AsburySkinsFan Posted December 7, 2016 Share Posted December 7, 2016 5 hours ago, twa said: Read the history?....Hell I married into the family. Then you should be well aware of what prompted the brothers down their road of outlaw living. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted December 7, 2016 Share Posted December 7, 2016 29 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said: Then you should be well aware of what prompted the brothers down their road of outlaw living. I'm leaning towards genetically insane....my wife scares me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted December 7, 2016 Share Posted December 7, 2016 15 hours ago, Larry said: No, he's not. He's arguing against you claiming the right to build your own road, through his land, whether he wants to sell it to you or not, for your exclusive use, so that you can sell your card to a collector with lower shipping cost. - - - - Now, though. Having said that? I think twa has made a valid point. When the Kilo decision was handed down, I was outraged, too. And then I read the actual decision. And what struck me in the decision was when the court pointed out that using eminent domain for private companies has been going on for 150 years. It's how how the railroads got built. And I think he's also drawing a valid comparison. Pipelines are similar to a railroad. (Not "equal to". There are differences. But there's similarities.) The railroads stole the land legally from those who didn't want to sell. They forced the sale of farms, they used the rule of law to bully land owners into giving them what they wanted all for private enterprise. If you want to use that as legal precedent then by all means do so, but it's no different than using internment camps as precedent now. At the end of the day it is simply legalized injustice, and free market capitalists SHOULD be outraged by government forcing the sale of a product below market value and circumventing the dynamics of supply and demand. Funny how the corpratists only want free markets when it benefits them, but when they are forced to pay market price they use the government to intervene and force sales at a discount. But please twa recount for me your love of supply and demand economics. Sing me the verse again where the government sets the artificial prices for goods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted December 7, 2016 Share Posted December 7, 2016 6 hours ago, AsburySkinsFan said: The railroads stole the land legally from those who didn't want to sell. They forced the sale of farms, they used the rule of law to bully land owners into giving them what they wanted all for private enterprise. Oh, I agree with you. I assume it's where the term "getting railroaded" comes from. BUT, I also have to observe, looking backwards with the long, big-picture telescope of history, that the railroads were a significant contributor to the economic success that our country has enjoyed. (And to observe that this does not guarantee that building this particular pipeline will have similar, beneficial, results.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted December 7, 2016 Share Posted December 7, 2016 1 hour ago, Larry said: (And to observe that this does not guarantee that building this particular pipeline will have similar, beneficial, results.) And I think we can obverve based on previous pipeline projects that they do not contribute to nearly the extent that the railroads did. I think that's in large part because the railroads were open to shipping any form of product, whether that is people or material goods. These benefit a single industry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted December 7, 2016 Share Posted December 7, 2016 1 minute ago, AsburySkinsFan said: And I think we can obverve based on previous pipeline projects that they do not contribute to nearly the extent that the railroads did. I think that's in large part because the railroads were open to shipping any form of product, whether that is people or material goods. These benefit a single industry. Yep, I've thought of that as one of the differences between the railroads and the pipelines. (Another is that, the railroad had stops along the way, and thus served the counties that it passed through. The pipeline is in some ways like an airline, going from end point to end point, with everything in between simply being "flyover country".) It's not a perfect equivalency, but then, nothing ever is. (If two things were completely identical, then there would be no need to substitute one for the other.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passepartout Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Yeah as really the Indians over the Army Corps of Engineers can take a breather for now. As this is far from over. As it is really only beginning! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikered30 Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 On 12/08/2016 at 0:30 AM, Passepartout said: Yeah as really the Indians over the Army Corps of Engineers can take a breather for now. As this is far from over. As it is really only beginning! You are correct, expecting protests again, although it is a a bit cold up there. Hope they stay warm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 On 12/7/2016 at 1:18 PM, AsburySkinsFan said: And I think we can obverve based on previous pipeline projects that they do not contribute to nearly the extent that the railroads did. I think that's in large part because the railroads were open to shipping any form of product, whether that is people or material goods. These benefit a single industry. So powerlines would be a better comparison. Larry, they do enable input and output along the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 2 hours ago, twa said: So powerlines would be a better comparison. Hmm let's see, a pipeline that pumps from one company in Canada across the US to be exported from Houston. Or powerlines owned by a company that supply electricity to the very people who have the utility easements across their properties, for the benefit of those who have the powerlines crosdibg their property. Yep, exactly the same. The Keystone pipeline is an abuse of eminent domain for the benefit of very few. Powerline benefit the very people they affect. And the last time a powerline went down it didn't make my water undrikable. Give them your land twa. Funny how Conservatives are always saying that the Dems want Robin Hood taxes to steal from the rich snd give to the poor, all the while Conservatives are stealing from the poor to give to the rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Keystone and other pipelines do not service just from end to end, just as your main trunks of powerlines there are inputs and outputs. You know like the transmission lines we spent Billions on here in Texas for the windmills.....and used