A Boyer acolyte makes the following statement publicly (regarding user
fees):

"That is why it's vital that we ensure airports get the funding they need
to maintain safety and generate revenue."

They need to "get funding" to "generate revenue."

LOL. Sounds like when Democrats talk about "investment," meaning raising
taxes to provide more money to public sector unions. If these airports are
such economic "engines," they wouldn't need annual subsidies. AOPA at
least calls the subsidies a "lifeline," thus implying that many would
cease to exist if users had to pay, rather than taxpayers and commercial
passengers, which generate virtually ALL OF THE REVENUE in the ATF.

The best part is that these comments were made in conference in CHICAGO!
Apparently, the economic armegeddon resulting from closing Megis has yet
to occur...

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> A Boyer acolyte makes the following statement publicly (regarding user
> fees):
>
> "That is why it's vital that we ensure airports get the funding they need
> to maintain safety and generate revenue."
>
> They need to "get funding" to "generate revenue."

Sometimes you strike me as an extremely intelligent fellow.

Sometimes you strike me as a complete idiot.

Today is the latter.

But Steve, sometimes I am joking around.
Not about the acolyte's quotes though. I think it is hysterical funny
that they "need funding to generate revenue."

Man, if anyone can outdo The Onion, it is Boyer's minions.

Of course you need funding to generate revenue. If you don't, the
infrastructure will crumble and there will be no business revenue. The
reason all the major GA manufacturers originated in the U.S. is because
of our publicly funded infrastructure. The WW2 also had much to do with
it, but that too was publicly funded. Too many Americans think that
only the poor need public assistance and everyone else rose up on their
own feet. The weathly reap the benefits of our public system far more
than the poor.


Skylune wrote:
> But Steve, sometimes I am joking around.
> Not about the acolyte's quotes though. I think it is hysterical funny
> that they "need funding to generate revenue."
>
> Man, if anyone can outdo The Onion, it is Boyer's minions.

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> But Steve, sometimes I am joking around.
> Not about the acolyte's quotes though. I think it is hysterical funny
> that they "need funding to generate revenue."
>
> Man, if anyone can outdo The Onion, it is Boyer's minions.
>

So you can operate a business and produce revenue without funding. Please
tell us how. For that matter right it down and sell it on late night
infomercials.

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...
>
> "Skylune" > wrote in message
> lkaboutaviation.com...
> > But Steve, sometimes I am joking around.
> > Not about the acolyte's quotes though. I think it is hysterical funny
> > that they "need funding to generate revenue."
> >
> > Man, if anyone can outdo The Onion, it is Boyer's minions.
> >
>
> So you can operate a business and produce revenue without funding. Please
> tell us how. For that matter right it down and sell it on late night
> infomercials.
>
>

How would you pay for the infomercials without funds?

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> A Boyer acolyte makes the following statement publicly (regarding user
> fees):
>
> "That is why it's vital that we ensure airports get the funding they need
> to maintain safety and generate revenue."
>
> They need to "get funding" to "generate revenue."

Have you ever heard of the term 'Venture Capitalist"?

How about "Investor"?

How about "capital formation"?

I've heard that Americans are economically ignorant, but this is ridiculous.

Michelle

What businesses run on annual government operating subsidies, and get
federal capital subsidies?

What other businesses need a federal "lifeline?"

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> What businesses run on annual government operating subsidies, and get
> federal capital subsidies?

Fire Department
Police Department
School Department
Street Department
Public Works
Railroad

Chrysler
Delta





>
> What other businesses need a federal "lifeline?"
>
>
>

"Michelle Settle" > writes:

> "Skylune" > wrote in message

> > [...] "That is why it's vital that we ensure airports get the
> > funding they need to maintain safety and generate revenue."
> >
> > They need to "get funding" to "generate revenue."
>
> Have you ever heard of the term 'Venture Capitalist"?
> How about "Investor"?
> [...]

