If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wall Street Journal)   Remember when New London took those homes and the Supreme Court said it was OK because they had this great development plan worked out with Pfizer...? Yeah, it didn't quite work out   (online.wsj.com) divider line 437
    More: Fail, Pfizer, City of New London, development plans, supreme court, Justice Anthony Kennedy, research and development, supreme court justices, pass laws  
•       •       •

32436 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Nov 2009 at 1:51 PM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



437 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-11-11 01:23:45 PM  
Gee. Never saw that coming.

All business interests have to do is claim that they will improve the economics. They don't have to prove it and they don't have to deliver it.

Eminently stupid IMHO.
 
2009-11-11 01:23:48 PM  
img248.imageshack.us


What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?


img297.imageshack.us


Well, Katie, that Keno decision was really bad, donchaknow. The government shouldn't nationalize gambling. I believe that Keno should be run by the free market and such as private business. But, you know, as mayor, and then as governor and even as a vice president, if I'm so privileged to serve, wouldn't be in a position of changing those things but in supporting the law of the land as it reads today.
 
2009-11-11 01:25:47 PM  
NewportBarGuy: What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?



how did you do that? i could hear palin's voice while reading that donchyaknow
 
2009-11-11 01:30:01 PM  
I'm incredibly happy to hear that New London is getting ass f*cked in all this.
 
2009-11-11 01:35:05 PM  
Wow.
 
2009-11-11 01:36:07 PM  
I Said: I'm incredibly happy to hear that New London is getting ass f*cked in all this.

It still sucks for the people that were forced out of their homes, though. Maybe even moreso because nothing positive at all has come of it.
 
2009-11-11 01:36:38 PM  
Right now, someone at Pfizer is explaining to people that if they hadn't turned the whole thing into a court battle and delayed construction for so long they'd have a profitable business there instead of a vacant lot.
 
2009-11-11 01:37:31 PM  

Make fun of Texas if you must, but we did add this nice little amendment to our laws last election:

HJR 14 would amend the constitution to provide that the taking of private property for public use ("eminent domain") is authorized only if it is for the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property by the State, its political subdivisions, the public at large, or by entities granted the power of eminent domain, or for the removal of urban blight. The amendment would prohibit the taking of private property for transfer to a private entity for the purpose of economic development or to increase tax revenues. The amendment would also limit the legislature's authority to grant the power of eminent domain in the future unless it is approved by a two-thirds vote of all the members elected to each house.


That shiat ain't goin' down here.
 
2009-11-11 01:39:19 PM  
Nabb1: It still sucks for the people that were forced out of their homes, though. Maybe even moreso because nothing positive at all has come of it.

Is there a way to use this as a challenge to Kelo? It's one of the worst decisions they've ever made and any chance to overturn it should be attempted.
 
2009-11-11 01:42:10 PM  
NewportBarGuy: Is there a way to use this as a challenge to Kelo? It's one of the worst decisions they've ever made and any chance to overturn it should be attempted.

I seriously doubt that the Supreme Court would overturn a precedent from 4 years ago. It doesn't really matter though, as the article says, most states have either passed legislation or interpreted their state constitution to provide greater protections than Kelo announced.
 
2009-11-11 01:42:42 PM  
bongmiester: NewportBarGuy: What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?



how did you do that? i could hear palin's voice while reading that donchyaknow


Good news, everyone! The adjustable voice modulator works!
 
2009-11-11 01:42:57 PM  
Nabb1: It still sucks for the people that were forced out of their homes, though. Maybe even moreso because nothing positive at all has come of it.

I agree, but I don't know if it sucks moreso now. At least now they can take some solace (which isn't much) in the fact that the town that f*cked them over is getting f*cked over itself.

Someone should do a follow-up piece on the parties involved.
 
2009-11-11 01:43:19 PM  
Kyosuke: Make fun of Texas if you must, but we did add this nice little amendment to our laws last election:
HJR 14 would amend the constitution to provide that the taking of private property for public use ("eminent domain") is authorized only if it is for the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property by the State, its political subdivisions, the public at large, or by entities granted the power of eminent domain, or for the removal of urban blight. The amendment would prohibit the taking of private property for transfer to a private entity for the purpose of economic development or to increase tax revenues. The amendment would also limit the legislature's authority to grant the power of eminent domain in the future unless it is approved by a two-thirds vote of all the members elected to each house.


That shiat ain't goin' down here.



unless your house is deemed "urban blight". seems like a big loop hole to me
 
2009-11-11 01:45:27 PM  
Okay, so this is the kind of government bullshiat that should piss off Americans.
 
