You’re Not Imagining It: America Is Less Free–This Time Property Rights

For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com

Premium Left blogad

Left Blog Ad

Permalinks

You’re Not Imagining It: America Is Less Free–This Time Property Rights

Written By : Melissa Clouthier

The cornerstone of liberty is the right to private property. It’s yours. The government doesn’t own it. It can’t take it. It’s yours. Since Kelo, though, private property has become passé..at least in some states. From the Eminent Domain Law Blog:

According to the 2010 Index of Economic Freedom published by The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal, 16 countries rank higher than the United States in protecting private property rights. From the report: “The United States’ economic freedom score is 78.0, making its economy the 8th freest in the 2010 Index. Its score is 2.7 points lower than last year, reflecting notable decreases in financial freedom, monetary freedom, and property rights.”

A ranking of 17, behind such countries as Hong Kong, Singapore, Norway and Germany, in the protection of property rights is hardly satisfactory. The constitutional right of private property ownership is a fundamental principle of American society and liberty. As a bedrock principle that is constitutionally guaranteed, protection of property rights should be a priority for American citizens and our government. Yet, given the government’s power to exercise eminent domain, protection of private property rights often succumbs to the power of the government.

The key, then, is to live in states that have passed laws ensuring private rights. A bunch of them passed laws protecting property rights post-Kelo because of the horrendous outcome of Kelo–like Roe v. Wade but for property rights.

UFKA_Smithwick

Losing to europe in terms of economic freedom.

What. The. Hell.
http://republic-mainstreet.blogspot.com/ MainStreet

Liberals are so entrenched in our education and legal systems and in government that it is a wonder we have any rights left. I'm so glad everyone now has the right (read legal obligation) to buy health insurance so that we can avoid those nasty fines. Through their taxation authority, they can, in effect, take all your property from you. Eminent domain is just another tool Government uses to steal what you thought was yours.
Karma Hoser

And [wannabe] Emperor-Dictator Obama and his sycophants continue to turn the USA into a dictatorship in any and every way they can. Tax increases (expiration of the Bush tax cuts for starters, as well as the tanning booth tax) increased user fees, more government intervention and regulation at every turn!!
Totalitarianism and Socialism, under the label “liberalism”.
guest

well its sad but we dont own it we just lease it from the Government,the only land we will ever own is that 6 foot plot..thats all yours

gfchicago

I wouldn't even count on that. I'm sure that they will come up with some enterprising way to even steal that from you in the future.
http://conservativebootcamp.com Martin Hale

Unless you're planning on having your survivors trek your remains out into the wilderness and illegally plant you out beyond the prying reach of governments, developers and the taxman, I wouldn't count on that plot being yours for the long haul. Cemeteries go bankrupt, governments have annexed them and moved all the bodies to make way for some other land use, and many of them have annual maintenance fees, non-payment of which might result in your remains being removed.

I'm having myself cremated and my cremains dropped into Lake Huron off the breakwater jetty at the small town marina where we kept our boat moored.

Bill Fabrizio

Martin, sometimes I think we complain too much about government intrusion into our lives. By the way, have you obtained the necessary permits from the EPA allowing your carbon increasing cremation and dumping of your polluting ashes into Lake Huron? Pretty silly of you to think that you can evade the King's fiats through death.

By the way, speaking of property rights, I hope you were'nt planning on leaving any sizeable estate to your heirs. But then, I digress!

http://conservativebootcamp.com Martin Hale

Well since I'm relying on family to dump me overboard in an informal ceremony, I think we'll forgo any EPA permits. As far as the cremation goes, the facility I have a contract with is licensed, so that implies that they've done their due diligence with respect to the permitting process. If I could convince someone that I'm fine with being cremated with some of the excess heat from a nuclear plant, I'd take that route to make it a carbonless experience. But ultimately, it's my last contribution anyway, that much is guaranteed.

As to my estate, I've established irrevocable trusts for my heirs, which should bypass most of the onerous death tax burden on them.

It's interesting to note that you follow your statement about complaining too much about government intrusion into our lives with questions which are exemplary of the very same government intrusion in our lives.

Intentional?

Bill Fabrizio

Martin, you and I are kindred spirits in many ways! Unfortunately, I have become very cynical over the last 18 months. As a result, my comments are frequently based on sarcasm or irony. So to answer your question, yes it is intentional!

Have a great weekend!

Mr. EMT

Our founding fathers disagreed about that.
They died for those beliefs and risked their entire wealth on it too.

UFKA_Smithwick

Starting to seem like they wasted their time.

RBC47

The current “conservative” position on this issue is historically nonsense where its not plain silly. Every government, not matter where, reserves the right to take property for a “public purpose.” If they didn't, highways, airports, rail lines, court houses, fire stations, police stations, court houses, etc etc would never be built, the military would have no where to locate bases. the real question is how far “public purpose” extends. The Kelo case was NOT some expansion of the doctrine – it merely restated what had been the law fro over 100 years. And that law has been that courts are very reluctant to overrule legislative decisions made by federal, state or local legislative bodies on the question of what is – or is not – a public purpose.

