11-24-2014, 02:02 PM
(11-24-2014, 01:02 PM)REnerd Wrote:(11-24-2014, 12:47 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: This might be a cultural thing, but where I come from this would become a case of eminent domain and the house would be expropriated at full market value. On the one hand I appreciate the respect for private property here, on the other hand I don't like the power of a single person to sabotage and uglify an entire neighbourhood by breaking up this new development. We interfere all the time with private rights through zoning as it is, so why not add one more?
I fully appreciate where you are coming from on this. However, I would never support undermining the rights of ownership. It seems to me this is a slippery slope - its use is obvious in this instance but the ongoing practice of it could be misused.
Rights of ownership in Canada are some of the strongest in the world. It is a cornerstone to our wealth and economic stability.
Let the private sector work on land assembly.
More libertarian than the US? From Wikipedia on eminent domain: "The court opinion stated that a public use does not have to mean public occupation of the land; it can mean a public benefit."