Jet-A users get screwed

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .

And obviously way over your head.


Bertie

Wow, yeah, you got him there Squirty. Really good point.


.......what was it?

God you're stupid.

"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in news:KXbRj.58533$QC.11776
@newsfe20.lga:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. .

And obviously way over your head.


Bertie

Wow, yeah, you got him there Squirty. Really good point.


......what was it?


Over your head, obviously.

God you're stupid.



Nope.

Bertie

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:YwaRj.139457$yE1.111620@attbi_s21...
No...that's a "false alternative".

In what way?

It's a classic breech of logic - it portrays that X would not happen at all
if not Y. It deliberately confuses a _convenience_ with a _necessity_.

The number is likely correct, but it's relatively meaningless.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:YwaRj.139457$yE1.111620@attbi_s21...
No...that's a "false alternative".

In what way?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:YwaRj.139457$yE1.111620@attbi_s21...
No...that's a "false alternative".

In what way?

See also: the "broken window fallacy".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_window_fallacy (Shifting economic costs)

Wow, short pants that can think for themselves. What a concept!!!



It's a classic breech of logic

Jay Honeck wrote:
I'm a big fan or airports, but I'm also an engineer that believes in
data driven arguments, not emotions. Saying that the airport costs
$112K per year is so grossly misleading that isn't even funny.

The direct, taxpayer support of Iowa City voters for our airport is
$112K per year, and they reap $5.5 million in economic return. Those
are the facts.

So, Iowa City taxpayers pay no state and federal taxes? Wow, I'm going
to move out! How are the housing prices??


Now, if you want to talk about state airport expenditures, like grants
for taxiway paving and hangar construction, that's another story. At
our airport these are fairly rare (too rare, most airport users would
assert) and are similar to what our state gummint spends maintaining and
building other gummint structures and facilities. Our runways haven't
been repaved since WWII, so I figure the state has gotten their money's
worth out of them.

Now, if you want to talk FEDERAL expenditures, those are REALLY rare,
and are so laced with stupidity, pork and lard as to drive strong men to
drink. For example, Rwy 25 here at KIOW has finally been extended 500
feet, and is now slated to open in July.

So where do these funds come from since Iowa City residents don't pay
state and local taxes? Are you saying that a PA resident like me is
paying for your airport??


This project has been in the works since (I kid you not) WWII. It was
first proposed sixty years ago, and denied or delayed countless times.
Every time it was proposed, new, more stringent regulations were in
force, so all previous EPA studies were invalidated and had to be redone
-- at huge expense.

If you add up the numerous "environmental impact statements",
"obstruction mitigation studies", and all the other ridiculous crap that
the FAA requires, that stretch of pavement becomes the single most
expensive piece of concrete in the history of the world. I can
personally count several MILLION dollars for that runway extension,
which you or I would have had paved for a tiny fraction of that...

In fact, if the interstate system was paved using the same criterion as
our runway extension, we STILL wouldn't have ten miles of it finished,
some 50 years after it was begun.

Airport support is a complicated subject.

Yes, that is a fact.

Matt