The purpose behind many government proposals is not to raise
money [revenue][ or to reduce crime]but to reduce certain
actions, such as flying or gun ownership.

A businessman flying a CE172 on a business trip to see
clients is "bad" while an airliner taking 100 holiday
tourists to the beach or Las Vegas to gamble is "good."

Rich people fly, so make them pay is the war cry of the user
fee faction. Just like luxury taxes on rich boaters almost
killed the boat-building industry, these people don't see
any advantage to a viable network of airports nation-wide.
To "them" 200 airline terminals are enough. They don't
understand that in order to train pilots you need airports,
airports need business which means travel, travel requires
airports at every city. It doesn't need 12,000 feet of 3
foot thick concrete or a 24/7 tower, it does need a GPS
approach, a remote communications outlet, a telephone
outside and fuel and rental cars.

No airplanes sales means airports close, no airports means
fewer student starts. Higher fees reduce profits. Let's
kill the industry, put up fences at all airports, require
security checks on the "airport kid" and impose new
"services" and then require the user pay whether they want
the service or not.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"Ron Lee" wrote in message
...
| Greg Farris wrote:
|
| Not really. If overall costs go up, people fly fewer
hours, and are
| rustier when they do fly.
|
| mmmmm..... Not so convincing.That would have to be
demonstrated.
| I do think the intial argument is convincing - if
pilots are charged money
| for a briefing, then many will launch without it. Same
for VFR flight
| following. That's a good argument against such a
ystem - however the
| solution is just as simple as has been suggested here -
charge for it even if
| it isn't specifically used!!
|
| Greg, how will they charge for something even if not used?
Take my
| normal flying. On cross countries I use flight following
but no
| flight plan. If I don't use flight following how do they
charge for
| it unless it is landing fee based or similar? Seems
that the fuel
| tax does the same thing already at perhaps a lower
collection cost as
| mentioned by others.
|
| Ron Lee
|