More reasons to love Koch Industries

[ninboydean]

http://www.observer.com/2010/slideshow/131739/eminent-domain"How did the Kochs manage to build up a pipeline network of this magnitude? By getting the government to use its tyrannical powers of eminent domain forcibly seize private property on Koch Industries' behalf

Comments

[induke]

The only real evidence of eminent domain abuse the article cites is the case of a Minnesota pipeline. I've read through the article, and it's talking about affected landowners, but doesn't say anywhere that they used eminent domain to gain access to land. There is only one veiled reference to it (one landowner says the land agent told them "they would get less if the company has to go through the eminent domain process").

Having worked for a long time for a wind farm developer, I know firsthand that landowners can be less than truthful (and that's putting it delicately) when it comes to large project development. It could be out of sheer ignorance sometimes, but more than likely it's due to them not receiving as big of a pie as their neighbor. Stories like this are far too familiar to me, and my old company never used eminent domain to gain access to property.

[gunslnger]

Here's the referenced article. Yeah, I'd say it sounds pretty much like that. I see no indication that there was any eminent domain usage. The "lack of due process" referenced is in regards to the notices sent out about using the right-of-way.

http://www.glencoenews.com/main.asp?SectionID=18&SubSectionID=31&ArticleID=17180

[ninboydean]

Actually, the article directly refers to easements, which are by definition the usage of property not yours.

But don't let reality stop you from defending your privileged thieves! After all, they manage big industry - their theft is justified!

[induke]

The article refers to easements, I never denied that, and I know what they are, thank you very much. What's your point?

[akilika]

. . . it also mentioned the purchase price of easements, and the fact that 80% of the property owners have signed the easement agreement. Meaning that the property owners are *allowing* their property to be used.

Lots of things involve using property that's not yours. So long as there's an agreement and consideration on both sides, there's no thievery involved.

[aviation_]

Meaning that 80% of the property owners are *allowing* their property to be used... ? Sounds like an "agreement..." not an actual agreement.

[ninboydean]

Except, that the article makes it clear that the property owners weren't properly respected in the dealings - in some cases, the particular usage was never agreed to by them.

But that's ok! Libertarians must prefer privileged property owners, not just the property of individuals.

You kids love to decry gov't redistribution of economic power, but when it is a pretty clear case of exploitation, you do a 180 - precisely because your paradigm has nothing to do with "individual property rights" but more to do with defending those who manage industry today.

You people wouldn't know what to do without a state.

[induke]

Except, that the article makes it clear that the property owners weren't properly respected in the dealings - in some cases, the particular usage was never agreed to by them.

That's not a fact, that's an accusation by *some* property owners. This is very common when dealing with landowners on a big project like this. They don't get as much as they thought they would (due to changes in project scope, etc.) and then they try to get out of the lease or try to stop the project altogether.

[ninboydean]

Nope, 20% have not signed the agreements.

[induke]

Have not signed the agreements yet. It's quite common for the last remaining landowners to hold out longer hoping to get a bigger paycheck.

[ninboydean]

The project has been approved, and construction is planned to go ahead despite that fact.

But keep speculating about how Koch couldn't possibly be in the wrong - its good to be a naive little libertarian, completely trusting authority.

[induke]

It's obvious that you have no idea about how project development works.

Approval comes from the zoning board, who certifies that the project conforms to zoning standards. It has nothing to do with land acquisition process. And construction is often planned years ahead, even before land acquisition is complete, because companies make a bet that they will be able to complete the land acquisition process in time.

Unless you can come with actual evidence of eminent domain abuse, I suggest you go back to DailyKos and post this garbage there.

[ninboydean]

Ah, so now the state processes don't involve theft. Keep crawling away from those libertarian principles.

[induke]

You seriously have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

[aviation_]

Stop making a shit ton of accusations about libertarians in general. It's rude and doesn't help your argument one bit. While the issue isn't completely clear as to what exactly happened, I'm siding with you. I am not siding with your condescending tone, which I roll my eyes at.

They're learning; give them time.

[montecristo]

Stop beating the children. That's not contributing to the education process. Some of them don't even yet grasp how the threat of using eminent domain is, in fact using eminent domain. Pity them, educate them, but beating them up doesn't really enlighten.