Page 21 of 83 FirstFirst ... 1119202122233171 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 821

Thread: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

  1. #201
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,173

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    When the various proposed high speed rail projects the current administration is pressing (you know in the stimulus bill?) progress are you going to be so vehemently against eminent domain for their construction? Are they also considered ‘substantial national interest’ even to those in other states who will NEVER use them? Also consider these will not be constructed below ground so there is a high probability they will have to ‘look out their window and see some monstrosity like that’.
    in speaking of the use of eminent domain you want to compare a high speed rail project which will benefit the citizens of this country who will ride the new transportation with a project owned by canadian oil interests which will only enrich the oil industry while polluting the USA
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  2. #202
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,343
    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    Well, regardless, eminent domain is supposed to be used for matters of substantial national interest. Just using it to line the coffers of some oil company is immoral no matter how invasive it is. But, do you really think that even in the areas where it would be underground, that that is not invasive? You could potentially have a massive oil spill on your land at any time. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live over a 3 foot wide pipeline of oil... Besides, only some of it is underground, it could cut through the line to your septic tank, it could go through where you have underground power lines to your house, it could go right through your living room, etc.
    Lol!!! You have got to be kidding me here...first you said they were kicking people out, then when proven wrong on that you said people were going to forced to look at an ugly pipeline. Then when that was wrong too, you now say that a buried line is invasive. Do you have indoor plumbing teamsoil? Or still using an out house? Lol... Too much gheeze.

    J-mac

    Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  3. #203
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    When the various proposed high speed rail projects the current administration is pressing (you know in the stimulus bill?) progress are you going to be so vehemently against eminent domain for their construction? Are they also considered ‘substantial national interest’ even to those in other states who will NEVER use them? Also consider these will not be constructed below ground so there is a high probability they will have to ‘look out their window and see some monstrosity like that’.
    Well definitely high speed rail is much more in the national interest than an oil pipeline. That's obvious isn't it? The people don't even use the pipeline. The oil company does, because it's cheaper than other methods of moving around their product. A rail system people can use. Not to mention the obvious, but a rail line DECREASES pollution where an oil pipeline INCREASES pollution. An rail line DECREASES oil dependence where an oil pipeline INCREASES oil dependence. A high speed rail is going to be useful for 100 years where a pipeline would probably only be used for 20. In short the oil pipeline hurts the people where a high speed train network would help the people.

    But, regardless, is he even proposing using eminent domain for that? I would assume they would just run the lines along the land already dedicated to train tracks.

  4. #204
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Lol!!! You have got to be kidding me here...first you said they were kicking people out, then when proven wrong on that you said people were going to forced to look at an ugly pipeline. Then when that was wrong too, you now say that a buried line is invasive.
    No, no. None of that is true. All we have is drz speculating that maybe none of these dozens of eminent domain suits they have already filed involves making people move out of their houses. No proof of anything, just his speculation. I'm saying "heck, even if that is true..."

  5. #205
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    But, regardless, is he even proposing using eminent domain for that? I would assume they would just run the lines along the land already dedicated to train tracks.
    Wrong again…:

    The California High-Speed Rail Train will require a substantial amount of private property to be taken by eminent domain — the power of the government to take private property for public use. It will be responsible for homes, businesses and farms being taken and demolished. It could be responsible for decreasing the value to an even higher number of commercial and residential properties

    San Francisco Property Value & High Speed Train Attorney | Martinez Eminent Domain Lawyer | California | CA

    High Speed Rail : California Eminent Domain Report

  6. #206
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    in speaking of the use of eminent domain you want to compare a high speed rail project which will benefit the citizens of this country who will ride the new transportation with a project owned by canadian oil interests which will only enrich the oil industry while polluting the USA
    Yes, I find no justification for eminent domain regardless of the intent. I am HIGHLY skeptical of the benefit to the citizens of this country as the only justification for these HSR's is in densely populated areas (NE corridor, some parts of Florida and California). The vast majority of the ‘citizens of this country’ will NEVER ride on these but are bearing the burden of the cost. Sound fair to those who espouse fairness?

  7. #207
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    Yes, I find no justification for eminent domain regardless of the intent. I am HIGHLY skeptical of the benefit to the citizens of this country as the only justification for these HSR's is in densely populated areas (NE corridor, some parts of Florida and California). The vast majority of the ‘citizens of this country’ will NEVER ride on these but are bearing the burden of the cost. Sound fair to those who espouse fairness?
    Seriously? So you think that the interstate highway system was a bad idea? Trains were a bad idea in the 19th century? Power lines ... bad idea?

  8. #208
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Seriously? So you think that the interstate highway system was a bad idea? Trains were a bad idea in the 19th century? Power lines ... bad idea?
    Can you prove that just compensation was not agreed upon by land owners and whoever for the construction of these systems?

  9. #209
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    The California High-Speed Rail Train will require a substantial amount of private property to be taken by eminent domain
    Ok, well, as I explained it is dramatically in the national interest. So it would need to be weighed out- benefits vs imposition on the property owners. It would depend how much land was actually being taken, but the benefits are pretty enormous. The pipeline, on the other hand, has virtually no public benefit.

  10. #210
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Keystone oil sands pipeline rejected

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    Can you prove that just compensation was not agreed upon by land owners and whoever for the construction of these systems?
    Of course. Eminent domain is used on a daily basis for highway and other infrastructure construction.

    Airports, bridges, tunnels, railroads, interstate highways and public parks that are such an integral part of modern life simply wouldn’t exist without the exercise of eminent domain. The U.S. Interstate Highway System, developed during the Eisenhower administration in the early 1950s, required the purchase—through eminent domain—of enough land to construct more than 42,000 miles of freeway.
    Eminent Domain

Page 21 of 83 FirstFirst ... 1119202122233171 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •