Comments on: Supreme Court Strikes Major Blow to Property Rights http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/ Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology Thu, 24 May 2012 19:19:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Phillipa http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-31450 Phillipa Fri, 03 Mar 2006 00:28:26 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/#comment-31450 <p><a href="http://demography.anu.edu.au/VirtualLibrary/" rel="nofollow">rseaajb</a> ikkhfeewaii</p> rseaajb ikkhfeewaii

]]> By: Phillipa http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-49144 Phillipa Fri, 03 Mar 2006 00:28:26 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/#comment-49144 <p><a href="http://demography.anu.edu.au/VirtualLibrary/" rel="nofollow">rseaajb</a> ikkhfeewaii</p> rseaajb ikkhfeewaii

]]> By: Geoffrey http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-31449 Geoffrey Mon, 27 Feb 2006 20:30:31 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/#comment-31449 <p><a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2005/m05-22.pdf" rel="nofollow">olorrujli</a> staio</p> olorrujli staio

]]> By: Geoffrey http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-49143 Geoffrey Mon, 27 Feb 2006 20:30:31 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/#comment-49143 <p><a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2005/m05-22.pdf" rel="nofollow">olorrujli</a> staio</p> olorrujli staio

]]> By: price http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-49142 price Wed, 19 Oct 2005 11:44:17 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/#comment-49142 <p>Take your time to check out the pages dedicated to<a href="http://www.showcasegifts.net/online-medication.html" rel="nofollow"> phatmacy </a> .</p> Take your time to check out the pages dedicated to phatmacy .

]]> By: price http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-31448 price Wed, 19 Oct 2005 10:44:17 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/#comment-31448 <p>Take your time to check out the pages dedicated to<a href="http://www.showcasegifts.net/online-medication.html" rel="nofollow"> phatmacy </a> .</p> Take your time to check out the pages dedicated to phatmacy .

]]> By: Sam Rose http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-49141 Sam Rose Fri, 24 Jun 2005 21:13:57 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/#comment-49141 <p>Aw, come on, trumpit. You must to be smarter than that. This isn't about blocking "COMMUNITY progress". It is about making it easier for people with huge amounts of money to do whatver they want.<br><br>The constitution was made by people trying to escape the hegemony of others with more power and money than themselves. They set up property rights so that people could not be slowly backed into surfdom due to human greed. Property rights of individuals is "COMMUNITY progress" over tyranny. The supreme court ruling opens the door to destroy progress that was made over 200 years ago. The supreme court ruling is regression, NOT progress. End of story.<br><br>Thankfully, in my own state of Michigan, our constitution specifically bans what the supreme court just ruled if allowed. And, the supreme court ruling says that State laws still trump their ruling. Other states and city governments would do well to totally ban the practive of allowing state and municipal governments to seize property on behalf of commercial developers.</p> Aw, come on, trumpit. You must to be smarter than that. This isn’t about blocking “COMMUNITY progress”. It is about making it easier for people with huge amounts of money to do whatver they want.

The constitution was made by people trying to escape the hegemony of others with more power and money than themselves. They set up property rights so that people could not be slowly backed into surfdom due to human greed. Property rights of individuals is “COMMUNITY progress” over tyranny. The supreme court ruling opens the door to destroy progress that was made over 200 years ago. The supreme court ruling is regression, NOT progress. End of story.

Thankfully, in my own state of Michigan, our constitution specifically bans what the supreme court just ruled if allowed. And, the supreme court ruling says that State laws still trump their ruling. Other states and city governments would do well to totally ban the practive of allowing state and municipal governments to seize property on behalf of commercial developers.

]]> By: Sam Rose http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-31447 Sam Rose Fri, 24 Jun 2005 20:13:57 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/#comment-31447 <p>Aw, come on, trumpit. You must to be smarter than that. This isn't about blocking "COMMUNITY progress". It is about making it easier for people with huge amounts of money to do whatver they want.</p> <p>The constitution was made by people trying to escape the hegemony of others with more power and money than themselves. They set up property rights so that people could not be slowly backed into surfdom due to human greed. Property rights of individuals is "COMMUNITY progress" over tyranny. The supreme court ruling opens the door to destroy progress that was made over 200 years ago. The supreme court ruling is regression, NOT progress. End of story.</p> <p>Thankfully, in my own state of Michigan, our constitution specifically bans what the supreme court just ruled if allowed. And, the supreme court ruling says that State laws still trump their ruling. Other states and city governments would do well to totally ban the practive of allowing state and municipal governments to seize property on behalf of commercial developers.</p> Aw, come on, trumpit. You must to be smarter than that. This isn’t about blocking “COMMUNITY progress”. It is about making it easier for people with huge amounts of money to do whatver they want.

