In article >, Dan J.S. wrote:

> This is a stupid ruling that should get bipartisan support in congress and
> senate to act. As someone was saying, any business will bring in more tax
> revenue than a home. We are all at risk (especially the folks that own homes
> around lakes, rivers or other scenic locales). I dont think there is a
> single democrat, republican and libertarian that would agree with this
> ruling unless they have something personal to gain by it.

I don't see any reason for either Ds or Rs to oppose this. They benefit
from it. They are in power. They get the control over people's property.

There are a number of angles. The first is that of dependence. Now
elections may determine wether or not the government takes you home.
That's a great way to hold on to or gain power. Also, **** off government
and you could find your home taken. It's power.

Now there are the favors and such this offers up. Now someone seeking
office can promise a backer someone else's property as compensation for
support in an election. The same can be done to reward friends and punish
enemies.

Outright monitary profit for government has already been mentioned.

Now that aside, there are forces on the left that wish to dictate what
people can do with their property or just outright take control of it in
the name of the collective. That they know what is best and should
determine land use for everyone else and who gets to live where.

I would assume there are similiar control freaks on the right who may
operate under different motivations for the same result. Ones who would
like to see the return of such things as corporate owned housing etc that
basically make the worker forever dependent upon the company like a slave.