On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 21:47:37 -0500, (Brent
P) wrote:

>In article > , 223rem wrote:
>> Is their goal to crush civil liberties and stomp on the poor?
>
>To make us poor, to rule over us with complete power.
>
>> Lately, they have:
>>
>> - Ruled to ban marijuana for cancer patients
>>
>> - Allowed police to use drug-sniffing dogs to check out
>> any car they stop for a traffic violation
>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...NGIMAVRML1.DTL
>>
>> - And today, they ruled that Cities May Seize Homes
>> (of course, poor peoples' houses, not the mansions of the rich)
>
>The rich have the resources to fight government, the poor do not.
>
>Example, two expressway projects yet to get off the ground. The northern
>extension of IL53 and the extension of I355 (really the same expressway
>at different ends) On the north end, the rich still live in their homes
>are are still fighting the development. In the south, the not rich were
>moved out and their homes destroyed years ago.
>
>In any case, the paranoia I have been accused of is coming to pass.

Much as I hate this idea, the Nation has an interest in doing _something_ about
the damn NIMBYs. One guy on TV said they had ultimately offered him $150K for
a house you could see, as he was standing beside it, was clearly not worth
$150K. He was just holding out for a jackpot at the public's expense. While
condo's and shopping malls may or may not be the sort of public interest that
the founding fathers had in mind, the right of way for a high speed rail's
consortium _is_, and the current thinking seeems to be that _nothing_ can be
built in the way of HS rail because of the NIMBYs. Well, maybe the Nation can
progress now... maybe we can have HS rail even if it is done with private
money.

Dave Head