The really fucked up thing is that they seem to be saying that the property doesn't need to be "distressed" anymore. The city just needs to prove things will be "better" under the new situation. Bottom line being, if Walmart wants your neighborhood, you (and your house, and your neighbor's house) are fucked.
The really fucked up thing is that they seem to be saying that the property doesn't need to be "distressed" anymore. The city just needs to prove things will be "better" under the new situation. Bottom line being, if Walmart wants your neighborhood, you (and your house, and your neighbor's house) are fucked.
can you say asbury park....?
Unfortunately you need only go a few short miles from Asbury Park to an area completely congested with mega-stores. No one's lining up to knock Asbury down for anything (except a better view of the ocean). I actually remember Asbury before the 1970 riots. It used to be a fun place.
speakin of messed up supreme court rulings, the 10 commandments are no longer allowed in courthouses. i dont even know what to say about this... that got me upset
The really fucked up thing is that they seem to be saying that the property doesn't need to be "distressed" anymore. The city just needs to prove things will be "better" under the new situation. Bottom line being, if Walmart wants your neighborhood, you (and your house, and your neighbor's house) are fucked.
can you say asbury park....?
Unfortunately you need only go a few short miles from Asbury Park to an area completely congested with mega-stores. No one's lining up to knock Asbury down for anything (except a better view of the ocean). I actually remember Asbury before the 1970 riots. It used to be a fun place.
One of the problems here is that there is a certain strain of liberals that believe this kind of thing is a good idea, that local/state/fed government inherently are to be trusted to make the best decisions regarding the 'greater good'. And a lot of them have political clout/money so their property/ownership will never be threatened, so it is easy for them to get all high-and-mighty about 'the big picture' and economic development. These people love to talk big about serving the needs of the working poor but like every other group more concerned about an ideological stance, they will sacrifice poor/middle class folks first in their quest for a better world.
Anyone remember what the road to Hell is paved with? Oh yeah, good intentions[/b].
And I guess even a broken clock is right twice a day, as that's the only way to explain how Scalia, O'Connor AND Thomas came down on the right side of this decision.
The really fucked up thing is that they seem to be saying that the property doesn't need to be "distressed" anymore. The city just needs to prove things will be "better" under the new situation. Bottom line being, if Walmart wants your neighborhood, you (and your house, and your neighbor's house) are fucked.
can you say asbury park....?
Unfortunately you need only go a few short miles from Asbury Park to an area completely congested with mega-stores. No one's lining up to knock Asbury down for anything (except a better view of the ocean). I actually remember Asbury before the 1970 riots. It used to be a fun place.
One of the problems here is that there is a certain strain of liberals that believe this kind of thing is a good idea, that local/state/fed government inherently are to be trusted to make the best decisions regarding the 'greater good'. And a lot of them have political clout/money so their property/ownership will never be threatened, so it is easy for them to get all high-and-mighty about 'the big picture' and economic development. These people love to talk big about serving the needs of the working poor but like every other group more concerned about an ideological stance, they will sacrifice poor/middle class folks first in their quest for a better world.
Anyone remember what the road to Hell is paved with? Oh yeah, good intentions[/b].
And I guess even a broken clock is right twice a day, as that's the only way to explain how Scalia, O'Connor AND Thomas came down on the right side of this decision.
Your point about the well off is especially valid since the sadly blighted Asbury Park is adjacent to some VERY wealthy towns, like Deal , Loch Arbour etc. Multi-million dollar homes within a mile of welfare/SRO type hotels and decaying single family homes (with irnoically some of the highest property taxes in the state). The really sad thing is, every few years someone comes along with a proposal to "save" Asbury but they never come through. Interestingly enough, the local Gay community had worked very hard to open businesses in Asbury and keep them going. So far they're making some progress. Nothing major, but something is definitely better than nothing.
Your point about the well off is especially valid since the sadly blighted Asbury Park is adjacent to some VERY wealthy towns, like Deal , Loch Arbour etc. Multi-million dollar homes within a mile of welfare/SRO type hotels and decaying single family homes (with irnoically some of the highest property taxes in the state). The really sad thing is, every few years someone comes along with a proposal to "save" Asbury but they never come through. Interestingly enough, the local Gay community had worked very hard to open businesses in Asbury and keep them going. So far they're making some progress. Nothing major, but something is definitely better than nothing.
An issue that's tied in with this is the whole accessibility/possibility of property ownership. With everyday that goes by, at least on the East Coast, the idea of home ownership gets farther and farther out of reach for average Americans making an average yearly income. Then you add this stupid ruling to the mix, someone who bought their house in SW DC (where they want to rip out a bunch of homes to put in their precious baseball stadium) 5 years ago will now be unlikely to afford a home in the same neighborhood that's being developed by the city, even with a fair buy-out. The prices are just crazy stupid high, even for professional people. How can we expect to establish a wider prosperity that pushes along the ENTIRE economy when fewer and fewer Americans can obtain any ownership? It becomes a viscious circle.
