![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 20:55:03 GMT, Jose
wrote: Skylune, in a different, way OT thread, intones... It kinda reminds me of AOPA logic. For example, user fees: they argue simultaneously that (1) GA uses very few FAA services and therefore user fees are not necessary and (2) user fees would impose a ruinous financial burden on the GA industry and reduce safety (because pilots might be less inclined to use ATC, flight following, etc.) This is weird and disingenous reasoning. Serveral things need to examined. 1) If user fees are implemented, then there will a large majority of users that will avoid them by flying to places where they are non-existant or decline services. If these fees can't be avoided, then people will stop flying. Either way, the funding will not be raised. Private pilots will be taxed out of the sky. Should I be squeezed out of airspace in favor of commercial operations? No. 2) Commercial operators should pay a larger share because businesses exploit resources for profit and are very efficient at it. I don't mean this in a negative way, it is just the purpose of business. Highway use taxes are much higher for commercial operators because they consume percentage wise more of the highway infrastructure. I don't know about you, but I've never used a weigh station or an escape ramp. The weigh stations are there because companies were overloading the roads. Should I be penalized because businesses are require more overhead? No. 3) Left unchecked, business entities will consume all of a given resource. SPAM is a wonderful example of this. Email is free and most of it is commercial. Eventually, email will not be free and why is that? Because of commercial abuse of the resource. Fees balance social cost. Airlines pack in flights and require increased infrastructure to support their schedule. If they spaced their flights over a 24 hour period, congestion would be less of a problem. I as a private individual can choose to fly during non-peak hours and I do. The ATC infrstructure is not designed for me. Should I pay for large percentage of it? No. Jim http://www.unconventional-wisdom.org |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
User Fees | Dude | Owning | 36 | March 19th 05 05:57 PM |
NAA Fees to the US Team | Doug Jacobs | Soaring | 2 | October 29th 04 01:09 AM |
LXE installation XP, strict user permissions. | Hannes | Soaring | 0 | March 21st 04 11:15 PM |
The Irony of Boeing/Jeppesen Being Charged User Fees! | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 9 | January 23rd 04 12:23 PM |
Angel Flight pilots: Ever have an FBO refuse to wave landing fees? | Peter R. | Piloting | 11 | August 2nd 03 01:20 AM |