Avgas in France has reached $7.50/gal !

("Peter Duniho" wrote)
snips
* Even if it were "dunderheaded" to do so, calling an entire country
"dunderheaded" is still offensive. It's no different than calling all
Americans "dunderheaded", just because 50% of them were "dunderheaded"
enough to reelect a president who willfully fabricated justification for a
war. The other 50% weren't, and saying they are is offensive.

Bob F, I appreciate you pointing out that this isn't so much about getting
Jay to understand his errors (a futile goal, if ever there was one) as it
is about showing the rest of the readership that not all participants of
this newsgroup are as narrow-minded and bigoted as Jay. But I think we've
accomplished that goal...we're not going to get anywhere by continuing to
feed the bigots.


BTW, why is "offensive" always assumed to be a 10? Or, better yet ...11?

Bigots? Racist? Narrow minded? What is and what is not offensive? These seem
like Hate Speech codes on our college campuses.

Is there any sense of proportionality left around here? Dealing with
"correctly PC sensitive types" is like dealing with gang-bangers in the
hood - I perceive you to be diss'n me (maybe someone's tennis shoes got
stepped on) ...bang! Everything is go for the guns.

'These people are dunderheads for over taxing GA' is no longer the starting
point for a fun discussion ...bang.

There goes the neighborhood.


Montblack
"My dear fellow! This isn't Spain ... this is England!"
A Man For All Seasons (1966)
Winner of six Academy Awards - including Best

'These people are dunderheads for over taxing GA' is no longer the
starting
point for a fun discussion ...bang.

There goes the neighborhood.

Thanks, Mont, but -- as you may have noticed -- there are very few topics
which *don't* offend Duniho and "Fry". I dare say, it's hard to recall the
last "fun" discussion that included either of them.

It's apparently in their makeup to be in a permanent state of politically
correct bluster. I mean, my gosh -- when we can't even bash someone for
charging $7.80 (it's gone up) per gallon for avgas -- on an AVIATION
newsgroup! -- there is very little room for discussion with people of their
stripe.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:Knz9e.4504$c24.1791@attbi_s72...
'These people are dunderheads for over taxing GA' is no longer the
starting
point for a fun discussion ...bang.

There goes the neighborhood.

Thanks, Mont, but -- as you may have noticed -- there are very few topics
which *don't* offend Duniho and "Fry". I dare say, it's hard to recall
the last "fun" discussion that included either of them.

It's apparently in their makeup to be in a permanent state of politically
correct bluster. I mean, my gosh -- when we can't even bash someone for
charging $7.80 (it's gone up) per gallon for avgas -- on an AVIATION
newsgroup! -- there is very little room for discussion with people of
their stripe.

Jay when you have to pay $7.80 for AVGAS complain and swear to give up
flying.

Those of us who do have to pay $7.80 are the ones entitled to gripe about
it. However I am also aware of where my tax £'s go and frankly I do not
worry too much about it. Why, apart from money wasted on some dunderheaded
war, most gets put to good use.
My parents get good medical treatment and they do not have to pay a cent for
it, I put a son through Oxford University for $30,000 (mostly for beer I
think) and many other things.

I consider flying a hobby, a luxury and indulgence. I do not fly to support
my job, British Airways is always the best for that.

What I don't do is take flying for granted. Here its a privilege not a right
but I have to accept that the majority of the country don't give a damn
about it and would not care a jot if it was stopped.

So while I can I will pay my $7.80 a gallon and my eurocontrol charges and
enjoy it and every so often slip over to the US and enjoy flying for $3 a
gallon and be subsidised by your tax $$s. That will taste sweet, knowing
that you are subsidising my flying.

So while I can I will pay my $7.80 a gallon and my eurocontrol charges and
enjoy it and every so often slip over to the US and enjoy flying for $3 a
gallon and be subsidised by your tax $$s. That will taste sweet, knowing
that you are subsidising my flying.

Chris, it will only feel like we're subsidizing your flying, after the way
you've been abused. Our airports are 100% supported by the (relatively
small) taxes on our fuel. (Or, rather, they WOULD be, if our legislatures
didn't continually rape the fund for all sorts of things that have nothing
to do with aviation.)

Your obvious enjoyment of such outrageous taxation indicates that you are
apparently suffering from a peculiar psychological side effect of persistent
abuse, whereby you end up falling in love with the prison guards who abused
you the most. This was well documented during World War II, and can be
cured with extensive counseling.

Or a major tax cut.

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:97A9e.4563$c24.215@attbi_s72...

Chris, it will only feel like we're subsidizing your flying, after the way
you've been abused. Our airports are 100% supported by the (relatively
small) taxes on our fuel. (Or, rather, they WOULD be, if our
legislatures didn't continually rape the fund for all sorts of things that
have nothing to do with aviation.)

--
Jay Honeck


Jay, this is total BS. The amount raised from the tax on avgas is $60
million annually. It doesn't even begin to pay for flight service stations
nevermind airports or anything else. Even AOPA achknowleged this in a
recent magazine. If we were to support airports with a gas tax gas would be
$7.80...or more...

Mike
MU-2

Jay, this is total BS. The amount raised from the tax on avgas is $60
million annually. It doesn't even begin to pay for flight service
stations nevermind airports or anything else. Even AOPA achknowleged this
in a recent magazine. If we were to support airports with a gas tax gas
would be $7.80...or more...

Allow me to re-phrase that more precisely.

In Iowa, if the Iowa legislature didn't keep spending all of the tax money
brought in by aviation on things other than aviation, we wouldn't be
scraping for money to repave our ramp. We would have ample money in the
coffers to properly maintain our airport(s).

