They didn’t steal the land and this girl didn’t own it. The mother (property owner) was given an offer she accepted.
They didn’t even use eminent domain. Now marinate on that.
Plus this is Georgia, who do these people vote for? Local elections matter.
Data centers are a cancer and should be banned. That being said there is no crime here and not even an abuse of power.
Edit: jesustittyfuckingchrist the ignorance in here is nuts. Y’all mothers need to watch the vid before commenting. I’m not your teacher and this is standard stuff.
This is a puff piece for rage bait and it fucking worked. “Duh, they LITERALLY stole our home”. No motherfucker, they LITERALLY paid you for it and your mother LITERALLY agreed to the sale.
Buddy thinks “legal” and “right” are there same thing.
This is a gross oversimplification.
The mother (property owner) was given an offer she accepted. They didn’t even use eminent domain. Now marinate on that.
That’s like saying the schoolyard bully didn’t steal your lunch money - you just gave it up willingly after they threatened to beat you up. Jeez, they didn’t even beat you up! Where’s the crime?
The company essentially said “Here is our offer. Take it or we will use eminent domain to get your land anyway.” Fighting this in court would take years and cost tons of money, and would likely still result in losing their home.
Plus this is Georgia, who do these people vote for? Local elections matter.
This is a gross oversimplification.
No it’s not. Feel free to familiarize yourself with Right of Way and municipal acquisition.
That’s like saying the schoolyard bully didn’t steal your lunch money - you just gave it up willingly after they threatened to beat you up. Jeez, they didn’t even beat you up! Where’s the crime?
Again no. They were going to take those houses regardless. Your issue is due to a lack of understanding. In the bully analogy the bully is breaking the law. The municipality is following the law in this case. Which is more than I can say for most of the federal government.
You may not like it, but that’s what it is.
That is ignoring the “sell now for this tmshit amount or next time we’ll take it for even less”
Its easy yo force a small person to sell if you’re a big company
Then having that spokes person go all teary eyed is just maddening
To fake tears and then lie.
Data centers are a cancer and should be banned.
Do you believe this or not?
This is a puff piece for rage bait and it fucking worked.
This isn’t a puff piece. They’re talking to real people who are being forced out of their homes by data centers. It’s a worthy news story for that community.
If you believe the first statement, then you should see the value in this propaganda against data centers.
Sources please
About the middle of the video above, sorry I can’t see the time on mobile.
The reporter states that the mother came to an agreement with the municipality and did not go to eminent domain. Then they immediately go on to explain (albeit briefly) what eminent domain is and what the process entails.
An additional source is that I’ve lived through this myself.
Ugh okay I’ll say I’m torn. Put AI aside for just a second, pur grid and transmission lines are HORRIBLY in need of upgrading. Ask any Republican pre AI and they would have parrotted the same thing about EVs being too much for our grid.
So, I’m not happy that it’s because of AI and datacenters. I do see we need to upgrade, and I have been also someone who is actually okay with eminent domain IF and only if the owners get full MARKET value (and I would throw on moving expenses). Of course we know things can be abused but ina just society I would say that if it means a few families moving for a more robust power grid, then I’m okay with it, even if it had to be me.
That being said I feel that I have a nuanced take here and I fully expect to be downvoted to hell.
Eminent domain was never meant to be for the economic profit of an individual, it was meant for the common good of the community - this is just fucking bullshit
Eminent domain wasn’t used though. They just bought the land. The article is sensational.
They threatened eminent domain. This is like the cops offering you a deal instead of going to trial.
Aww figures
I agree with others that they should get at least 1.5x market value. There is an emotional damage to taking someones belongings that should be accounted for. And also, supposing they use the funds to buy a new home, they will need to get a mortgage still, which now have significantly higher interest rates, increasing their monthly payments.
market value and moving expenses seems like a no brainer, but it doesn’t go nearly far enough. the value that is created from these properties being requisitioned isn’t really addressed.
a company deciding they want it at market value, would intrinsically increase the market value pretty significantly. and it’s hard to put numbers to it, but if someone were to knock on my door, completely unprompted, I think I would have a hard time packing up and leaving for less than 1.5x market value (plus expenses).
I can’t see increasing capacity for AI data centers as “just cause”. Silver lining is if that AI collapses; their will be extra capacity to meet EV demands right?.. Right? I’d want at least double if it was a child hood home.
TL;DR she actually agreed to sell and is now bitching and whining on Tiktok that they are “taking” it and using her kids as sob material.
Bruh. That title and framing is disingenuous. I don’t care it’s “driven” by datacenters. The power grid would need to be upgraded at some point anyway.
There’s no “theft” to call out if YOU’RE GETTING PAID, IN A DEAL.
And what if they didn’t sell? The datacenter is just gonna respect that decision?
No but in my book you can’t agree to the first presented deal, then complain online about theft. It’s not theft. It’s a deal, datacenter involved or not.
She laid down and surrendered without a fight and now regrets it so she took to tiktok to farm fame off the dataventer bad trope. They are bad, but in this case, they made a deal, they didn’t steal anything.
Other poster said that too but where are the sources
I was being genuine in my other response to you, but this comment makes me wonder if you watched the vid or just came to comment.
You still haven’t posted any sources. I’m not watching the video again. Also not trying to fight with you.
You don’t want to watch the roughly 30 sec in the middle where it explains exactly what you’re asking?
Ok
Here: https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/pddm/right-way-utilities.
Read for HOURS instead.
I’m not that guy but I went back and watched uo to minute 1. All they said is that the land is their family’s. Okay and?
They say later that the power company could also try to get the land via Eminent Domain. So? They didn’t even get there because she took the deal. She would’ve received compensation anyway. How substantial that would be, WOULD be up for debate, IF she didn’t sign a deal.
