[Info-vax] Completely OT: Frank Lloyd Wright

[Bob Koehler]

In article <k6jbce$fff$1 at dont-email.me>, David Froble <davef at tsoft-inc.com> writes:
> 
> Getting back to the "improved" land, such as a runway.  Again, the 
> government doesn't want the runway, they're going to build a road.  But 
> if I paid a substantial amount for the improvements, grading the land, 
> planting, and such, and now I'm going to lose my investment, should the 
> purchase price include my investments, or should the government just pay 
> for the "acreage"?

   The government should pay the going rate in that neighborhood for the 
   acreage involved, and any buildings affected.
   
   My neighbor was in a similar paosition.  Improved his place far beyond
   others in the area.  When he sold, it took him a couple of years and
   he got only about the average prices for the size of the lot and size
   of the house, no return on his improvements.

   And no reason the taxpayer should have to pay extra for them, either.
   Some investments are good only for the enjoyment of the investor,
   not for long term finacial gain.