Thing is, airports don't tend to be owned by venture capitalists.
Governmental "investment" in them tends to be of the sort of
expenditure that anticipates only ancialliary benefits (like survival
of dependent businesses, infrastructure capability, social stability
and whatnot), and not direct financial benefit in terms of net profit
returned to the "investor" (federal? taxpayer).

- FChE

Skylune wrote:
> What businesses run on annual government operating subsidies, and get
> federal capital subsidies?
>
> What other businesses need a federal "lifeline?"

Every business done, in that almost all businesses these day depend on
some mechanism to transport goods from one place to another.

The airports are just like the public roads.

The first six are not businesses, they are government services.

Chrysler, Delta did get federal bailouts (which I would oppose,
politically), but they do not get annual operating subsidies from the
gubmint.

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> The first six are not businesses, they are government services.

As are *all* airports that receive federal funding.

Spencer Airport (where I fly) is not eligible for federal funding because it
is privately owned.

>
> Chrysler, Delta did get federal bailouts (which I would oppose,
> politically), but they do not get annual operating subsidies from the
> gubmint.
>

Yes, but with one major exception. Federal gasoline taxes generate more
money annually than highway grants.

AV gas taxes contibute about 2% or so to the Aviation Trust Fund. The
rest comes from commercial airline passenger and General Fund support.

Skylune wrote:
> They need to "get funding" to "generate revenue."
>

The funding covers infrastructure (buildings & taxiways/runways) which
must be maintained for the airport to operate safely (remember, the
FAA's raison de etre?) in order to generate revenue.

I second Steve Foley's remark...

I like Spencer, then, and the other private airports. That is how all GA
airports should be operated. As businesses. No tax money.

In article
utaviation.com>,
"Skylune" > wrote:

> The first six are not businesses, they are government services.

So are roads and airports. Sometimes, Loon, you stumble across the truth!

TVA is a government "business."



> Chrysler, Delta did get federal bailouts (which I would oppose,
> politically), but they do not get annual operating subsidies from the
> gubmint.

Yeah. So is WAPA and other federal power projects. They should be
privatized, if you ask me.....

Oh well. At least no one asked me what "torutured" logic is. I think i
got that word from W.

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
>
> I like Spencer, then, and the other private airports. That is how all GA
> airports should be operated. As businesses. No tax money.
>

Just GA airports? Why?

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> What businesses run on annual government operating subsidies, and get
> federal capital subsidies?
>
> What other businesses need a federal "lifeline?"
>
>
>


Trucking comes to mind.

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> Yes, but with one major exception. Federal gasoline taxes generate more
> money annually than highway grants.
>
> AV gas taxes contibute about 2% or so to the Aviation Trust Fund. The
> rest comes from commercial airline passenger and General Fund support.
>

How much of the cost to the aviation trust fund do you think is spent to
support only GA?

Lots. Virtually all SBIR/STTR programs are government operating
subsidies, and very few if any become sustainable businesses. All
subcontracting "businesses" to the defense industry and NASA are
essentially living on subsidies. They would all disappear if the
federal money stopped flowing.


Skylune wrote:
> What businesses run on annual government operating subsidies, and get
> federal capital subsidies?
>
> What other businesses need a federal "lifeline?"

"Skylune" > wrote in
lkaboutaviation.com:

> The first six are not businesses, they are government services.
>
Amtrak is not a government service it's just heavily subsidized.

--

Hi again Troll ..

Then next time you go on vacation go catch your flight out of a private
airport. Or the next time you order some crap by mail order tell UPS or
Fedex or whoever that you will only accept your package if it was flown in
to a private airport. Or when you need to ask for the kindness of a angel
flight pilot tell them you only want to go to a private airport..

P.S.
I do realize that you only post your crap to get a reaction from real pilots
and aircraft owners...
Why don't you go bug the boaters for a while..




> "Skylune" > wrote in message
> lkaboutaviation.com...
>>
>> I like Spencer, then, and the other private airports. That is how all GA
>> airports should be operated. As businesses. No tax money.
>>
>
> Just GA airports? Why?
>

Skylune wrote:
> A Boyer acolyte makes the following statement publicly (regarding user
> fees):
>
> "That is why it's vital that we ensure airports get the funding they need
> to maintain safety and generate revenue."
>
> They need to "get funding" to "generate revenue."
>
> LOL. Sounds like when Democrats talk about "investment," meaning raising
> taxes to provide more money to public sector unions. If these airports are
> such economic "engines," they wouldn't need annual subsidies. AOPA at
> least calls the subsidies a "lifeline," thus implying that many would
> cease to exist if users had to pay, rather than taxpayers and commercial
> passengers, which generate virtually ALL OF THE REVENUE in the ATF.
>
> The best part is that these comments were made in conference in CHICAGO!
> Apparently, the economic armegeddon resulting from closing Megis has yet
> to occur...
>

Skylune is now the "voice of reason?"

Bru hahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahah

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
> Of course you need funding to generate revenue.

Yep. It's called "investment".
Communities spend oodles of money for public infrastructure on that
premise.
I spend money on education for that purpose.

IF you want to kill an airport slowly, don't invest in it. Let the
runways deteriorate, the buildings collapse, and cancel fuel
deliveries. Soon enough you'll have plenty of idle time to spend
wondering why nobody stops there any more.

Skylune wrote:
> What businesses run on annual government operating subsidies, and get
> federal capital subsidies?
>
> What other businesses need a federal "lifeline?"

For a couple decades now, I'm wondering what industries DON'T get
subsidies.

Oil (depreciation allowances)
Ethanol (Archer Daniels Midland has such wonderful lobbyists)
Arts
Education (wouldn't be so bad if we got anything for it)
Mining (public land leases for cheap)
Forestry (we put in roads that cost more than the revenue from the
timber)
Ranching (don't get me started on cattle on national forest land)
Transportation (you think you pay for the roads through driving taxes?
They are subsidized by taxes on houses and purchases)
Real Estate (deductions for your mortgage)


I think you'd be hard pressed to find an industry that hasn't sold it's
support to a congresscritter of either party for some favor or other.
It's a sad state of affairs.

Skylune wrote:
> I like Spencer, then, and the other private airports. That is how all GA
> airports should be operated. As businesses. No tax money.

I'll go for that. Shortly after I don't pay taxes to support sports
arenas (millions of bucks to support lots of multimillionaires, and
regular guys get priced out of the stadium) and public art (the
national endowment for the arts is a national embarrassment) These are
businesses. They should only be paying taxes, not getting subsidies
and free rides.

wrote:
> Skylune wrote:
>> What businesses run on annual government operating subsidies, and get
>> federal capital subsidies?
>>
>> What other businesses need a federal "lifeline?"
>
> For a couple decades now, I'm wondering what industries DON'T get
> subsidies.

Computer software development. Dang, I picked the wrong industry to work
in!

Are there any subsidies or tax breaks specific to the restaurant industry
or any of the "hospitaility" industries like hotels, etc.?

>
> Oil (depreciation allowances)
> Ethanol (Archer Daniels Midland has such wonderful lobbyists)
> Arts
> Education (wouldn't be so bad if we got anything for it)
> Mining (public land leases for cheap)
> Forestry (we put in roads that cost more than the revenue from the
> timber)
> Ranching (don't get me started on cattle on national forest land)
> Transportation (you think you pay for the roads through driving taxes?
> They are subsidized by taxes on houses and purchases)
> Real Estate (deductions for your mortgage)
>
>
> I think you'd be hard pressed to find an industry that hasn't sold it's
> support to a congresscritter of either party for some favor or other.
> It's a sad state of affairs.
>
>

"me" > wrote in message ...
>
> Hi again Troll ..
>
>
> Then next time you go on vacation go catch your flight out of a private
> airport. Or the next time you order some crap by mail order tell UPS or
> Fedex or whoever that you will only accept your package if it was flown in
> to a private airport. Or when you need to ask for the kindness of a angel
> flight pilot tell them you only want to go to a private airport..
>
> P.S.
> I do realize that you only post your crap to get a reaction from real
> pilots and aircraft owners...
> Why don't you go bug the boaters for a while..
>

Troll? Me? Hi again? Have we met before?

