Page 14 of 33 FirstFirst ... 4121314151624 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 330

Thread: Senate passes bill approving Keystone XL oil pipeline Associated Press By DINA CAPPI

  1. #131
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,759

    Re: Senate passes bill approving Keystone XL oil pipeline Associated Press By DINA CA

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    It doesn't matter how many times you say it, it's still not true. Private entities are not seizing property. In this case, and others, the jurisdiction - that's government - takes control of the land, pays the landowner, and then leases access to the land to the private entity. The private entity at no time owns the land so your claim that they seize it is nonsense.
    You're deliberately missing the point. At the end of the day, there is a pipeline owned by Keystone across that landowner's property. How that happens - which party exercises the power of eminent domain - makes no difference to the landowner or affects the outcome.

    Secondly, jurisdictions don't agree to do this for no benefit to their community. They gain revenue from leases and taxes for the life of the pipeline, which is around 30 to 40 years, and in many of the jurisdictions, they gain employment which also generates wealth for individuals in the communities and economic activity and tax revenue that springs from that employment.
    But by that standard, then there is really no restraint on the use of eminent domain for any private purpose at all. My mother in law owns a small piece of commercial property on a corner that, 10 years after she bought the place, turns out to be directly across a planned major new shopping and entertainment complex. Whose decision should it be to sell that property to, e.g. Best Buy? Hers or the local county commission - maybe the state legislature?

    I appreciate that you may think politicians are utter idiots, and some are, but I don't know of a single politician who would agree to such a project without garnering some benefit to the community they serve. Don't you find it strange, if you believe what you post, that politicians in all the jurisdictions directly affected approve of this project and a large majority of the populations in the affected jurisdictions approve this project, but those who aren't directly affected, perhaps like those in Tennessee or Hollywood, don't approve of the project?
    OK, so if the Tennessee state legislature decides some farm outside Lenoir City would make a great place for a manufacturing plant, it's fine if they pass a law giving the private entity the power of eminent domain to seize that farm. I just don't agree.

  2. #132
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,187

    Re: Senate passes bill approving Keystone XL oil pipeline Associated Press By DINA CA

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    You're deliberately missing the point. At the end of the day, there is a pipeline owned by Keystone across that landowner's property. How that happens - which party exercises the power of eminent domain - makes no difference to the landowner or affects the outcome.



    But by that standard, then there is really no restraint on the use of eminent domain for any private purpose at all. My mother in law owns a small piece of commercial property on a corner that, 10 years after she bought the place, turns out to be directly across a planned major new shopping and entertainment complex. Whose decision should it be to sell that property to, e.g. Best Buy? Hers or the local county commission - maybe the state legislature?



    OK, so if the Tennessee state legislature decides some farm outside Lenoir City would make a great place for a manufacturing plant, it's fine if they pass a law giving the private entity the power of eminent domain to seize that farm. I just don't agree.
    Well, you are trying to equate a multinational project with the building of a plant in a small town. There is no way to equate the extent of potential public interest override between the two. To prove that point, a poster previously in this thread indicated that Hyundai wanted to build a plant in a Kentucky jurisdiction and one landowner put the kibosh on the whole deal by refusing to sell and the plant went to Alabama instead. Not all projects and not all jurisdictions resort to eminent domain to actualize their plans.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  3. #133
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,759

    Re: Senate passes bill approving Keystone XL oil pipeline Associated Press By DINA CA

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Well, you are trying to equate a multinational project with the building of a plant in a small town. There is no way to equate the extent of potential public interest override between the two. To prove that point, a poster previously in this thread indicated that Hyundai wanted to build a plant in a Kentucky jurisdiction and one landowner put the kibosh on the whole deal by refusing to sell and the plant went to Alabama instead. Not all projects and not all jurisdictions resort to eminent domain to actualize their plans.
    Again, I don't agree. If we're using a "public interest" standard, it's seems simple to argue that the public benefit to Nebraska and the local community of a major car plant FAR exceeds, by orders of magnitude, the public benefit to Nebraska of a pipeline across the state transporting oil from Canada to Texas.

    And saying not all DO isn't a defense either. The only barrier, then, to the state seizing that property and selling/leasing it to Best Buy is the ability to buy enough votes in the legislature, with the rationale that Best Buy will pay more in property taxes than the current farm and our little commercial building.

  4. #134
    cynical class clown
    Luftwaffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    CONNECTICUT
    Last Seen
    11-18-17 @ 10:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    10,499

    Re: Senate passes bill approving Keystone XL oil pipeline Associated Press By DINA CA

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    Because they can force the Dem candidate to either stick with BHO's decision and get hammered as anti-growth and anti-jobs, or abandon BHO's decision and turn off the environmental base. It's a great wedge issue for the Repubs. I would not be surprised if Repubs are hoping for a veto.
    Why the hell are you talking about anti growth an anti jobs when keystone is a trivial issue both politically AND economically.
    -----MOS 19D = cavalry scout = best damn MOS there is

  5. #135
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,187

    Re: Senate passes bill approving Keystone XL oil pipeline Associated Press By DINA CA

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    Again, I don't agree. If we're using a "public interest" standard, it's seems simple to argue that the public benefit to Nebraska and the local community of a major car plant FAR exceeds, by orders of magnitude, the public benefit to Nebraska of a pipeline across the state transporting oil from Canada to Texas.