Hell, during a recent "budget crisis" year (aren't they all?), they
eliminated ALL spending on aviation in the state. But they sure didn't cut
any taxes.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:sp_9e.6987$WI3.4028@attbi_s71...
Jay, this is total BS. The amount raised from the tax on avgas is $60
million annually. It doesn't even begin to pay for flight service
stations nevermind airports or anything else. Even AOPA achknowleged
this in a recent magazine. If we were to support airports with a gas tax
gas would be $7.80...or more...

Allow me to re-phrase that more precisely.

In Iowa, if the Iowa legislature didn't keep spending all of the tax money
brought in by aviation on things other than aviation, we wouldn't be
scraping for money to repave our ramp. We would have ample money in the
coffers to properly maintain our airport(s).

Hell, during a recent "budget crisis" year (aren't they all?), they
eliminated ALL spending on aviation in the state. But they sure didn't
cut any taxes.


While the states should keep their promises, aviation would still be
subsidized. Aviation has a very small number of participants exclusively
using a large amount of infrastructure. I am not saying that this subsidy
is good or bad but I am merely asserting that it exists.

Mike
MU-2

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:97A9e.4563$c24.215@attbi_s72...

Chris, it will only feel like we're subsidizing your flying, after the
way
you've been abused. Our airports are 100% supported by the (relatively
small) taxes on our fuel. (Or, rather, they WOULD be, if our
legislatures didn't continually rape the fund for all sorts of things
that
have nothing to do with aviation.)

--
Jay Honeck


Jay, this is total BS. The amount raised from the tax on avgas is $60
million annually. It doesn't even begin to pay for flight service
stations
nevermind airports or anything else. Even AOPA achknowleged this in a
recent magazine. If we were to support airports with a gas tax gas would
be
$7.80...or more...


Does the tax on Jet-A and other fees support the airlines usages?

Has anyone ever done a complete breakout of costs vs. revenue of the air
transport system at all levels?

Interestingly, I recall a few articles a few years ago the over-the-road
trucks pay roughly half of taxes and fees for the interstate and state
highways, but they cause more than 3/4ths of wear-and-tear and damage.

When someone else foots the bill, new and more efficient processes and
technologies never seem to get implemented as quickly as when we pay our own
way (like good, mature adults).


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
hlink.net...


Jay, this is total BS. The amount raised from the tax on avgas is $60
million annually. It doesn't even begin to pay for flight service
stations
nevermind airports or anything else. Even AOPA achknowleged this in a
recent magazine. If we were to support airports with a gas tax gas
would
be
$7.80...or more...


Does the tax on Jet-A and other fees support the airlines usages?

Has anyone ever done a complete breakout of costs vs. revenue of the air
transport system at all levels?

Interestingly, I recall a few articles a few years ago the over-the-road
trucks pay roughly half of taxes and fees for the interstate and state
highways, but they cause more than 3/4ths of wear-and-tear and damage.

When someone else foots the bill, new and more efficient processes and
technologies never seem to get implemented as quickly as when we pay our
own
way (like good, mature adults).



One last thing; the current FSS is, IMO, a throwback to the olden days
before long distance phones and high speed communications. Every big city
doesn't need a FSS, and especially doesn't need several. My take is it's a
jobs program for otherwise unemployable controllers ( :~) ) just like most
of the "education" system.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:97A9e.4563$c24.215@attbi_s72...

Chris, it will only feel like we're subsidizing your flying, after the
way
you've been abused. Our airports are 100% supported by the (relatively
small) taxes on our fuel. (Or, rather, they WOULD be, if our
legislatures didn't continually rape the fund for all sorts of things
that
have nothing to do with aviation.)

--
Jay Honeck


Jay, this is total BS. The amount raised from the tax on avgas is $60
million annually. It doesn't even begin to pay for flight service
stations
nevermind airports or anything else. Even AOPA achknowleged this in a
recent magazine. If we were to support airports with a gas tax gas would
be
$7.80...or more...


Does the tax on Jet-A and other fees support the airlines usages?


The passenger and fuel taxes are all mixed together. I used avgas tax and
FSS because almost all the FSS users are flying piston engine airplanes.
There really aren't any other fees that don't go to the airport owner.

Has anyone ever done a complete breakout of costs vs. revenue of the air
transport system at all levels?

If you consider that most of the system exists for the airlines, with GA as
an incremental user then the airlines are getting a pretty good deal. If
you divide the cost among all users by the number of flights then GA is
getting a good deal. People try to parse the facts to support their
position. Another way to look at it is that GA pilots and companies with
business aircraft pay income taxes and most airlines do not. The airlines
would counter that they pay wages and their employees pay taxes. It goes on
forever. One thing is clear though; piston GA is not paying its way through
fuel taxes as many believe. If the airplane burns 10GPH and flys 100hrs/yr
the fuel tax is only about $200/yr which doesn't cover much of anything.

Interestingly, I recall a few articles a few years ago the over-the-road
trucks pay roughly half of taxes and fees for the interstate and state
highways, but they cause more than 3/4ths of wear-and-tear and damage.

I recall a statistic that one max weight semi truck caused as much damage as
2300cars over the same road. This implies that trucking is indeed
subsidized. The railroads have to maintain their own tracks. The system
doesn't change because there are more truckers than railroads.

When someone else foots the bill, new and more efficient processes and
technologies never seem to get implemented as quickly as when we pay our
own
way (like good, mature adults).

Yes I would support an IFR system like in the UK. You fly without radar
separation below certain altitudes and you don't have to talk to ATC. AFAIK
there has never been a collision.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO