>I've had the back strip of land behind my house taken by eminent
>domain, for building a sound barrier. Don't get me wrong; the barrier
>IS effective and has been for many years. But they took the back strip
>from our land and graded a portion of the rest at a 30 degree incline,
>which we can't of course fix, and naturally we didn't get the real
>market value for it. It's never fair, I don't think, and of course
>there's a legendary case of eminent domain abuse a few years back.
>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,198303,00.html
>
Oh, I'm not saying that existing governments give fair market value for what they take, I'm just saying that I suspect G would not only give fair market value, but also additional compensation for the additional costs of relocating as well as (monetary) intangibles if he ever made that kind of offer to someone. And while there may be occasional good reasons for moving someone out of where they live (e.g., one of the mining towns that's so polluted the entire town is considered a toxic-waste superfund site), most cases of eminent domain are clearly greedy power plays on the part of politicians and the people who line their pockets. RZC's ban prev