Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Judah writes:

Your statement is equivalent to saying that commercial land vehicles
(cars & trucks) are a necessity, but private ones are not.

No, it's not even remotely close to that.

I think it is exactly the same, except replace the word "land" with "air".

A lot of airports would simply disappear without GA, as they would no
longer serve any purpose. The airlines don't need them.

Your definition of GA is inconsistent. Here you say GA is anything but
airlines. Before you said GA is anything that is not commercial.

Commercial aviators can be trained from scratch in simulators; small
aircraft are only used because current regulations require it, but
regulations can be changed.

I don't think that is practical. How many hours of training are required to
learn to fly safely in a simulator? The pilot wouldn't even understand the
behavior or proper use of Trim without any actual flight time. This is
safe?

No, I've seen the picture objectively, and not through the rose-colored
goggles worn by many pilots. The fact is, general aviation by private
pilots could disappear in a puff of smoke tomorrow, and it would have no
effect at all on society at large.

Your goggles are equally as colored as mine, if not moreso.

It's important to keep this in mind when trying to influence or shape
public policy with respect to GA. The vast majority of the population
cares nothing about your flying, and would not miss it if it were gone;
so if you want to persuade that population, you need a method that
doesn't depend on the subjective appeal of flying an aircraft (which
doesn't exist for most people). Indeed, if you concentrate too much on
this aspect, you may alienate the majority, and you definitely don't
want to do that.

I'm not shaping public policy.