What's this? a politcal rebuttal that is informed and well thought out
and not full of flames? What the heck happened to the usenet I've come
to know? Seriously, nice work Dude.

I agree that what you have written below is the crux of our disagreement
on this issue. You feel that GA would have flourished if left to its
own devices and that the infrastructure that we now use is more an
imposition to please the big lines than an essential part of our GA
experience. I believe that GA would never have been as widespread or as
successful as it is if it didn't have all that infrastructure to get a
relatively free ride off of. Fair enough, we just see it differently.

And we both agree on politicans of both parties at the local level being
bought and owned by development interests


Dude wrote:

After writing my response, I am coming back to the top here to perhaps save
you time, and because I realize a key point. We are mostly in disagreement
based on my belief that you cannot fairly account a pro rata share to GA
users because most of what we use is forced on us due to the needs of other
users of the airspace. Since we are being accepted into the airspace as
secondary users, it is only appropriate that the accounting of costs keep
this in mind.