The constitution was made by people trying to escape the hegemony of others with more power and money than themselves. They set up property rights so that people could not be slowly backed into surfdom due to human greed. Property rights of individuals is “COMMUNITY progress” over tyranny. The supreme court ruling opens the door to destroy progress that was made over 200 years ago. The supreme court ruling is regression, NOT progress. End of story.

Thankfully, in my own state of Michigan, our constitution specifically bans what the supreme court just ruled if allowed. And, the supreme court ruling says that State laws still trump their ruling. Other states and city governments would do well to totally ban the practive of allowing state and municipal governments to seize property on behalf of commercial developers.

]]> By: Walter E. Wallis http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-49139 Walter E. Wallis Fri, 24 Jun 2005 17:12:55 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/#comment-49139 <p>Pay them off at the new value that justified taking their property, not the old value if they were let alone.</p> Pay them off at the new value that justified taking their property, not the old value if they were let alone.

]]> By: Walter E. Wallis http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-31446 Walter E. Wallis Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:12:55 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/#comment-31446 <p>Pay them off at the new value that justified taking their property, not the old value if they were let alone.</p> Pay them off at the new value that justified taking their property, not the old value if they were let alone.

]]> By: trumpit http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-49138 trumpit Thu, 23 Jun 2005 22:12:12 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/#comment-49138 <p>The majority apparently was concerned with a bunch of stick-in-the-mud old fogey homeowners holding up COMMUNITY development/improvements. I say chase them out of their cruddy abodes with a blowtorch if necessary. How can someone with blog named 'Technology Liberation Front' be so in favor of blocking progress. Or are your views so narrow that only private interests can promote "progress" and government never should? But then you argue that special interests will rule the roost by exerting control over government to do its bidding. Since when don't you like that? In another comment you argue in favor of a monopolistic company like Microsoft over free and fair competitions. Your arguments are so full of paradoxes and contradictions and personal attacks on the jurists involved in the decisions that you make little sense. I don't blame you for quoting Justice O'Connor; I doubt you've ever had an original thought in your entire life.</p> The majority apparently was concerned with a bunch of stick-in-the-mud old fogey homeowners holding up COMMUNITY development/improvements. I say chase them out of their cruddy abodes with a blowtorch if necessary. How can someone with blog named ‘Technology Liberation Front’ be so in favor of blocking progress. Or are your views so narrow that only private interests can promote “progress” and government never should? But then you argue that special interests will rule the roost by exerting control over government to do its bidding. Since when don’t you like that? In another comment you argue in favor of a monopolistic company like Microsoft over free and fair competitions. Your arguments are so full of paradoxes and contradictions and personal attacks on the jurists involved in the decisions that you make little sense. I don’t blame you for quoting Justice O’Connor; I doubt you’ve ever had an original thought in your entire life.

]]> By: trumpit http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-31445 trumpit Thu, 23 Jun 2005 21:12:12 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2005/06/23/supreme-court-strikes-major-blow-to-property-rights/#comment-31445 <p>The majority apparently was concerned with a bunch of stick-in-the-mud old fogey homeowners holding up COMMUNITY development/improvements. I say chase them out of their cruddy abodes with a blowtorch if necessary. How can someone with blog named 'Technology Liberation Front' be so in favor of blocking progress. Or are your views so narrow that only private interests can promote "progress" and government never should? But then you argue that special interests will rule the roost by exerting control over government to do its bidding. Since when don't you like that? In another comment you argue in favor of a monopolistic company like Microsoft over free and fair competitions. Your arguments are so full of paradoxes and contradictions and personal attacks on the jurists involved in the decisions that you make little sense. I don't blame you for quoting Justice O'Connor; I doubt you've ever had an original thought in your entire life.</p> The majority apparently was concerned with a bunch of stick-in-the-mud old fogey homeowners holding up COMMUNITY development/improvements. I say chase them out of their cruddy abodes with a blowtorch if necessary. How can someone with blog named ‘Technology Liberation Front’ be so in favor of blocking progress. Or are your views so narrow that only private interests can promote “progress” and government never should? But then you argue that special interests will rule the roost by exerting control over government to do its bidding. Since when don’t you like that? In another comment you argue in favor of a monopolistic company like Microsoft over free and fair competitions. Your arguments are so full of paradoxes and contradictions and personal attacks on the jurists involved in the decisions that you make little sense. I don’t blame you for quoting Justice O’Connor; I doubt you’ve ever had an original thought in your entire life.

]]>