Press Release For Release Monday, June 27 to New Hampshire media For Release Tuesday, June 28 to all other media
Weare, New Hampshire (PRWEB) Could a hotel be built on the land owned by Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter? A new ruling by the Supreme Court which was supported by Justice Souter himself itself might allow it. A private developer is seeking to use this very law to build a hotel on Souter's land.
Justice Souter's vote in the "Kelo vs. City of New London" decision allows city governments to take land from one private owner and give it to another if the government will generate greater tax revenue or other economic benefits when the land is developed by the new owner.
On Monday June 27, Logan Darrow Clements, faxed a request to Chip Meany the code enforcement officer of the Towne of Weare, New Hampshire seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road. This is the present location of Mr. Souter's home.
Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, LLC, points out that the City of Weare will certainly gain greater tax revenue and economic benefits with a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road than allowing Mr. Souter to own the land.
The proposed development, called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" will feature the "Just Desserts Caf??" and include a museum, open to the public, featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America. Instead of a Gideon's Bible each guest will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged."
Clements indicated that the hotel must be built on this particular piece of land because it is a unique site being the home of someone largely responsible for destroying property rights for all Americans.
"This is not a prank" said Clements, "The Towne of Weare has five people on the Board of Selectmen. If three of them vote to use the power of eminent domain to take this land from Mr. Souter we can begin our hotel development."
Clements' plan is to raise investment capital from wealthy pro-liberty investors and draw up architectural plans. These plans would then be used to raise investment capital for the project. Clements hopes that regular customers of the hotel might include supporters of the Institute For Justice and participants in the Free State Project among others.
speakin of messed up supreme court rulings, the 10 commandments are no longer allowed in courthouses. i dont even know what to say about this... that got me upset
Not a big fan of separation of church and state, huh?
speakin of messed up supreme court rulings, the 10 commandments are no longer allowed in courthouses. i dont even know what to say about this... that got me upset
Not a big fan of separation of church and state, huh?
Actually, the Court's rulings underline that each instance would be taken as case by case, and that the intent behind each placement was a deciding factor. 10 Commandments as Historical document=OK, Displays that promote Religion=Not OK.
If only all of there decisions were this middling.
Comments
Fuck yeah!
I'd stay there.
can you say asbury park....?
Unfortunately you need only go a few short miles from Asbury Park to an area completely congested with mega-stores. No one's lining up to knock Asbury down for anything (except a better view of the ocean).
I actually remember Asbury before the 1970 riots. It used to be a fun place.
i dont even know what to say about this... that got me upset
One of the problems here is that there is a certain strain of liberals that believe this kind of thing is a good idea, that local/state/fed government inherently are to be trusted to make the best decisions regarding the 'greater good'. And a lot of them have political clout/money so their property/ownership will never be threatened, so it is easy for them to get all high-and-mighty about 'the big picture' and economic development. These people love to talk big about serving the needs of the working poor but like every other group more concerned about an ideological stance, they will sacrifice poor/middle class folks first in their quest for a better world.
Anyone remember what the road to Hell is paved with? Oh yeah, good intentions[/b].
And I guess even a broken clock is right twice a day, as that's the only way to explain how Scalia, O'Connor AND Thomas came down on the right side of this decision.
Your point about the well off is especially valid since the sadly blighted Asbury Park is adjacent to some VERY wealthy towns, like Deal , Loch Arbour etc. Multi-million dollar homes within a mile of welfare/SRO type hotels and decaying single family homes (with irnoically some of the highest property taxes in the state).
The really sad thing is, every few years someone comes along with a proposal to "save" Asbury but they never come through.
Interestingly enough, the local Gay community had worked very hard to open businesses in Asbury and keep them going. So far they're making some progress. Nothing major, but something is definitely better than nothing.
An issue that's tied in with this is the whole accessibility/possibility of property ownership. With everyday that goes by, at least on the East Coast, the idea of home ownership gets farther and farther out of reach for average Americans making an average yearly income. Then you add this stupid ruling to the mix, someone who bought their house in SW DC (where they want to rip out a bunch of homes to put in their precious baseball stadium) 5 years ago will now be unlikely to afford a home in the same neighborhood that's being developed by the city, even with a fair buy-out. The prices are just crazy stupid high, even for professional people. How can we expect to establish a wider prosperity that pushes along the ENTIRE economy when fewer and fewer Americans can obtain any ownership? It becomes a viscious circle.
Actually, the Court's rulings underline that each instance would be taken as case by case, and that the intent behind each placement was a deciding factor. 10 Commandments as Historical document=OK, Displays that promote Religion=Not OK.
If only all of there decisions were this middling.