NATCA Going Down in Flames

Why don't you answer my questions?

Because after several years of on-line sparring with you, Steven, I've
learned that your method of debate is to simply keep asking questions
until the original point is lost. It's counter-productive and results
in uncontrolled thread-drift.

If it improved FSS why wouldn't it improve ATC?

I firmly believe that privatization WOULD make ATC better.

Why?

Because competitition always improves performance. If you (as an
employee) know that you can be replaced tomorrow by someone younger,
stronger, smarter, and cheaper, you will work just *that* much harder
to be a great controller. If, on the other hand, you think you're
invulnerable to discipline by management because of work rules, union
contracts, etc., a major incentive to "go the extra mile" is gone.

It's the primary reason communism fails as an economic system. Thus,
privatizing ATC would inevitably improve it.

But that is certainly NOT going to help GA.


Why not? How could an improved ATC not benefit all users?

I don't care about *all* users. GA doesn't *need* improved ATC, and
therefore shouldn't be made to pay for it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

I firmly believe that privatization WOULD make ATC better.
Why?
Because competitition always improves performance.

Privatization does not mean competition.

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Because competitition always improves performance.

Privatization does not mean competition.

You think there's no one waiting in the wings to bid against
Lockheed-Martin?

I'll bet there's at least half a dozen companies, all willing to bid on
the ATC contract, all promising to do it "cheaper-faster-better"...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

In article om,
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

I'll bet there's at least half a dozen companies, all willing to bid on
the ATC contract, all promising to do it "cheaper-faster-better"...

I believe it was one of the Mercury astronauts that made a comment about
being bothered by the fact that the construction of the capsules and
rockets went to the lowest bidder. And there were many more companies
around then doing the business than there are today.

john smith wrote:
In article om,
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

I'll bet there's at least half a dozen companies, all willing to bid on
the ATC contract, all promising to do it "cheaper-faster-better"...

I believe it was one of the Mercury astronauts that made a comment about
being bothered by the fact that the construction of the capsules and
rockets went to the lowest bidder.

You might be thinking about Gus Grissom's problems with the Apollo
capsule...he hung a lemon in the simulator.

Jay Honeck wrote:
Because competitition always improves performance.

Privatization does not mean competition.


You think there's no one waiting in the wings to bid against
Lockheed-Martin?

I'll bet there's at least half a dozen companies, all willing to bid on
the ATC contract, all promising to do it "cheaper-faster-better"...

That isn't quite the same as what we traditionally think of as free
market competition. In a normal free market, several companies are
providing roughly the same product or service at the same time. So you
can compare the performance of multiple companies simultaneously. That
is a whole lot different than serially switching from one low bidder to
the next and HOPING that the next company really can do what they say.

Matt

You think there's no one waiting in the wings to bid against
Lockheed-Martin?

OF course - this is the same kind of competition we had in the cable TV
industry in the early days. The only reason there's any competition in
Cable is that the internet came, and even so, there are many political
barriers between the telephone and the cable.

Once they get the contract and have done it for a while, the startup
costs for new entrants will be just as high, but Lockheed won't have
those startup costs any more. It will be harder to bid against them.
They will also be politically entrenched.

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ps.com...
You think there's no one waiting in the wings to bid against
Lockheed-Martin?

I'll bet there's at least half a dozen companies, all willing to bid on
the ATC contract, all promising to do it "cheaper-faster-better"...

Who will just hire the LM workers as contractors and all you've done is
change the upper management...

and all you've done is
change the upper management...

Which, to be fair, sometimes makes a difference.

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Grumman-581" wrote in message
...
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ps.com...
You think there's no one waiting in the wings to bid against
Lockheed-Martin?

I'll bet there's at least half a dozen companies, all willing to bid on
the ATC contract, all promising to do it "cheaper-faster-better"...

Who will just hire the LM workers as contractors and all you've done is
change the upper management...

Kinda like the Yankee's and Billy (I didn't punch that doggie)Martin...