"Jim Logajan" > wrote in message
.. .
> wrote:
>
> Computer software development. Dang, I picked the wrong industry to work
> in!
>
> Are there any subsidies or tax breaks specific to the restaurant industry
> or any of the "hospitaility" industries like hotels, etc.?
>


There are R&D tax breaks that some companies could receive for SW
development.


And there are several programs at the local, state and federal level to
promote tourism that helps out the hospitality industry.

this is true. all rail service in US receives operating subsidies.

truckers don't: ask an independent or a truck company how much they pay
in taxes, tolls, etc. It is mucho dinero. They pay their own way,
unlike GA (and Amtrak).

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
>
> this is true. all rail service in US receives operating subsidies.
>
> truckers don't: ask an independent or a truck company how much they pay
> in taxes, tolls, etc. It is mucho dinero. They pay their own way,
> unlike GA (and Amtrak).
>

How did you determine that GA does not pay it's own way?

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> this is true. all rail service in US receives operating subsidies.
>
> truckers don't: ask an independent or a truck company how much they pay
> in taxes, tolls, etc. It is mucho dinero. They pay their own way,
> unlike GA (and Amtrak).
>

Do they pay enough to completely pay for every road and highway they use? I
think not. How much longer do you think the roads would last if nothing by
<5000 lbs cars and light truck were the only things driving on them.

But I'm not bitching about the investment made with tax dollars because we
all benefit from it. Just like we all benefit from airport spending.

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> this is true. all rail service in US receives operating subsidies.
>
> truckers don't: ask an independent or a truck company how much they pay
> in taxes, tolls, etc. It is mucho dinero. They pay their own way,
> unlike GA (and Amtrak).
>


Compare the amount paid in taxes, tolls, etc by truckers to the amount paid
in taxes, tolls, etc by automobiles.

Compare the maintenance budgets of the New York parkways (where no trucks
are permitted) to the maintenance budgets of the rest of the New York
highway system.

I don't think you'll feel the trucks are paying their own way anymore.

Come on Steven you know my post was not aimed at you ...
As a matter of fact doesn't my post quote the original poster ? I think so..

Unless of course your post was an attempted troll !? :)

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "me" > wrote in message ...
>>
>> Hi again Troll ..
>>
>>
>> Then next time you go on vacation go catch your flight out of a private
>> airport. Or the next time you order some crap by mail order tell UPS or
>> Fedex or whoever that you will only accept your package if it was flown
>> in to a private airport. Or when you need to ask for the kindness of a
>> angel flight pilot tell them you only want to go to a private airport..
>>
>> P.S.
>> I do realize that you only post your crap to get a reaction from real
>> pilots and aircraft owners...
>> Why don't you go bug the boaters for a while..
>>
>
> Troll? Me? Hi again? Have we met before?
>

Skylune wrote:
> this is true. all rail service in US receives operating subsidies.
>
> truckers don't: ask an independent or a truck company how much they pay
> in taxes, tolls, etc. It is mucho dinero. They pay their own way,
> unlike GA (and Amtrak).

They apparently pay a lot in federal taxes. That covers federal
highways.
But state and local non-highway roads get paid by lots of other taxes,
and the trucks roll along on those. I'm not sure how much, etc. But
local roads are not supported by the wheels that roll on them. They
are paid by property and other taxes, such that those who ride bicycles
pay the same local road support as the guys in SUVs.

"me" > wrote in message ...
>
> Come on Steven you know my post was not aimed at you ...
> As a matter of fact doesn't my post quote the original poster ? I think
> so..
>
> Unless of course your post was an attempted troll !? :)
>

Your post was a response to my message.