Control Tower Controversy brewing in the FAA

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...
Tarver Engineering wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Dave" wrote in message
...

Who stands to gain from ATC privatization? Are there major

businesses

that do this now, and others that are quietly preparing to pick up

some

fat federal ATC contracts? Do these companies have any connection

to

the white house and friends?


It will be sold off to the airlines which makes a lot of sense. Sell a
national asset to companies that are struggling to either avoid or get

out

of bankruptcy. Maybe the White House think that putting ATC into their
balance sheets will give the airlines more strength.

An ATC responsive to common carriers has a very real apeal.

and to hell with GA too!


GA would not only get superior service, but $100,000,000 in the aviation
budget.

Can you name one country with private ATC where this is true?

These United States is where the money is offered and GA is valued.

Tarver Engineering wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Tarver Engineering wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message
...


"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...


"Dave" wrote in message
...


Who stands to gain from ATC privatization? Are there major

businesses


that do this now, and others that are quietly preparing to pick up

some


fat federal ATC contracts? Do these companies have any connection

to


the white house and friends?


It will be sold off to the airlines which makes a lot of sense. Sell a
national asset to companies that are struggling to either avoid or get

out


of bankruptcy. Maybe the White House think that putting ATC into their
balance sheets will give the airlines more strength.

An ATC responsive to common carriers has a very real apeal.

and to hell with GA too!


GA would not only get superior service, but $100,000,000 in the aviation
budget.


Can you name one country with private ATC where this is true?


These United States is where the money is offered and GA is valued.



Commercial aviation has far more money to spend than any GA operation
short of the Fortune 500 corporations. I agree that those with the
dough will get the service, but it won't be us who fly anything less
than 12,500 lbs.


Matt

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...
Tarver Engineering wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Tarver Engineering wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message
...


"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...


"Dave" wrote in message
...


Who stands to gain from ATC privatization? Are there major

businesses


that do this now, and others that are quietly preparing to pick up

some


fat federal ATC contracts? Do these companies have any connection

to


the white house and friends?


It will be sold off to the airlines which makes a lot of sense. Sell
a
national asset to companies that are struggling to either avoid or
get

out


of bankruptcy. Maybe the White House think that putting ATC into
their
balance sheets will give the airlines more strength.

An ATC responsive to common carriers has a very real apeal.

and to hell with GA too!


GA would not only get superior service, but $100,000,000 in the
aviation
budget.

Can you name one country with private ATC where this is true?

These United States is where the money is offered and GA is valued.

Commercial aviation has far more money to spend than any GA operation
short of the Fortune 500 corporations. I agree that those with the
dough will get the service, but it won't be us who fly anything less
than 12,500 lbs.

I believe small GA has value in R&D and maintaining Americans right to
travel. Without a change, what you can expect is for small GA to be frozen
out of some airports/regions.

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Commercial aviation has far more money to spend than any GA operation
short of the Fortune 500 corporations. I agree that those with the
dough will get the service, but it won't be us who fly anything less
than 12,500 lbs.

Why should it be any other way? "Those who bears the costs, gets the goods".

Tom S. wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Commercial aviation has far more money to spend than any GA operation
short of the Fortune 500 corporations. I agree that those with the
dough will get the service, but it won't be us who fly anything less
than 12,500 lbs.


Why should it be any other way? "Those who bears the costs, gets the goods".

That isn't true in vast sectors of the American economy. You don't even
begin to pay for what you use in cost of roads, etc., and people who
live in the city don't pay for the real cost of public transportation.
These are subsidized by general tax revenue just as general aviation is.
I don't you'd really want to pay via user fees for every service you
use, unless you live in a shack in Wyoming.


Matt

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...
Tom S. wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Commercial aviation has far more money to spend than any GA operation
short of the Fortune 500 corporations. I agree that those with the
dough will get the service, but it won't be us who fly anything less
than 12,500 lbs.


Why should it be any other way? "Those who bears the costs, gets the
goods".

That isn't true in vast sectors of the American economy. You don't even
begin to pay for what you use in cost of roads, etc., and people who
live in the city don't pay for the real cost of public transportation.
These are subsidized by general tax revenue just as general aviation is.
I don't you'd really want to pay via user fees for every service you
use, unless you live in a shack in Wyoming.

In that case, you should get behind privatization.

Tarver Engineering wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Tom S. wrote:

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...


Commercial aviation has far more money to spend than any GA operation
short of the Fortune 500 corporations. I agree that those with the
dough will get the service, but it won't be us who fly anything less
than 12,500 lbs.


Why should it be any other way? "Those who bears the costs, gets the

goods".

That isn't true in vast sectors of the American economy. You don't even
begin to pay for what you use in cost of roads, etc., and people who
live in the city don't pay for the real cost of public transportation.
These are subsidized by general tax revenue just as general aviation is.
I don't you'd really want to pay via user fees for every service you
use, unless you live in a shack in Wyoming.


In that case, you should get behind privatization.

Admitting that he's fresh out of logical arguments for his position,
Tarver tries a lame insult.


Matt

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Admitting that he's fresh out of logical arguments for his position,
Tarver tries a lame insult.


Tarver has never had a logical argument in any discussion.

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...
Tarver Engineering wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Tom S. wrote:

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...


Commercial aviation has far more money to spend than any GA operation
short of the Fortune 500 corporations. I agree that those with the
dough will get the service, but it won't be us who fly anything less
than 12,500 lbs.


Why should it be any other way? "Those who bears the costs, gets the

goods".

That isn't true in vast sectors of the American economy. You don't even
begin to pay for what you use in cost of roads, etc., and people who
live in the city don't pay for the real cost of public transportation.
These are subsidized by general tax revenue just as general aviation is.
I don't you'd really want to pay via user fees for every service you
use, unless you live in a shack in Wyoming.


In that case, you should get behind privatization.

Admitting that he's fresh out of logical arguments for his position,
Tarver tries a lame insult.

Asking you to join me and AOPA in advocating privatization is not intended
to be an insult.

Tarver Engineering wrote:

Can you name one country with private ATC where this is true?

These United States is where the money is offered and GA is valued.

Translation: "No".

George Patterson
The actions taken by the New Hampshire Episcopalians (ie. inducting a gay
bishop) are an affront to Christians everywhere. I am just thankful that
the church's founder, Henry VIII, and his wife Catherine of Aragon, and his
wife Anne Boleyn, and his wife Jane Seymour, and his wife Anne of Cleves,
and his wife Katherine Howard, and his wife Catherine Parr are no longer
here to suffer through this assault on traditional Christian marriages.