I answered the poll based on the thread title. Farther along you modified the question to add that the landowner would receive no compensation for the taking. This modification would cause me to change my initial answer which was maybe to no.
Welcome Guest!
Should government take land from landowners
- Thread starter Throwback
- Start date
This is a convoluted question, and a trap. No, I do not believe that land should be taken from citizens without compensation. I am also not aware of many cases where that has happened, as it would be generally illegal.
I have a personal take on this in two directions. Members of my family were bought out and evicted from the area that is now the GSMNP, and also the Pisgah National Forest. One caveat: none of them had their land taken without compensation. The government paid market value, or more for most of it. Many of them were very bitter and hated the government for it. Some of them were glad to get rid of their land for a good price, and have the opportunity to find a better place than where they were. The majority of the land making up both the GSMNP and PNF was bought from lumber companies who owned vast tracts of land that they had already logged off, and they made a fortune from selling land to the government that was no longer an asset to them. A lot of the land in both cases was farmed out, logged out, eroded, and otherwise almost unusable. That same land is now some of the most beautiful natural scenery in the eastern US, rich in wildlife and biodiversity, and a vast reservoir for propagation and sanctuary of wildlife and other flora and fauna; while the private land around it is sterile, overdeveloped and covered in condos, housing developments, strip malls, and seedy tourist traps. Even some of the most bitter members of my family who sacrificed their family homesteads for a national park and hated the government for it came around in later years when they compared say, Cataloochee Valley as it is now to the surrounding similar areas like Maggie Valley and Gatlinburg that are vile, condo-covered, and ruined for eternity. Without the park, there would be nothing of any value there now, just another overdeveloped area of urban sprawl with ruined land and polluted water and no wildlife.
Personally, I think public land is one of the very few things that our government has gotten right, and is one thing that sets us apart from other countries. The county I live in is nearly half public land, and I would not want to live here if it wasn't. It is one of the few things that makes it a good place to live, and one of the main reasons I've stayed here in an area of very low wages and very high cost of living.
I have a personal take on this in two directions. Members of my family were bought out and evicted from the area that is now the GSMNP, and also the Pisgah National Forest. One caveat: none of them had their land taken without compensation. The government paid market value, or more for most of it. Many of them were very bitter and hated the government for it. Some of them were glad to get rid of their land for a good price, and have the opportunity to find a better place than where they were. The majority of the land making up both the GSMNP and PNF was bought from lumber companies who owned vast tracts of land that they had already logged off, and they made a fortune from selling land to the government that was no longer an asset to them. A lot of the land in both cases was farmed out, logged out, eroded, and otherwise almost unusable. That same land is now some of the most beautiful natural scenery in the eastern US, rich in wildlife and biodiversity, and a vast reservoir for propagation and sanctuary of wildlife and other flora and fauna; while the private land around it is sterile, overdeveloped and covered in condos, housing developments, strip malls, and seedy tourist traps. Even some of the most bitter members of my family who sacrificed their family homesteads for a national park and hated the government for it came around in later years when they compared say, Cataloochee Valley as it is now to the surrounding similar areas like Maggie Valley and Gatlinburg that are vile, condo-covered, and ruined for eternity. Without the park, there would be nothing of any value there now, just another overdeveloped area of urban sprawl with ruined land and polluted water and no wildlife.
Personally, I think public land is one of the very few things that our government has gotten right, and is one thing that sets us apart from other countries. The county I live in is nearly half public land, and I would not want to live here if it wasn't. It is one of the few things that makes it a good place to live, and one of the main reasons I've stayed here in an area of very low wages and very high cost of living.
Shadow11
Senior Member
A definite no.
What's going on in northeast GA right now is extremely sad. All of this awesome land is being mowed down by the minute and being turned into concrete. From Atlanta to Gainesville.... now it's headed up toward Cornelia, Clarkesville, Clayton, Dahlonaga, etc. Mexicans are filing in left and right to fill the hundreds of thousands of jobs that are needed to fill these massive plants.
The local politicians, who are mostly "out of towners", are continuously campaigning on the narrative that we need more businesses and economic growth in our small towns. That is the complete opposite of what we need to be doing!
We need to be conserving and protecting our land! It's a precious thing right now! Hang onto it and fight for it, folks!
What's going on in northeast GA right now is extremely sad. All of this awesome land is being mowed down by the minute and being turned into concrete. From Atlanta to Gainesville.... now it's headed up toward Cornelia, Clarkesville, Clayton, Dahlonaga, etc. Mexicans are filing in left and right to fill the hundreds of thousands of jobs that are needed to fill these massive plants.
The local politicians, who are mostly "out of towners", are continuously campaigning on the narrative that we need more businesses and economic growth in our small towns. That is the complete opposite of what we need to be doing!
We need to be conserving and protecting our land! It's a precious thing right now! Hang onto it and fight for it, folks!
Trying to.
gma1320
I like a Useles Billy Thread
No, and don't think we should be taxed on our homes and land nor our vehicles. We've already paid sales tax on them. In reality we don't completely own anything.
Silver Britches
Official Sports Forum Birthday Thread Starter
@Throwback Only if they're Bama fans. 
Similar threads
