Begging for Billionaires. Land Use and Eminent Domain: Begging for Billionaires

Student’s Name:
Tutor/supervisor/Instructor:
Course:
Date:
Land Use and Eminent Domain: Begging for Billionaires
Introduction
The property is a critical factor in human life in the U.S and many other parts of the world. The property use and ownership of land constitute the reasons that underlie conflicts in the U.S. The disputes regarding the property are well reflected in the documentary ‘Begging for Billionaires’ which highlights the clash between individual property rights against other parties’ interests. The film espouses the exposition of private property rights erosion, and the governments use taxes and abusive policies as a leeway to grant property rights to corporations and private developers. The governments’ authorities have raised concerns relating to the underutilized property. In some of the instances, the ownership of such properties has been shifted to other private individuals whose use is believed to bring more taxes. This paper illustrates the interplay of law and property rights in the context of private property rights and public interests in light of the ‘Begging for Billionaires’ film.
The Gist of the film, ‘Begging for Billionaires’
The film raises thought-provoking illumination on property rights assault in America. Through the use of journalism strategies, expert interviews, and getting stories of those who have been forced out of their homes, the documentary captures the brazen government actions of taking the property from the disadvantaged and giving it to the most privileged in society. The property rights are in continuously dwindling as state seize such properties are seized by state and given to corporations and other private actors. It is quite shocking that these private actors who get properties are multi-billion dollar entities, as the disadvantaged families are forced out of their property, or homes, witness their lifelong only possession being demolished, even without any notice. It is quite a paradoxical phenomenon because the government seizes individuals’ property and grants to another private actor, arguing that it is meant for community development while leaving the affected persons with no home. Such actions wipe away deep rich history associated with such demolished homes in a bid to create space for private developers. It seems the community development and its associated rights as represented by private developers’ business growth and tax generation acts as a foundation violating an individual’s property rights. In crux, the documentary seems to indicate that the U.S is learning more towards community development rights at the cost of individual property rights. This scenario reflects a clear imbalance of property rights for individuals and communities.
Nature of Property Rights and Definition
The protection of the property is an affront practice in human life. The right to property has been guaranteed under statutes, laws, and legislation. Besides basic needs as forms of property, there are other diverse forms of properties that include bank accounts, patterns, and copyrights, amongst others, that confer a sense of life satisfaction, personal fulfillment, achievement, and security. What encompasses property is broad and intricate. In law, it may include intangible rights such as future interests and nearby suburbs. Property has fuzzy border features, and due to lack of imprimatur of custom and property qualifying features in some forms of property like copyrights and patents, they are classified as mere privileges. Most common forms of intangible properties rely on federal statutes for their existence and are subject to expiry. Since the property is of paramount importance, it usually coupled with competing interests and claims, which have resulted in drawing and redrawing of lines that defined property control and ownership.[] [Tom W. Bell, "Property" in the Constitution: The View From the Third Amendment, 20 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 1243 (2012), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol20/iss4/7]
The changes in property control and ownership are implemented under law. Every government action appears to influence the value of private rights and on the value of people's wealth. Regulations and restrictions on banking, food industry, land use, professional licensing, land use, and taxation decision and federal, state, and local governments do affect the value of property and distribution. The property owners are in constant fear of collective actions that touch on property transfer and use. Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S constitution has caused a litigation battlefield as espoused on property transfer and ownership. Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment is quite provoking, emotionally charged, and controversial; this is partly due to the U.S significantly biased inclination towards constitutional protection of property rights. Therefore, the Fifth Amendment departs from the spirit property protection rights; the heat generated by this is exhibited by many court decisions revolving around taking of private properties.[Underkuffler, Laura S. "Property and change: The constitutional conundrum." Tex. L. Rev. 91 (2012): 2015.] [Underkuffler, Laura S. "Property and change: The constitutional conundrum." Tex. L. Rev. 91 (2012): 2015.] [Underkuffler, Laura S. "Property and change: The constitutional conundrum." Tex. L. Rev. 91 (2012): 2015.]
The case law has no plain narration, but it raises eyebrows regarding what property means in the constitution. According to Tom, the term ‘property’ is mention four times at essential junctures, which include propelling the federal and state governments' machinery. There are many blurred lines regarding the meaning of property as enshrined in the U.S constitution. For example, the taking clause protects the individual property, but to a less degree than it confers to real property. Furthermore, it remains unclear what constitutes property, real or personal? It might be challenging to have a consistent definition of the property since such descriptions mean different things at diverse epochs of time. For instance, the definition of property in the 19th century would not be the same as that of the 21st century[Tom W. Bell, "Property" in the Constitution: The View From the Third Amendment, 20 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 1243 (2012), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol20/iss4]
Eminent Domain
The eminent domain empowers the government to direct the owner to sell his or her property forcefully. This power is attributable to state sovereignty. This constitutional authority is conferred to the state because there are foreseen circumstances where the government may need particular property, which may only be held by a single or monopoly seller. Such a monopoly seller can transfer ownership to government at exorbitant rates, which overburdens the taxpayers, and since they are monopolistic, they can delay negotiation; this is where the concept of eminent domain assists the government in navigating through pricey markets when intending to acquire property for public use.[]
The concept of the eminent domain plays a critical role ...