Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Much like the arguments for free trade (hi skek!), it seems just to me that those benefiting from the state action compensate the victims, through the state, for the harm they suffer. If the state action is truly net beneficial, everyone will still be at least as well off in the end.
|
These things happen all the time, of course, but the logic is pretty damned paternalistic and assumes the state has the sole appropriate measure of value. Whether it's taking farm land for a football stadium, an Indian burial ground for a road, or a "slum" for urban redevelopment, the folks forced to sell their land usually suffer disproportionately and the collective benefit is usually a benefit perceived mainly by the proverbial tyranical majority.
Anyone up for 2004, a Takings Odyssey (the sequel to the Great Zoning Debate)?