2009-11-11 01:47:55 PM  
bongmiester: Kyosuke: Make fun of Texas if you must, but we did add this nice little amendment to our laws last election:
HJR 14 would amend the constitution to provide that the taking of private property for public use ("eminent domain") is authorized only if it is for the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property by the State, its political subdivisions, the public at large, or by entities granted the power of eminent domain, or for the removal of urban blight. The amendment would prohibit the taking of private property for transfer to a private entity for the purpose of economic development or to increase tax revenues. The amendment would also limit the legislature's authority to grant the power of eminent domain in the future unless it is approved by a two-thirds vote of all the members elected to each house.


That shiat ain't goin' down here.


unless your house is deemed "urban blight". seems like a big loop hole to me


Half of the cities in Texas could be described as "urban blight".
 
2009-11-11 01:48:56 PM  
bongmiester: unless your house is deemed "urban blight". seems like a big loop hole to me

Cracked driveway? Urban blight!

Hedges overgrown? Urban blight!

Algae growing on your siding? Urban blight!
 
2009-11-11 01:52:03 PM  
NewportBarGuy: Nabb1: It still sucks for the people that were forced out of their homes, though. Maybe even moreso because nothing positive at all has come of it.

Is there a way to use this as a challenge to Kelo? It's one of the worst decisions they've ever made and any chance to overturn it should be attempted.


This dispute is res judicata as to these parties, so barring a new cause of action, no, this cannot be revisited. You'll have to wait for this to happen somewhere else and have parties file suit.
 
2009-11-11 01:53:07 PM  
img1.fark.net indeed
 
2009-11-11 01:53:33 PM  
Asa Phelps: Right now, someone at Pfizer is explaining to people that if they hadn't turned the whole thing into a court battle and delayed construction for so long they'd have a profitable business there instead of a vacant lot.

I seriously doubt anybody at Pfizer cares enough to even do that.
 
2009-11-11 01:54:15 PM  
Who would have thought that the government seizing land and determining the winner rather than letting the market play out would result in a loss for all parties involved?
 
2009-11-11 01:54:26 PM  
Sounds like Pfizer owes the WSJ some money.
 
2009-11-11 01:55:21 PM  
So, there shouldn't be a law because sometimes things go awry?

OK.

You NRA-types, turn in your guns.
 
2009-11-11 01:55:53 PM  
30daysout.files.wordpress.com

I said don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
Till it's gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot
 
2009-11-11 01:56:18 PM  
I love how the WSJ sees it as a 'big government' issue without any real mention of the corporate greed that started it.
 
2009-11-11 01:56:28 PM  
img1.fark.net

This can't be made too big.
 
2009-11-11 01:56:48 PM  
Asa Phelps: Right now, someone at Pfizer is explaining to people that if they hadn't turned the whole thing into a court battle and delayed construction for so long they'd have a profitable business there instead of a vacant lot.

That's the exact argument they used in an early news story actually. According to Pfizer if it had not been delayed by the court battle the development would have occurred before the economic slump and perhaps the infusion of tax revenue from the new construction would have mitigated the effects of the downturn on the local economy.

They came within a breath of blaming the loss of property values in the area solely on Susette Kelo.
 
2009-11-11 01:57:03 PM  
Nabb1: This dispute is res judicata as to these parties, so barring a new cause of action, no, this cannot be revisited. You'll have to wait for this to happen somewhere else and have parties file suit.

Sucks, but at least, as stated above, the states are addressing it. Although, the reason I'd hope to revisit it is because of the current state of the economy, cities, towns, and states will probably do anything to attract a business to their location.

I'm sure this will come up again.
 
2009-11-11 01:57:18 PM  
Glad that Texas just passed an amendment to prevent this sort of silly shiat from happening here.
 
2009-11-11 01:58:29 PM  
jennyz: Glad that Texas just passed an amendment to prevent this sort of silly shiat from happening here.

as previously mentioned that urban blight rule is a nasty little loophole though

/texan
 
2009-11-11 01:58:48 PM  
land grab-money grab

what's the difference?

none.


too many people don't give a shiat about either governmental abuse as long as it isn't happening to them

and too many actually enjoy it when it feeds their envy and jealousy of people who are more successful than they are.


/yes, they all voted for Obama
 
2009-11-11 01:58:54 PM  
jennyz: Glad that Texas just passed an amendment to prevent this sort of silly shiat from happening here.

It would've been nice if they'd done it before the city of Arlington claimed eminent domain over an entire neighborhood so that the Cowboys could have a new stadium.
 
2009-11-11 01:59:43 PM  
I did more than one report on this in High School and College. That being said, I am getting a kick...
 
2009-11-11 02:00:22 PM  
I'm curious to know what compensation the citizens got for their property. Market value and then some? Did they get any or were they tossed out on their asses?
 
2009-11-11 02:00:40 PM  
Just because something is constitutional doesn't mean it isn't stupid.
 
