My point is if the government is introducing an aesthetic policy that has a stochastic negative impact on private business while also limiting business ability to mitigate, then the government should compensate. My point is also the public rangeland argument is a convenient cudgel to beat up on ranchers with that is actually mostly a nonsequitor.
My personal background was just a my-card-on-the-table so my arguments are seen as genuine rather than agenda driven.
Bookmarks