Report a Comment

Am I the only one who agrees with the Kelo decision?

First of all, I'm not too keen on property rights. Property is not essential to limited government; in fact, property relies on government. It relies on government to guarantee a property owner that s/he has exclusive domain over the property and that no one else does. Without a strong government, property rights couldn't exist. People would just do what they want with others' property, and there'd be no one to make them stop.

But here's what the question boils down to: is it possible for private development to serve a public good? I think it'd be hard to argue that it can't. Think about it: grocery stores, pharmacies, offices, entertainment ... all of it serves (or at least can serve) the public good.

Now keep in mind that our government is a democracy, of the people, by the people, etc. So it's not like a few people living in a bubble make the decisions about what serves the public good and what doesn't. These people represent, and are accountable to, their constituents. So it would behoove them to make good decisions on such matters.

by Tim on Jun 1, 2009 10:31 am • link • report