2009-11-11 02:01:06 PM  
By the Power of Numbskull!
http://tinyurl.com/yzvprb3
(copy and paste)
 
2009-11-11 02:01:57 PM  
[cool story bro]
Last time I was in New London I was in a drunken brawl in the street until my friends pulled up and threw me into the back of their car and took me back to Conn College.

Dave if you're out there sorry for making you sleep in a bush.
[/cool story bro]

/New London is a hole
 
2009-11-11 02:02:14 PM  
Inquisitive Inquisitor: jennyz: Glad that Texas just passed an amendment to prevent this sort of silly shiat from happening here.

It would've been nice if they'd done it before the city of Arlington claimed eminent domain over an entire neighborhood so that the Cowboys could have a new stadium.


As someone who lives in Arlington, I'm glad they did. Getting rid of a dozen abandoned Taquerias and long-forgotten industrial parks was worth it.
 
2009-11-11 02:02:39 PM  
Ah who gives a shiat.
 
2009-11-11 02:03:29 PM  
libbynomore2: land grab-money grab

what's the difference?

none.


too many people don't give a shiat about either governmental abuse as long as it isn't happening to them

and too many actually enjoy it when it feeds their envy and jealousy of people who are more successful than they are.


/yes, they all voted for Obama


Your point. Make it.
 
2009-11-11 02:04:25 PM  
I guess Pfizer couldn't get it (funding) up to finish what they started.

/switching to Cialis
//just kidding, enzyte
///just kidding, I'm ALL MAN BABY!
 
2009-11-11 02:05:14 PM  
Inquisitive Inquisitor: jennyz: Glad that Texas just passed an amendment to prevent this sort of silly shiat from happening here.

It would've been nice if they'd done it before the city of Arlington claimed eminent domain over an entire neighborhood so that the Cowboys could have a new stadium.


or the Tejas Rangers.. making dubya his first successful business venture...evar.
nevermind the lawsuits and the millions that the state still owes the Curtis Mathis heirs.
 
2009-11-11 02:06:00 PM  
Inquisitive Inquisitor: That's the exact argument they used in an early news story actually. According to Pfizer if it had not been delayed by the court battle the development would have occurred before the economic slump and perhaps the infusion of tax revenue from the new construction would have mitigated the effects of the downturn on the local economy.

They came within a breath of blaming the loss of property values in the area solely on Susette Kelo.


Of course. The damn peasants tried to hold onto land that they had paid for and were paying taxes on. If they had simply gotten off the land when their corporate overlords told them to, then they would have gotten the pittance that their small homes were worth.

It's arrogant scumbags like this that give "corporate overlords" a bad name.
 
2009-11-11 02:06:46 PM  
As has already been pointed out, New London is a shiathole. It was before this came up, still is today. The British tried doing us a favor by burning in during the Revolutionary War, but unfortunately it was rebuilt - though never improved.

/Just shows that "Kill it with Fire" doesn't always work
 
2009-11-11 02:07:29 PM  
sub_harmonic: I did more than one report on this in High School and College. That being said, I am getting a kick...


I did a report on this in college as well. My avowed East German Marxist professor said he'd read a lot about it and agreed that the whole decision was insane and SCOTUS was utterly in the wrong.
He then skeptically said he needed to "look further into it all" when I mentioned in my report which judges voted which way. Evidentally he was damn sure the judges he liked voted the way he liked. heh.

I also didn't get why a Marxist would be opposed to the decision anyway.
 
2009-11-11 02:08:02 PM  
So Kennedy and Stevens voted for this, who were the others?
 
2009-11-11 02:08:07 PM  
King Something: bongmiester: NewportBarGuy: What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?



how did you do that? i could hear palin's voice while reading that donchyaknow

Good news, everyone! The adjustable voice modulator works!


Get out of my head!
 
2009-11-11 02:08:41 PM  
HAHAHAH, awesome. They spent 78mil to get back a million a year, and now get 0. They've had a few rulings in the last few years that I thought sucked. Hiibel is another one. But this is one of the few times I agree with Scalia & Thomas.
 
2009-11-11 02:09:14 PM  
This thing that is happened in New London my mom is afraid is going to happen in our backyard. There is this developer that is buying lots behind our house, and since the railroad track is closed now he is buying more up and is trying to buy my grandmother's lot as well. I have no idea what he is going to do, but my mom and my gram are afraid that he is going to develop condos or apartments in our backyard. I hope it doesn't happen the lot is connected to our backyards so we be very crammed not to mention the foxes, and deer will have no where to go.
 
2009-11-11 02:09:32 PM  
Asa Phelps: Right now, someone at Pfizer is explaining to people that if they hadn't turned the whole thing into a court battle and delayed construction for so long they'd have a profitable business there instead of a vacant lot.

Hank doesn't care.

Link (new window)
 
2009-11-11 02:09:55 PM  
Better living through real estate.
 
Displayed 50 of 437 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report