Because they paid for it and will never get it back again?
Because $4 billion may have been less than fair market?
Because the people owned it, but some bureaucrats sold it?
Because you wouldn't sell your Exxon-Mobil stock because they had two down quarters in a row?
Or maybe basically because you don't dump assets just because your crummy pricing scheme has revenues in a dip. Mismanagement is temporary and curable; nonownership isn't.
Um, they do get it back.
Because $4 billion may have been less than fair market?
There was open bidding. They got fair market.
Because the people owned it, but some bureaucrats sold it?
The people owned an asset that was losing money each year. They realized a gain.
Because you wouldn't sell your Exxon-Mobil stock because they had two down quarters in a row?
I would if I got way more than it was worth.
P.S. Since Indiana has leased the toll road, it has earned $112 million in interest--about $7 a second.
Thanks a million, Mitch--or should I say, thanks a $4 billion.
If you'd like to see the to-the-second interest earned on the lease of the toll road, you can go here:
http://www.in.gov/tos/MajorMoves.htm