eminent domain to impose on landowners. If you do not think pipelines serve the greater population you are ignoring much. Do you think transformers and PCB's and such have not impacted your water supply or the emissions from electric transmission lines not impacted health? I've never been a fan of Keystone, but I do not deny reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 @twa why is it that whenever people want to take rights away from people or take their land or take whatever and it would otherwise be seen as an injustice the people doing the taking always just say well, "it is what it is" or "This is just reality"? As if there is some great rule in the sky that says companies can take whatever land they want through the use of eminent domain. As if that was even a thing 20 years ago. The true reality is quite contrary to what you would have us believe. Companies have only recently been granted the use of eminent domain to steal land from others. Before then it was only for government projects like highways. But as always very rich people bought themselves some legislators and some judges who would side with them and now we get to have our land stolen and given to corporations. That is reality. Accept it if you want but I expect to see you first in line to handover your deed. Oh, and the other reality is that the Keystone pipeline is intended to export the oil from Canada. You know this you just don't want to admit it. It's not the first time that's happened Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 Eminent domain for pipelines goes back to at least 1938 with the Natural Gas Act., most property is simply purchased rather than forced sale Keystone was also designed to bring in landlocked Midwest oil....you know,the part we already built. phase 4 which is the one being held up would also bring in oil from the Bakken formation in North Dakota and Montana eliminating rail cars full of oil any more questions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 @twa I expect photographic evidence of you signing your deed over to the government. Lead by example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 4 hours ago, AsburySkinsFan said: @twa I expect photographic evidence of you signing your deed over to the government. Lead by example. If they pay me what they value it at for taxes they can have it, though I would certainly accept more. already have pipelines on and near my property though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 17 minutes ago, twa said: If they pay me what they value it at for taxes they can have it, though I would certainly accept more. already have pipelines on and near my property though. Wow...just surrender what you work for to the government to hand over to a corporation?! Are you sure you're not a Democrat? You weren't clear on this before, I'm guessing you're confused. By the way, if they only pay you what they value it at for taxes then you're probably getting ripped off. Tax assessments are notoriously low compared to market value. But with such a compliant citizenry willing to sell remit their land to corporations below market value it's no wonder comoanies see eminent domain as a smart business move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 is it surrendering if you're receiving money you believe is adequate for it? doesn't seem like surrendering to me. edit: they can have my house too if they'll give me the tax assessed value. spare me finishing the remodel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 26 minutes ago, tshile said: is it surrendering if you're receiving money you believe is adequate for it? doesn't seem like surrendering to me. edit: they can have my house too if they'll give me the tax assessed value. spare me finishing the remodel. See that's the American way...if YOU choose to sell. However, if I don't want to sell then tough ****. Again, Conservatives are against taxation, but have no problem giving up their land to companies below market value. Sheeple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 4 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said: See that's the American way...if YOU choose to sell. However, if I don't want to sell then tough ****. Again, Conservatives are against taxation, but have no problem giving up their land to companies below market value. Sheeple. but that's what TWA said.. if they gave him the tax assessed value he'd happily part with it. that's not surrendering. you called it surrendering. that was all i was pointing out. there's also a shot at his real estate assessment being higher than he think it should be. you're right, notoriously they're low, but from 2008 to now not every where has been like that. around here assessments were above market value, and the counties were in no rush to adjust them because revenue was suffering anyways during the recession. depending on where you are, you might have an assessment that is still high, low, or about even. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 I've been fighting them for years on overvaluing it....already offered to sell it to them for that price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 45 minutes ago, tshile said: but that's what TWA said.. if they gave him the tax assessed value he'd happily part with it. that's not surrendering. you called it surrendering. that was all i was pointing out. there's also a shot at his real estate assessment being higher than he think it should be. you're right, notoriously they're low, but from 2008 to now not every where has been like that. around here assessments were above market value, and the counties were in no rush to adjust them because revenue was suffering anyways during the recession. depending on where you are, you might have an assessment that is still high, low, or about even. I know that's what you and twa said. You both obviously are willing to surrender your property to the government without resistance. Not all of us share your docility in giving up the land we work for and invest in, some of us look forward to passing it on to our children. But, by all means feel free to be meek with your land. @twahas already demonstrated that he wishes to force his docile nature upon others so that compsnies can force us to sell that which is not for sale all because some rich guy wants it and he paid dnough other rich guys to make laws that allow it. Sheeple 7 minutes ago, twa said: I've been fighting them for years on overvaluing it....already offered to sell it to them for that price. My guess is you just want a lower assessment. When did you last have it independently appraised? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 Of course I want a lower assessment....or cash the govt or the pipeline folk's are both green. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, visionary said: I'm shocked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.