Well guess what... software can never be considered finished, don't believe me? Then why is Windows XP still being updated almost 12 years after its initial release?
Psychologically a lot of people compare a software project with more traditional types projects such as construction, however they are completely incomparable:
- Software only ever reaches a state of acceptable functionality
- Software is infinitely malleable meaning it can never reach a state of 'done'
Both of these reasons, in the same way as proving they aren't comparable to construction, show that starting a software project again is very rarely the right choice - instead adapt the software into the new state of acceptable functionality.
This is because software is the cumulative sum of all previous work, even reasonably small products will be the culmination of many man years. In addition users understand how it works and all of the quirks of the features, including how to use them to the organisations advantage.
Therefore no matter how much spaghetti, ill named and awkward that legacy project is, it is almost never the right decision to start again from scratch.
Which is exactly why code needs to be maintainable, because you'll almost certainly won't be the only person who has to look after it. Using tools such as resharper can help with this, and great to transform a spaghetti-ridden legacy project (and you may even manage to get some unit test coverage!) into something you can work with.
Therefore next time you want to start again from scratch think very carefully, as it's almost never the right choice.