|
Nominations and Campaigning for the 2024 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now open |
Talk:Eminent domain
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Huh?[edit]
The paragraph about the New York Times doesn't make any sense. Read-Write (talk) 17:18, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- Why would the Times say their property is blighted when that would decrease its value and therefore their compensation? Why would they say it's in the public interest if they're fighting condemnation? I suggest cutting this whole unsourced paragraph, but I'll wait to see if anyone objects. Read-Write (talk) 17:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- The NY Times said it was blighted when they were trying to buy it, not after they had it. CorruptUser (talk) 22:17, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- The Times doesn't have the power of eminent domain. I've added some clarification. Read-Write (talk) 04:30, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- The NY Times said it was blighted when they were trying to buy it, not after they had it. CorruptUser (talk) 22:17, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Compulsory Purchase[edit]
How does (UK) compulsory purchase differ from eminent domain? Anna Livia (talk) 11:40, 29 July 2019 (UTC)