Mxsmanic wrote:

Gig 601XL Builder writes:
Tell me what is so restrictive about it. The type of flight it
authorizes would cover 90% of the recreational GA flight in the US.

It's restrictive because it wouldn't allow me to fly in a way that
would make flying worthwhile. I don't just want to putter around in
a circle.

The pilot licensing process is not restricting you, lack of money is
restricting you. You have champain dreams on a tap water budget. Your desire
to (as you said) fly a King Air under IFR in and out of IMC is shared by
almost everyone. Your distain for recreational VFR flying is however shared
by almost no one in this newsgroup. And many pilots look upon the licensing
steps as challenges met and experience earned. You choose to skip past all
that, run to the head of the line, and expound on flying "experience" you've
never had.

There is one way that the licensing process is restrictive in a very good
way: It protects the safety of the public. It places legal and functional
hurdles before those with "too much money & too little judgement", although
it leaves wiggle room (Kennedy, Munson, Lidle). And most importantly it
gives the public comfort that the person sitting at the front of the metal
tube has met the minimum standards to pilot them to a safe destination.

And you seem to want to bypass all that, stand with the people who have
walked that road, and insist upon being taken as an expert. Not here, not
ever!