The rest of the world is leaving America behind

Damocles said:
Done. Explain your position.
Click to expand...

My position? What on earth are you talking about? My position! Do you think I am standing for parliament or something?
Bloody hell! Talk about pretentious language!
What I referred to was the question that asked how much private property would be stolen. Well, unless America is now a dictatorship or run by a Stalinist despot, the question is stupid. If you cannot understand the illogical, mis-thought and ill-informed mindset that was used to phrase that question I feel sorry for you.
Unless, of course, you are simply trying to cause trouble.... of course I would be the last person to accuse you of .....
 
Lowaicue said:
My position? What on earth are you talking about? My position! Do you think I am standing for parliament or something?
Bloody hell! Talk about pretentious language!
What I referred to was the question that asked how much private property would be stolen. Well, unless America is now a dictatorship or run by a Stalinist despot, the question is stupid. If you cannot understand the illogical, mis-thought and ill-informed mindset that was used to phrase that question I feel sorry for you.
Unless, of course, you are simply trying to cause trouble.... of course I would be the last person to accuse you of .....
Click to expand...

I think you are on a message board making a judgment of a person in support of a policy and would like to see how you justify that judgment and the position.

So, you think all government action is legitimate? Even taking the homes of people who live in the way of "progress" and giving them dinkus in return? Basically your position is that because it is America, and something you think we should have, therefore there can be no "theft" all property seizure through eminent domain is justified? In a nation where they've begun to take properties using this method just so they can build a privately owned mall for higher tax revenues, you believe it is "stupid" to question the validity of government actions?

Everybody should submit to whatever decision they make because it is "government"?

Questioning government is what we do here in the US, calling it "stupid" because you like trains is just totalitarianist nonsense.
 
These 2nd rate European countries only have 1 or 2major cities each. The us has hundreds and we can afford cars. Democrats should study economics.
 
Damocles said:
dinkus
Click to expand...

Underpayment in cases of eminent domain is actionable and generaly results in generous compensation.

The one case you refer to was hardly a mold breaker.

Though unjust, it resulted in state legisaltive action in most states.
 
Damocles said:
I think you are on a message board making a judgment of a person in support of a policy and would like to see how you justify that judgment and the position.

So, you think all government action is legitimate? Even taking the homes of people who live in the way of "progress" and giving them dinkus in return? Basically your position is that because it is America, and something you think we should have, therefore there can be no "theft" all property seizure through eminent domain is justified? In a nation where they've begun to take properties using this method just so they can build a privately owned mall for higher tax revenues, you believe it is "stupid" to question the validity of government actions?

Everybody should submit to whatever decision they make because it is "government"?

Questioning government is what we do here in the US, calling it "stupid" because you like trains is just totalitarianist nonsense.
Click to expand...

Enough of such nonsense. That is NOT what I think at all.
I have better things to do than pursue this line of dubious logic. You are on your own, sir.
 
Lowaicue said:
Enough of such nonsense. That is NOT what I think at all.
I have better things to do than pursue this line of dubious logic. You are on your own, sir.
Click to expand...

<Thought process behind the above quoted post>
Those are hard questions, I'll act like a putz, throw an insult, in no way show any logical reason to call somebody stupid because they questioned the government, then pretend I took the high ground. Maybe nobody will notice.
</Thought process behind the above quoted post>

Translation:
Crap! I'd better run fast so people don't notice that I was standing here, unable to support my position on anything or my judgment of another!
 
Return of Dune said:
Underpayment in cases of eminent domain is actionable and generaly results in generous compensation.

The one case you refer to was hardly a mold breaker.

Though unjust, it resulted in state legisaltive action in most states.
Click to expand...

Which are generally better answers than Lowaicue's, but don't support calling somebody "stupid" for what appears to be a reasonable question.

I would state that just because it is actionable does not mean that people necessarily win, even when it is justly deserved. There are numberless stories of those who have been forced to take the poop end of the stick through eminent domain.
 
The Dude said:
These 2nd rate European countries only have 1 or 2major cities each. The us has hundreds and we can afford cars. Democrats should study economics.
Click to expand...


People in the US use and rely on car so much because the government has for decades promoted policies that support the use and reliance on cars and development patterns in the US are based on that use and reliance. However, there are plenty of places where rail is a good, viable and beneficial alternative to automobile or air travel. Think of the benefits of eliminating Boston to New York air travel -- freeing up precious air and runway space for trips that cannot reasonably be made by rail.

I'm amazed at how short-sighted anti-rail folks are. Even if you don't use rail and never will, increase rail benefits you.
 
Cornholio said:
People in the US use and rely on car so much because the government has for decades promoted policies that support the use and reliance on cars and development patterns in the US are based on that use and reliance. However, there are plenty of places where rail is a good, viable and beneficial alternative to automobile or air travel. Think of the benefits of eliminating Boston to New York air travel -- freeing up precious air and runway space for trips that cannot reasonably be made by rail.

I'm amazed at how short-sighted anti-rail folks are. Even if you don't use rail and never will, increase rail benefits you.
Click to expand...

Rail has always been the most efficient way to move freight.
 
WinterBorn said:
Rail has always been the most efficient way to move freight.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I couldn't give less of a fuck on how proles travel (as non-stop road trips are the only REAL way to get anywhere). But trains can haul literal millions of tons of stuff, freeing up commercial planes and freeways from tractor trailers. And doing it faster saves businesses money, all while being cheaper in the process.
 
Damocles said:
Which are generally better answers than Lowaicue's, but don't support calling somebody "stupid" for what appears to be a reasonable question.

I would state that just because it is actionable does not mean that people necessarily win, even when it is justly deserved. There are numberless stories of those who have been forced to take the poop end of the stick through eminent domain.
Click to expand...

Aren't people compensated at market value?
 
Schadenfreude said:
not just a rail system, but reduction of the deficit
Click to expand...

Nope. Stop spending. The problem is out of conrol spending and you want to add more. The people are taxed enough. How popular do you think a rail system is among the voters? I'd say it's not one of our priorities right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top