecting people from having their homes seized for corporate profits is somethin we still haven't figured out how to balance fairly.
I disagree with the 2005 decision that private property should be forcibly given to other private entitles. However, if you didnt have eminent domain you couldn't build any kind of road or rail system that would connect cities together. Literally a couple of land owners could prevent a 50 mile road or rail line from being built.
Have you seen the case in Colorado of the homeowner who purchased property in I think Jefferson county. It has a creek running through it and butted up to a public park. The previous owners had allowed public access and did not disclose it to the new owner. She stopped allowing public access and the county sued her for her property. She ended up settling and lost a huge chunk of her yard. Infuriating. I agree we need to value personal property rights. But I also struggle with it. But also my background is rail planning. I don’t know how we ever expand rail access without eminent domain.
I don’t really have much respect for all the “property rights” that are preventing there being a goddamned direct train to LGA and JFK from Grand Central, which ought to be one of the most reasonable concepts in the history of urban planning.
Like, we’ve just emerged from a whole half-century of lefties using “property rights” as a fig leaf for killing progress and assaulting the regular old ACTUAL property rights that people have to build whatever they want on their property.
“Use property rights to protect us from big bad corporations” seems like it’s barking up the wrong tree. Sorry, I’d rather strip NIMBYs of their “right” to stop the aforementioned airport trains from getting built, let alone the 10-20 million housing units that we desperately need just for the housing market to have its sanity restored to it.
This framing of eminent domain through the Kelo case is incredibly powerfull. The fact that Pfizer never even built what they promised, and Susette Kelo's property ended up being sold to OTHER people not named Susette Kelo is peak absurdity. I think about how many modern infrastructure projects use "economic development" as a trojan horse for displacing working-class neighborhoods while enriching developers. The tension between necesary infrastructure and protecting people from having their homes seized for corporate profits is somethin we still haven't figured out how to balance fairly.
I disagree with the 2005 decision that private property should be forcibly given to other private entitles. However, if you didnt have eminent domain you couldn't build any kind of road or rail system that would connect cities together. Literally a couple of land owners could prevent a 50 mile road or rail line from being built.
Have you seen the case in Colorado of the homeowner who purchased property in I think Jefferson county. It has a creek running through it and butted up to a public park. The previous owners had allowed public access and did not disclose it to the new owner. She stopped allowing public access and the county sued her for her property. She ended up settling and lost a huge chunk of her yard. Infuriating. I agree we need to value personal property rights. But I also struggle with it. But also my background is rail planning. I don’t know how we ever expand rail access without eminent domain.