Rekjalhew

December 4, 2005

The Right to Not be Rich

by @ 3:23 pm. Filed under Nuts on Parade, Property Rights Abuse

The recent abuses of eminent domain mean that you have no right to be anything but rich. Anything less means you have no right to own property.

Riviera Beach Mayor Michael Brown was on Hannity and Colmes to discuss how he is taking property from the poor to give to the rich. When the Mayor was asked how he could abuse his power like this, he responded by speaking about the poor people in New Orleans and how President Bush suggested that towns do for themselves. What this fool does not realize is that he’s doing nothing to help the poor in his area. He’s getting rid of them! Which will force them to spend money finding a new home. While they may get fair market value for what is taken from them, they will still have to face the expenses involved with moving and settling in a new area. The move may put them further from their job, which will increase their overall expenses.

Even 60 Minutes has pointed out that this affects not just the poor. It affects anyone that a local government deems not rich enough! For those working their way up to be rich, there is no more time allowed. If you are not rich now you’ve got to go! If you don’t desire to be rich and simply wish to live comfortably as a property owner, this no longer allowed. You’ll get a check and be kicked to the curb, literally.

What is even more of a massive irony in the Riviera Beach case, is that the Mayor is a Black man who is planning to kick out poor Blacks while he claims to be helping them. Oh but he’s a Liberal Democrat, so I guess I should not be surprised! Given Liberal Democrats advocate people murdering babies in the womb in the name of “advancement”, while the areas with the most abortions continue to do the worst. As Sean Hannity accurately pointed out, Mayor Brown is not doing this to help poor people, he is doing it to help himself. An increased tax base means more money for him to play with.

I’ve got no problem with an area’s tax base increasing and new businesses coming in. In fact I totally endorse it for helping poor areas. But when it is done by way of removing current property owners by force, instead of allowing them to remain in their homes and businesses as long as they can afford the taxes, it displaces the poor in favor of the rich. If the poor are not removed via force, then they have the opportunity to get jobs from some of the new businesses and grow with the community. They also have the opportunity to sell their property at what they find to be an acceptable price if they are unable to stay. What government finds to be “fair market value” might not be acceptable to the property owner. And any owner that must leave should have the freedom to negotiate what they feel is the best deal for themselves. With abuse of eminent domain, government gets to decide when negotiations end and the closing terms!

Since the establishment of this nation, the property owner was always given special consideration. Property owners used to be the only people that could vote. Now owning property in America means nothing. If your property is not giving your local government the tax revenue they desire, they now can simply take your property and pass you a check for what they feel is reasonable.

In my prior post about the Riviera Beach situation, I mentioned that:

I wonder if this might create some strange bedfellows? Imagine Civil Rights ACTORvist Jesse Jackson locking arms with Neal Boortz and Sean Hannity :grin: .

Well I thought the ACTORvists would consider running to prevent some poor Blacks from losing their property. But that has not happend. They are too busy trying to save a man behind the destruction in many Black communities. I guess Tookie’s fund raisers were able to pay whatever fee is involved in getting a Poverty Pimp to run to your cause. Also there are more cameras there for them to market themselves with.

So far the main people speaking out strongly against property rights abuse have been Conservatives. Conservatives on the US Supreme Court (and the Liberal O’Connor that some mistake for Conservative) were the only ones that dissented from the majority in the Kelo v. New London case. Conservatives have proven they are protectors of the rights of both rich and poor to own property. While the property being taken is in Liberal areas.

update (12/7/2005 10:31PM ET): Mayor Dumbo Michael Brown was on Hannity and Colmes again tonight. And he mentioned that Hannity was standing in a nice yard to do the interview and would not have been able to stand there a year ago. If that yard and small area could be improved without taking property, it proves that more areas could be improved without taking away property. But Mayor Dumbo would rather take property to increase the tax base, so he will have more to play with. He’s even called the people who want to stay selfish. Which is really a shame for a public official to stoop that low. Speaking of stooping low, I don’t think Hannity should have brought up the Mayor’s dead mother. Low blow Sean and no need for you to go there. Although you did a good job in getting this story out.

The people fighting Mayor Dumbo have a web site here.

The Political Teen has video of the latest interview.



Comments are closed.

Independent Conservative - Copyright 2008 - Copyright Notice

[powered by WordPress.]

49 queries. 0.404 seconds