could somebody explain eminent domain to me?

[Trolls_r_us]

I don't get the basic concept...

the gov't can just sieze your property if there is a "public good?"

do they at least pay you for it, and how is the amount determined if so?

I thought we had rights in this country!

[tax2death]

"rights, you got no stinking rights," apparently only our forefathers had rights. They ended with the second presidential election. After that each right has been eroded.

[Jim Ostrowski]

Murray Rothbard--

The Right of Eminent Domain

In contrast to the franchise, which may be made general and nonexclusive (as long as the central organization of force continues to own the streets), the right of eminent domain could not easily be made general. If it were, then chaos would truly ensue. For when the government confers a privilege of eminent domain (as it has done on railroads and many other businesses), it has virtually granted a license for theft. If everyone had the right of eminent domain, every man would be legally empowered to compel the sale of property that he wanted to buy. If A were compelled to sell property to B at the latter’s will, and vice versa, then neither could be called the owner of his own property. The entire system of private property would then be scrapped in favor of a society of mutual plunder. Saving and accumulation of property for oneself and one’s heirs would be severely discouraged, and rampant plunder would cut ever more sharply into whatever property remained. Civilization would soon revert to barbarism, and the standards of living of the barbarian would prevail.

The government itself is the original holder of the “right of eminent domain,” and the fact that the government can despoil any property holder at will is evidence that, in current society, the right to private property is only flimsily established. Certainly no one can say that the inviolability of private property is protected by the government. And when the government confers this power on a particular business, it is conferring upon it the special privilege of taking property by force.

Evidently, the use of this privilege greatly distorts the structure of production. Instead of being determined by voluntary exchange, self-ownership, and efficient satisfaction of consumer wants, prices and the allocation of productive resources are now determined by brute force and government favor. The result is an overextension of resources (a malinvestment) in the privileged firm or industry and an underinvestment in other firms and industries. At any given time, as we have stressed, there is a limited amount of capital—a limited supply of all resources—that can be devoted to investment. Compulsory increase in investment in one field can be achieved only by an arbitrary decline in investment in other fields.[72]

Many advocates of eminent domain contend that “society,” in the last analysis, has the right to use any land for “its” purposes. Without knowing it, they have thus conceded the validity of a major Henry Georgist plank: that every person, by virtue of his birth, has a right to his aliquot share of God-given land.[73] Actually, however, since “society” does not exist as an entity, it is impossible for each individual to translate his theoretical aliquot right into real ownership.[74] Therefore, the ownership of the property devolves, not on “everybody,” but on the government, or on those individuals whom it specially privileges.

http://www.mises.org/rothbard/mes/chap15d.asp

[300miles]

short answer:

Originally posted by Trolls_r_us
the gov't can just sieze your property if there is a "public good?"

Yes. How do you think all those freeways were built in the 50's and 60's?

do they at least pay you for it, and how is the amount determined if so?

Yes. Fair Market Value isn't a concrete thing though. They probably base it off the 100% assessed value of the property. and if they're nice, may add a bit to that for your trouble.

I thought we had rights in this country!

yes, but not necessarily what you think they are.

[ERIEMAN]

Eminent domain is when the government seizes the building that your favorite restaurant is in so they can build a completely unnecessary new courthouse.

[Jim Ostrowski]

I liked the long answer better.

As for compensation, since the owner is being escorted off at gunpoint, there is no just compensation. The government, the party seizing the private property, unilaterally sets the price.

Since economic value is subjective, the owner never receives a just price, that is, the market price.

The other night, Brown and Helfer proudly gave as a great example of eminent domain that they had both supported kicking out some owner at Main and Tupper to build a police station--as if all would agree that was right.

My reaction: in a city filled with empty lots and abandoned buildings, why in the world did you need that particular lot? Some bureaucrat got a hankering, I guess.

[therising]

Jim

I take it that you're against using eminent domain for the proposed cedargrove development?

Short answer will be fine.

[ERIEMAN]

I hear gabryszak is proposing hiring a Border Collie from Clarence to help remove all of the existing residents of Cedargrove. They were going to drive in at night and shoot them, but that didn't work all that well at Stiglmeier.

[WNYresident]

THe cheektowaga Towns website

There's a little write up about cedargrove.

[crlachepinochet]

Originally posted by Trolls_r_us
I don't get the basic concept...

the gov't can just sieze your property if there is a "public good?"

do they at least pay you for it, and how is the amount determined if so?

I thought we had rights in this country!

Doesn't my signature explain eminent domain well enough?