The Good Book instructs us.
The advice under discussion is not religion specific.
Just do the right thing. Treat others as you want to be treated. Don’t sue your neighbor, the courts may rip you off.
1 Like
All kinds of good news today.
Now, that is some funny crap right there.
In the history of humans, that has not occurred with groups over a couple hundred.
What you describe, is like a big commune.
.
I understand what you’re saying, and I don’t disagree.
But it is possible for two people to be just and good - yet fundamentally disagree as to a matter of law. And while both of the parties are honest people, they both disagree over the facts of what happened.
Who picks the winner?
A judge.
A judge rules on matters of law. The law is very complicated, because it must be.
Without lawyers, most of the time the winner will be the one who has more time to learn the law.
With lawyers, most of the time the winner will be the one who can pay more to employ those who can argue the law professionally.
I disagree.
The whole without laws everyone will be polite Heinlein fantasy will never work.
The same way doctrinal Communism will never work.
The law must be complicated because the world is complicated.
1 Like
I disagree it has to be complicated.
I added to my post.
It has to be complicated because the world is complicated.
That’s a lot more than eminent domain.
I disagree.
It never was eminent domain.
Give me an example of a “simple” law, and I will poke holes in it.
And I’m not even a professional yet (if ever).
Digging a stock pond on my property.
if that stock pond upstream has a negative economic impact on your downstream businesses , who you gonna call?
This case had nothing to do with Eminent Domain. Stay on topic.
1 Like
Nobody. There is no stream.
It’s a hole and I have a permit.
1 Like
Okay. The same arguments work for watersheds.
If your neighbor drinks your water, who you gonna call?