As conservatives, you should want judges to defer to elected legislators on questions like that.

And then if you do not like the definition of public purpose as it stands, and how it is used, elect different people and change the statutes involved.

And… this country and most of the states, have had estate taxes for a very long time. Bush wanted to get rid of it at the federal level as a way of doing a favor for rich people because they supported his election. An estate tax does NOT take away property from anyone who earned the wealth – it does tax that wealth before it passes to people who did not earn it in the first place. It is not a tax on wealth – it is a tax on UNEARNED wealth – the descendants of rich people have no Constitutional or moral right to get it.

The Bush tac cuts did not promote prosperity – they merely increased the size of the deficits. Continuing them will continue to increase the size of the federal deficits. You are against deficits, right? How do you expect to get rid of deficits as long as you continue tax breaks for undeserving people?

TheDickNixon

Sure thing comrade.

You do realize those Bush tax cuts (who went to the people who actually pay taxes) produced the largest amount of tax revenue in history, don't you?

And by what moral or Constitutional right does the Government have to seize wealth from those who earned it, who have already paid taxes on it, and choose to leave their money (not yours or other parasites) to the people of their choosing?

Bet you really miss the USSR don't you?
Mr. EMT

It is not a tax on wealth – it is a tax on UNEARNED wealth – the descendants of rich people have no Constitutional or moral right to get it.

Thanks for admitting to the fact that estate taxes are nothing more than “legalized” theft of property.
Stealing pennies from the eyes of a dead man may seem like a good way to earn a prophit for you.
It's despicable for everyone with any moral fiber.
You ask how to get rid of deficets? Reduce the size of government. How about you increase the income tax on government elected officials for starters?
You would earn more money than your toxic ideas for attacking the “rich” when the people you are really hurting is EVERYONE.

Wake up call, MORON, people that are affected directly by this tax is farmers and ranchers who pass their land and heritage on from generation to generation.
A farm with barely more than a hundred acres on it is worth more than a million dollars. Your plans would tax over 50% of that and CRUSH the farm into nothing.
How does the community supported by that farm get fed then moron?
alana1

Oh. I didn't realize that Kelo was for a new airport or police station. I thought it was for a private entity that the government decided would provide them with more taxes.
gfchicago

“The Kelo case was NOT some expansion of the doctrine – it merely restated what had been the law fro over 100 years.”

All of the homes have been bulldozed and the land now sits fallow. So hows the Kelo decision working out for those folks that lost their homes?
http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

Shut up hoggo, nobody cares what you think, you retarded excuse for humanbeing.

RBC47

And I'm the moron? Family farms were protected – and will be protected – if the Bush tax cuts expire, a they should. The inheritors of wealth did not earn it, did not pay taxes on their income, and have no claim to it other than the fact they were lucky enough that a rich person had sexual intercourse with another person and produced them.

the Bush tax cuts did not produce increased tax revenue. There is no economist not bought and paid for for by the Republican Party who has tried to prove that. There was a a boom in the economy which, on the natural, produced increased tax revenue. Bush's dumb tax cuts had nothing to do with it. Bush, of course, then proceeded to undermine the basis of the prosperity, thereby proving his economic incompetence – and you, blind idiots that you are – want to preserve his legacy.

billdalasio

and have no claim to it other than the fact they were lucky enough that a rich person had sexual intercourse with another person and produced them.

Actually, they do. The claim is that the person who earned that wealth intended for that wealth to go to them.

<blockqoute>the Bush tax cuts did not produce increased tax revenue. There is no economist not bought and paid for for by the Republican Party who has tried to prove that.</blockqoute>

Ah, so it's the no true Scotsman argument. Any economist who says otherwise is “bought and paid for”. Gotcha.

There was a a boom in the economy which, on the natural, produced increased tax revenue. Bush's dumb tax cuts had nothing to do with it.

Well, actually, there's a fellow at Princeton who, when he's not writing for the New York Times, does some work in Economics. His most recent edition of his textbook in economics credits the Bush tax cuts with preventing a much more severe recession in 2001 and paving the way for a recovery. Perhaps you may have heard of him. His name is Paul Krugman. But, I guess he's “bought and paid for for by the Republican Party”.
http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

Shut up hoggo, nobody cares what you think.

And for the record, the person who is leaving the estate to his heirs has already paid the taxes on it, what little hasn't been taxed already mostly interest, still gets taxed. And then all of it gets taxed AGAIN under the inheritance tax rules. Why should any money get that's already taxed get taxed again?
Mr. EMT

Point of fact, farms and ranches are not protected.
Also, you have no right to say what a descendant of a family legacy has a right to that their parents declare belongs to them.
You have no way of judging how much work and sweat a descendant put into helping the family amass their “wealth.”
Your toxic mentality that the only people entitled to inheritance are welfare freeloaders, in preference to families is TREASON.
Eat it, you are a traitorous THIEF and a coward.
You have no moral fiber nor any right to have any opinion on this subject.
Your opinions are in direct conflict with not just our constitution, but the EXACT reasons our founding fathers created this nation in the first place.