FAA paper Noise Attenuation Properties of Noise-Canceling Headsets

On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 07:09:20 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:


wrote in message
oups.com...
Somebody wasted my tax dollars coming up with this piece
of "obvious" drivel? Try them on and see what you can
hear?

Phhhhtttt. These guys are pikers, Ron. Hell, at least they're
studying something quasi-useful.

Here's a good one: There are "government studies" going on nationwide
-- to the tune of tens of millions of taxpayer dollars -- trying to
figure out why people are FAT, as if this is some sort of mystery.

Closer to (my) home, let's talk about the hundreds of thousands of
dollars spent on "environmental impact studies" for our runway
extension in Iowa City. As if any one of us couldn't have written a
fact-filled report on any given weekend, describing the effect of
adding 1000 feet of pavement to the end of the runway.

Or, perhaps, we should talk about the University of Iowa's "driving
simulator" that has cost millions, and generated little real science?
Or their ongoing millions in grants to develop "synthetic vision" --
when it's already for sale in ads in every aviation magazine.

The more you look, the sicker you become. It's best not to think about
it.

Hey! They gotta **** away $2.7 TRILLION _somehow_. Gotta keep up the
hysterics about deficits, ya' know!

Buying off voters with illegal pork is a lot cheaper than bribing them with
your own money.

That's why they need user fees. Taxpayers won't put up with such
waste, so they need to get money from people who have no say in the
matter.

RK Henry

"RK Henry" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 07:09:20 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:

Hey! They gotta **** away $2.7 TRILLION _somehow_. Gotta keep up the
hysterics about deficits, ya' know!

Buying off voters with illegal pork is a lot cheaper than bribing them
with
your own money.

That's why they need user fees. Taxpayers won't put up with such
waste, so they need to get money from people who have no say in the
matter.

The taxpayers have been putting up with $$$BILLIONS wasted for DECADES. How
do you think we got to a $2.7 Trillion Federal budget (not to mention
another $2.4 trillion on the state and local level)?

With User Fee's and the right arrangement (significantly different than we
have now), we have much more control over the next generations ATC system
development. See Robert Poole's article on this in the November issue of
_Professional Pilot_ magazine.

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

With User Fee's and the right arrangement (significantly different than we
have now), we have much more control over the next generations ATC system
development.

How do you figure? With airlines at the helm and GA paying the bill,
what control do you figure we have?

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 15:57:24 GMT, Jose
wrote in :

With User Fee's and the right arrangement (significantly different than we
have now), we have much more control over the next generations ATC system
development.

How do you figure? With airlines at the helm and GA paying the bill,
what control do you figure we have?

Not only that, as currently envisioned, aviation user fees will remove
congressional oversight of the FAA ATC budget! Aviation user fees are
clearly another special interest boondoggle to hijack an inherently
governmental function for private control and profit, IMO.