...is my point - UK did it multiple times, overall successfully I would say: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_towns_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.m.wikipe

...is my point - UK did it multiple times, overall successfully I would say: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_towns_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_towns_in_the_United_King... These towns often have a bit of a reputation for being full of, well, 1960s architecture and being a bit dated and unexciting, but frankly that's just a lot of the UK. Functionally, I have been to a few of them and they are just fine, if a little boring, places to live. > [is it] okay to have the government take over properties that are simply poor uses of land even if the owners don't want to sell? I mean, happens all the time with infrastructure projects - roads, railroads, power plants.