I think I know what you mean but I don't think that to be true in the real definition of arbitration. I don't think you can be a far arbitrator when the arbitrator has the power of the gun. :) That is how public unions run havoc over the taxpayers.
Thank you! That was my goal. If you want to read & learn more I place my 1 word in a new post called "Follow up - What is the single purpose of government...". There is some really good comments on it as well.
Had to think about this one. My one word is " defend", but defend what? The precepts set forth in the constitution. It is that simple. edweaver, good question, made people think.
Applied to the personal level, self-government = self-control, rule over yourself. At a municipal level, city government = city management. At the federal level, federal government = federal control.
There are concepts such as self-defense, state property, national laws, and community service, but these don't cover the whole gamut found in that one word: Control.
This made me think further: Are you out of control? Are you in control? Are you being controlled?
I don`t actually agree with all of these things that I listed! I was simply contemplating the "purpose" of government from the diverse perspectives of those who hope to corrupt it (and expand it)...or those who despise all currently unfavorable elements...as well as those who would hope to streamline it to its minimal (but sacred) role of protecting individual rights.
I agree in principle with the comments from all of you; but I reiterate: All governments have always had the power of eminent domain. It is defined in our Constitution. We cannot get around that without an Amendment of the Constitution. End of story, unless you can amend the Constitution.
Which is just bogus. The only "willing seller" of a piece of property is the title holder of the property. Otherwise, it is theft, pure and simple.
The fact that an owner of property can "hold up" the sale for the interest of "public works" is no consequence. Property ownership is sacrosanct and to overrule such is a travesty.
IMHO you are correct with the exception of Dagny's railroad. I don't believe a person of Dagny's character would us the power of government for private purposes. I know I never will.
There is longstanding legal precedent establishing in the United States that the "fair market price" is the price for which a given property would sell as negotiated between a willing seller and a willing buyer. That is established, in the absence of a willing seller, by independent real estate appraisals based on recent sales of comparable properties in the same area. There is no way under American law, pursuant to the Constitution, to get around that. The government has the right under the constitution to take the property at a fair market price, whether the seller is willing to sell or not, provided the taking is for a legitimate public purpose. I don't have to agree with that, but I have to accept that to be the case, unless the Constitution is amended to abolish eminent domain. That has never happened in earth's history since governments have been established. There could be no "public works" construction without the government having eminent domain rights. One property owner could hold up the government for far more than "fair market value" for his land unless he could be forced to sell at a price determined by others. There would be no highways, no railways, no courthouses, no government offices, no dams, no bridges, etc. There would have been no railroad for Dagny Taggert to own were it not for the railroad's ability to use the government's eminent domain powers to acquire rail right-of-way.
Applied to the personal level, self-government = self-control, rule over yourself.
At a municipal level, city government = city management.
At the federal level, federal government = federal control.
There are concepts such as self-defense, state property, national laws, and community service, but these don't cover the whole gamut found in that one word: Control.
This made me think further: Are you out of control? Are you in control? Are you being controlled?
The fact that an owner of property can "hold up" the sale for the interest of "public works" is no consequence. Property ownership is sacrosanct and to overrule such is a travesty.
Load more comments...