Columbia Eminent Domain Case Will Not Be Heard - Megan McArdle - National - The Atlantic

Boyes illustrates the growth of the state in the recent Washington "compromise" over tax policy. The Washington decision illustrates the public choice observation that concentrated perceived benefits will be "maximized" in the short run if costs can be differed into the future. This short term/long term element of public policy offers continuing opportunities for rent seeking as well as stimulus for expansion of the state.

Another example of the expansion of the state takes place in New York City.

Megan McArdle ends her post on the expansion of the state:

I don't understand why this is an issue that only fires up libertarians. Can't we all agree that it would be better to live in a world where Columbia cannot do this sort of thing? I guess not, though.

I think part of the answer to McArdle's bafflement is twofold - first an evolution in the belief system that underlies our ethical concern with freedom and second the shaping of this belief system by the intelligensia.

First, as the debate over at CATO illustrates, there is a real debate today over the source of rights. The majority in our society seem to agree that that state is the source of rights. This would reflect the change in culture that has become both collectivist and focused on security rather than liberty. McArdle's outrage is understandable in this case, but the state will consistently respond to rent seekers and the concentration of benefit to a large university will predicably override the diffused costs to the inhabitants of the surrounding area. This case also illustrates the power of the intelligensia - university concerns are, in their view, much more important than the concerns of the "common" folk surrounding Columbia.

McArdle seems to miss the point as she writes below. The benefit, from the perspective of the elite intelligensia is a larger capacity to create more elite intelligensia. The consequence - NYC becomes more elite and able to shape society - this is the perceived benefit to the rent seekers at Columbia and the threat that Leviathan poses to us all. While it is not surprising that elite rent seekers would strive to expand their sphere of control, nor that the elite intelligensia (would members of the courts in this area have attended elite schools?) would support this expansion, it is of concern (although not surprise) that the "common" inhabitants of New York City and our country so willingly acquiese to this sacrifice of the source of liberty - our property rights.

In the case of Columbia, there's a tangible public loss--they're going to tear down one of the few gas stations in Manhattan in order to give Columbia's privileged students more space. And what public benefit does the city get? We're talking about taking taxpaying private properties and transferring them to a non-profit which will not pay taxes, and will turn a large swathe of Manhattan into a quasi-compound for some of the wealthiest and most privileged people in the city.


One's gut and one's social conscience positively riot at the thought of taking this seized land and handing it over to wealthy private institution that almost exclusively serves the affluent class.


Columbia Eminent Domain Case Will Not Be Heard - Megan McArdle - National - The Atlantic