    And saying not all DO isn't a defense either. The only barrier, then, to the state seizing that property and selling/leasing it to Best Buy is the ability to buy enough votes in the legislature, with the rationale that Best Buy will pay more in property taxes than the current farm and our little commercial building.
    Check out some of the comments from people in Nebraska if you don't think they see economic benefit to them from the building of the pipeline through their state.

    And since you mention "buying votes", are you happy that Obama's dear friend, and financial backer, Warren Buffett personally benefits if the pipeline doesn't go through? You are aware that his Burlington, Northern, Sante Fe railroad transports millions of barrels of Canadian oilsands bitumen from Alberta and Saskatchewan to American midwest refineries and American gulf coast refineries right now, collecting great gobs of money doing so? And guess what? Eminent domain was used in laying track for all of these rail lines that are transporting oil in a more dangerous fashion.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  6. #136
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,759

    Re: Senate passes bill approving Keystone XL oil pipeline Associated Press By DINA CA

    BTW, what's a bit funny is this has long been a conservative issue. Here's legislation titled, "Protection of Homes, Small Businesses and Private Property Act of 2012." And some language:

    (9) Under the Court’s decision in Kelo, Justice O’Connor warns, ‘‘The specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory.’’.

    (10) Justice O’Connor further warns that, under the Court’s decision in Kelo, ‘‘Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party’’, and ‘‘the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms. As for the victims, the government now has license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more. The Founders cannot have intended this perverse result.’’.
    One of the co-sponsors of this is Cornyn, who also enthusiastically supports Keystone. I'm not sure how to square those positions.

  7. #137
    Professor
    iacardsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Last Seen
    11-24-17 @ 09:51 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,981

    Re: Senate passes bill approving Keystone XL oil pipeline Associated Press By DINA CA

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    Repubs win either way. If BHO signs it he angers his environmentalist base and hands the Repubs a nice win. If he vetoes it he hands the Repubs a powerful issue for 2016.
    If the GOP is still squawking about Keystone XL in 2016 they do not deserve to get reelected to any seats. There are significantly bigger issues than the Keystone, and they should focus on those.
    "Conservatism is the blind and fear-filled worship of dead radicals."
    - Mark Twain
    Run your own nation, play Cybernations.

  8. #138
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,759

    Re: Senate passes bill approving Keystone XL oil pipeline Associated Press By DINA CA

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Check out some of the comments from people in Nebraska if you don't think they see economic benefit to them from the building of the pipeline through their state.
    I do not CARE whether the "people of Nebraska" see 'economic benefit.' What I'm discussing is property rights and whether the government should have the power to seize YOUR farm and transfer it to GE if, for example, enough of your neighbors think doing so would benefit them. I don't know why you're deliberately missing the point.

    And since you mention "buying votes", are you happy that Obama's dear friend, and financial backer, Warren Buffett personally benefits if the pipeline doesn't go through? You are aware that his Burlington, Northern, Sante Fe railroad transports millions of barrels of Canadian oilsands bitumen from Alberta and Saskatchewan to American midwest refineries and American gulf coast refineries right now, collecting great gobs of money doing so? And guess what? Eminent domain was used in laying track for all of these rail lines that are transporting oil in a more dangerous fashion.
    Buffett's not the issue, but nice try.

    And you mentioned railroads. Sure, eminent domain is used all the time for such projects, roads, bridges, power lines. In fact my grandfather's old rural 10 acre home place had a major power line built right through the middle of it - ruined it for purposes of anyone putting another home there. A nice man met with my mother, said here's the check, we asked what our options were, he said "None - you can sue but you'll lose."

    But the public benefit or use of a railroad or road or bridge or that power line is obvious and uncontroversial. Other than some lease payments, I'm not seeing the public benefit to Nebraska from a pipeline transporting Canadian oil to Texas refineries.

  9. #139
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,078

    Re: Senate passes bill approving Keystone XL oil pipeline Associated Press By DINA CA

    the oil gets refined either way, making this a stupid hill to die on. Obama should sign the bill in exchange for something else. that's how Washington used to work before everyone went bat**** insane.

  10. #140
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,187

    Re: Senate passes bill approving Keystone XL oil pipeline Associated Press By DINA CA

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    I do not CARE whether the "people of Nebraska" see 'economic benefit.' What I'm discussing is property rights and whether the government should have the power to seize YOUR farm and transfer it to GE if, for example, enough of your neighbors think doing so would benefit them. I don't know why you're deliberately missing the point.



    Buffett's not the issue, but nice try.

    And you mentioned railroads. Sure, eminent domain is used all the time for such projects, roads, bridges, power lines. In fact my grandfather's old rural 10 acre home place had a major power line built right through the middle of it - ruined it for purposes of anyone putting another home there. A nice man met with my mother, said here's the check, we asked what our options were, he said "None - you can sue but you'll lose."

    But the public benefit or use of a railroad or road or bridge or that power line is obvious and uncontroversial. Other than some lease payments, I'm not seeing the public benefit to Nebraska from a pipeline transporting Canadian oil to Texas refineries.
    Two points:

    1. This thread may not be about Buffett, but it's not about eminent domain either - you made it the issue by speaking against one and not the other.

    2. Your position is hypocritical because you complain about eminent domain being used to support a private entity to build a pipeline but you don't complain about using eminent domain to support a private entity to build rail lines.

    I think we've exhausted our views on this issue and we're never going to agree - and that's fine. Take care and have a good day.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

Page 14 of 33 FirstFirst ... 4121314151624 ... 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
  •