Fred said:
Precisely...averages, but I want to read about marginal costs of
GA, or why this approach is not valid. In our Class B area, it's
basically about bizjets, burning like $50/hour in fuel tax. It's
very clear to me that if those guys weren't up there, only one ATC
position -- the "satellite controller" -- goes away. But knowing
gov't from the inside as I do, FAA will find a position for that
guy in some understaffed place. A net loss to the Treasury. User
fees are all about getting additional money that Congress won't
provide through the appropriations process, unless they repeal the
fuel tax. Is that seriously the plan?

Fred F.

I don't think the plan is to eliminate the fuel tax, but who knows. I
agree that this is about getting additional funding because of pressure on
General Fund subsidies.

As far as using the marginal cost approach, I don't think this is the
right way to measure the costs GA imposes on the system relative to the
economic benefits and the taxes paid in. If one additional light plane
(or commercial airplane) were to take to the skies, the marginal cost
would be nil, or close.

I think you are right though, that if air traffic decreases, funding
levels will stay about where they are for FAA staffing....