Thursday, June 23, 2005

Just want to point something out here...

Most of the Blog's have thrown up some comments in regards to today's Supreme Court decision. Several solid views on the issue at Q and O, Commonwealth Conservative, Michelle Malkin, and Bacon's Rebellion. Now since I personally know the New London/SE Connecticut region I would like to bring a different spin to this entire situation. As some people may or may not remember the Groton Sub Base got hit in the preliminary BRAC list last month. So, what does this mean? New London is the town directly west of Groton. Groton is not only the home of the sub base but also the home of Electric Boat- the largest submarine manufacturer in the entire world. With the closing of the base the region is expected to lose almost 20,000+ jobs. That is a significant chunk of the working population in the region and does not account for the lose of dollars into the local economy that keeps the service industry up and running. The point? The New London Development Commission pushed this case in hopes of revitalizing the waterfront in their city. Parks, hotels, shops, etc. All of this was in hopes of cashing in on the military and tourist industries that keep southeastern Connecticut vibrant. Well newsflash to all.... YOU JUST LOST 20,000 JOBS! New London and its neighboring communities have alot more revitalization to worry about outside of the waterfront. The only military presence that will remain in the area in five years is the United States Coast Guard Academy, not exactly an economic driving force. Now I do not know what the NLDC and the local developer has planned if the base gets hit in the final list in September. But, a decreasing per capita income, sinking property value, and the leaving of all military personnel is not going to put the local economy in a great position to attract outside companies into the region. We may very well have had a Supreme Court decision that has screwed local property owners for a project that will never happen. Thank you Federal Judiciary once again.

9 Comments:

At 6/24/2005 05:57:00 PM, Blogger too conservative said...

Agreed MR JMS.

 
At 6/24/2005 10:25:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have no idea what the fuss is about. Republicans were once about capitalism, industrialism and progress, now they seem to want to live in caves and work for the government or some special interest group. Pave it all and let's put up a factory!

 
At 6/25/2005 02:46:00 AM, Blogger MR JMS said...

It is about personal property. If we lose our right to hold onto what we spend our whole lives working fr then what do all of our other freedoms truly mean?

 
At 6/25/2005 09:39:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

People are still being compensated for their land. It's about capital and highest/best use -- and getting more economic activity. You don't live in the 18th Century when property meant economic activity, e.g., agriculture. Now it means something else - offices, mixed use, etc. Under your thinking, the granting of rights over private property for railroads was a bad idea. Imagine America today without them.

 
At 6/25/2005 10:13:00 AM, Blogger MR JMS said...

Point is that just become some big developer wants to build a mall or condo's on top of the home I have owned for 30 years do not mean he should be able too. If the issue was money then they should make an offer and if it is fair the owner will accept. But no. Heaven forbid we should decide what happens to our property.

What we see here is the liberals on the court telling us that once again government knows whats best and can violate basic human rights. Funny thing is the little man in urban centers will be the ones that get screwed. Just wait until DC and Richmond begin their "revitalization" efforts.

This court is horrible.

 
At 6/25/2005 12:29:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I hate to let you in on a little secret - there is hardly a road, airport, seaport, pipeline, or other transportation or commerce inducing infrastructure that was not built with some sort of condementation authority. All this public action was intended to help private enterprise flourish FOR THE PUBLIC GOOD. Think of this the next time you drive on a public road to Wal-Mart to buy those Chinese-made goods that are putting American workers out of their jobs - maybe you should be worrying about what we need to do (including government action) to make us an industrial power once again before it is too late.

 
At 6/25/2005 12:48:00 PM, Blogger Mitch Cumstein said...

I agree with MR JMS and TC. If you believe in the concepts of free enterprise and market economy, you cannot allow the government to devalue private property and the rights of its owners by forcing them to sell it.

 
At 6/25/2005 01:43:00 PM, Blogger MR JMS said...

There is a HUGE difference between taking a house to build a public road to access the Wal-Mart and forcing people to sell homes to build the Wal-Mart. The government should NEVER take a private home away to give to a private developer. It is a ridiculious though.

 
At 6/25/2005 06:26:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah, you now have accepted the premise that it is alright to take private property for public purposes. So, the next issue is who determines what public purposes are valid and which are not. Thank you for being so agreeable.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home