The subsidies to GA are MASSIVE

Doug wrote:
Having an airport is a point of pride in a community and
there is a safety aspect so far as medical transport goes.

Not really. You can helo someone out of a town without an airport.

But maybe
raising the aviation fuel tax would be appropriate here, trying to get
GA to pay it's way.

Are you kidding me? How about after everyone ELSE starts paying their
way? I promise you, GA contributes more to this country than some woman
on welfare with eight kids...and yet she's NEVER going to pay her way.

Why should she? Everyone ELSE gets a subsidy, why not her?

We're all against govt subisidies until it comes to OUR gov't subsidy.
Then strangely, we are in favor of THAT one.

Emily wrote:
Are you kidding me? How about after everyone ELSE starts paying their
way? I promise you, GA contributes more to this country than some woman
on welfare with eight kids...and yet she's NEVER going to pay her way.

"Skylune" wrote:
DAMN: the subsidies are enormous, as every informed person knows....

If you would just go to the FAA website and check out their materials on
their budget, you'd find more relevant information. The document titled
"Revised Air Traffic Organization Data Package" [1] contains breakdowns
with better information than you are supplying. An explanation is given
in [2] on what the tables rows and columns mean and how the information
was collected.

The subsidies do not appear to be "enormous". The FAA appears to be
spending more than gets from all aviation fees and taxes [3], but that
appears to be a recent phenomenon (if I understand their Trust Fund
white paper).

[1] http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...ta_Package.pdf

[2] http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...Background.pdf

[3] http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...Trust_Fund.pdf

"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
Now that I have again provided the amount of annual funding deriving from
GA fuel taxes (including AV GAS and Jet A), compare that to 2005 capital
grants to airports by looking at the ACTUAL 2005 DATA below. (Note that
these figures DO NOT include the $150K annual operating subsidy that many
GA airports receive.)

DAMN: the subsidies are enormous, as every informed person knows....

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...rants_2005.pdf




If anyone is serious about analysing this, here is a list of part 139
certified airports:

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...atus_table.xls

Part 139 certification is required to handle scheduled service over 30
passengers. It's also the basis for determining eligibility for most federal
grants.

In Massachusetts: Barnes, Westover, and Worcester are all part 139
certified, yet lune tries to call them GA airports.