Avgas in France has reached $7.50/gal !

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

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

The subsidy surely does exist, and it's huge. As I recall from
discussions about our local airport:

- The FAA, from the Federal Airport Improvement Program, will pay 90%
of the costs for airport improvement (runway widening or extension or
resurfacing, taxiways, aprons, and so forth). There's no way that the
Feds' AIP is paid completely by aviation related taxes.

- The remaining 10% must come from local or state. Here in California
there is a state airport department (part of the state DOT), and sure
enough the funds they collect get stolen most years to the General
Fund. But at most they would pay for 10%.

- Then the airport owner is usually required to kick in 1% to 2% so
the state doesn't pay the full 10%. In our case the Univ. of
California owns our airport, and they get airport money not from
taxes, but from hangar rentals and gasoline sales. I don't know
whether the airport is a source or sink of money for the UC.

GA is highly subsidized in the US, and like Mike I won't comment
further if that's good or bad.

- The FAA, from the Federal Airport Improvement Program, will pay 90%
of the costs for airport improvement (runway widening or extension or
resurfacing, taxiways, aprons, and so forth).

That's because the Feds have decided that maintaining an aviation
infrastructure is in the interest of the country, and they understand that a
local government entity is too small to pay the entire bill. Thus, they
spread the cost over many users, rather than over just the few in (for
example) Iowa City, Iowa.

Now I suppose that premise is open to debate, too -- but that's the concept
at the heart of the Federal subsidy. In that regard, runways are no
different than freeways. We all pay for them -- and we all get to use
them, if we choose.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

- The FAA, from the Federal Airport Improvement Program, will pay 90%
of the costs for airport improvement (runway widening or extension or
resurfacing, taxiways, aprons, and so forth).


The FAA pays 95% now.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:8C5ae.8520$r53.7576@attbi_s21...
- The FAA, from the Federal Airport Improvement Program, will pay 90%
of the costs for airport improvement (runway widening or extension or
resurfacing, taxiways, aprons, and so forth).

That's because the Feds have decided that maintaining an aviation
infrastructure is in the interest of the country, and they understand that
a local government entity is too small to pay the entire bill. Thus,
they spread the cost over many users, rather than over just the few in
(for example) Iowa City, Iowa.

Now I suppose that premise is open to debate, too -- but that's the
concept at the heart of the Federal subsidy. In that regard, runways are
no different than freeways. We all pay for them -- and we all get to use
them, if we choose.
--
Jay Honeck

No, there is a fundemental difference. The road tax on gasoline pays for
all the roads and the taxes on aviation do not come close to paying for
airports. Most of the 90% is coming from non-aviation sources. Aviation is
heavily subsidized but so is everybody with an AGI under something between
$100K and $200K/yr which is most taxpayers. Same thing with SS, recipients
are getting way more in benefits than they paid in.

Ask your local FBO's how much fuel they sell and what the taxes are and
compare it to the airport budget then estimate the number of flights, figure
$10 per weather briefing and see how the numbers come out.

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