In message , Adrian
writes

Paul Terry gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:

If you don't like it, don't buy a house under the flight path. It's that
simple.

Since I know of nobody who actually enjoys aircraft noise, are you
suggesting that the 2 million people affected by noise from Heathrow
should be rehoused so that a quarter of London can be depopulated?

Not at all. Those people voluntarily chose to live there since the
aircraft noise was a fact of life.

But the noise was considerably less back in the 1970s, when I bought my
house.

Why did they do that? Because the aircraft noise made _that_ house, in a
location of _that_ type, cheaper than it would have been if it wasn't for
the aircraft noise.

Bollox. Houses in Richmond are among the most expensive in the country.

Now that they've forgotten about the benefit side of that particular cost/
benefit equation, they want to ignore the cost side, too.

You've made the error of thinking that your equation is correct.

--
Paul Terry