How else can you interpret this conclusion from todayÂ’s editorial on the Kelo case?

Connecticut is a rich state with poor cities, which must do everything they can to attract business and industry. New London's development plan may hurt a few small property owners, who will, in any case, be fully compensated. But many more residents are likely to benefit if the city can shore up its tax base and attract badly needed jobs.

In other words, property rights be damned – be happy the government is giving you anything when they throw you out of your home for the benefit of someone else.

UPDATE: I had no idea how right I was when I wrote this -- the NY Times itself has screwed the little guy in an "eminent domain for economic development case" that allowed it to get the land for its new headquarters from an unwilling seller. And they updated the original editorial surreptitiously to include an acknowledgement of this fact in the editorial after it was published. Good going to Lawroark at Protect Homes, Not Flags.

Posted by: Greg at 12:39 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 194 words, total size 1 kb.