Avgas in France has reached $7.50/gal ! [Archive]

Bob Fry

April 14th 05, 02:23 AM

"Jay Honeck" > writes:

> Makes you wonder how people so dunder-headed ever spawned men like
> Bleriot...

Or how people so smart spawned George W[hat? Me Worry?] Bush?

Oh...maybe 51% of us aren't so smart. Maybe the Europeans aren't
dunder-headed. Read this if you wish...

An Economy On Thin Ice
By Paul A. Volcker
Sunday, April 10, 2005; Page B07

The U.S. expansion appears on track. Europe and Japan may lack
exuberance, but their economies are at least on the plus side. China
and India -- with close to 40 percent of the world's population --
have sustained growth at rates that not so long ago would have seemed,
if not impossible, highly improbable.

Yet, under the placid surface, there are disturbing trends: huge
imbalances, disequilibria, risks -- call them what you
will. Altogether the circumstances seem to me as dangerous and
intractable as any I can remember, and I can remember quite a
lot. What really concerns me is that there seems to be so little
willingness or capacity to do much about it.

We sit here absorbed in a debate about how to maintain Social Security
-- and, more important, Medicare -- when the baby boomers retire. But
right now, those same boomers are spending like there's no
tomorrow. If we can believe the numbers, personal savings in the
United States have practically disappeared.

To be sure, businesses have begun to rebuild their financial
reserves. But in the space of a few years, the federal deficit has
come to offset that source of national savings.

We are buying a lot of housing at rising prices, but home ownership
has become a vehicle for borrowing as much as a source of financial
security. As a nation we are consuming and investing about 6 percent
more than we are producing.

What holds it all together is a massive and growing flow of capital
from abroad, running to more than $2 billion every working day, and
growing. There is no sense of strain. As a nation we don't consciously
borrow or beg. We aren't even offering attractive interest rates, nor
do we have to offer our creditors protection against the risk of a
declining dollar.

Most of the time, it has been private capital that has freely flowed
into our markets from abroad -- where better to invest in an uncertain
world, the refrain has gone, than the United States?

More recently, we've become more dependent on foreign central banks,
particularly in China and Japan and elsewhere in East Asia.

It's all quite comfortable for us. We fill our shops and our garages
with goods from abroad, and the competition has been a powerful
restraint on our internal prices. It's surely helped keep interest
rates exceptionally low despite our vanishing savings and rapid
growth.

And it's comfortable for our trading partners and for those supplying
the capital. Some, such as China, depend heavily on our expanding
domestic markets. And for the most part, the central banks of the
emerging world have been willing to hold more and more dollars, which
are, after all, the closest thing the world has to a truly
international currency.

The difficulty is that this seemingly comfortable pattern can't go on
indefinitely. I don't know of any country that has managed to consume
and invest 6 percent more than it produces for long. The United States
is absorbing about 80 percent of the net flow of international
capital. And at some point, both central banks and private
institutions will have their fill of dollars.

I don't know whether change will come with a bang or a whimper,
whether sooner or later. But as things stand, it is more likely than
not that it will be financial crises rather than policy foresight that
will force the change.

It's not that it is so difficult intellectually to set out a scenario
for a "soft landing" and sustained growth. There is a wide area of
agreement among establishment economists about a textbook pretty
picture: China and other continental Asian economies should permit and
encourage a substantial exchange rate appreciation against the
dollar. Japan and Europe should work promptly and aggressively toward
domestic stimulus and deal more effectively and speedily with
structural obstacles to growth. And the United States, by some
combination of measures, should forcibly increase its rate of internal
saving, thereby reducing its import demand.

But can we, with any degree of confidence today, look forward to any
one of these policies being put in place any time soon, much less a
combination of all?

The answer is no. So I think we are skating on increasingly thin
ice. On the present trajectory, the deficits and imbalances will
increase. At some point, the sense of confidence in capital markets
that today so benignly supports the flow of funds to the United States
and the growing world economy could fade. Then some event, or
combination of events, could come along to disturb markets, with
damaging volatility in both exchange markets and interest rates. We
had a taste of that in the stagflation of the 1970s -- a volatile and
depressed dollar, inflationary pressures, a sudden increase in
interest rates and a couple of big recessions.

The clear lesson I draw is that there is a high premium on doing what
we can to minimize the risks and to ensure that there is time for
orderly adjustment. I'm not suggesting anything unorthodox or
arcane. What is required is a willingness to act now -- and next year,
and the following year, and to act even when, on the surface,
everything seems so placid and favorable.

What I am talking about really boils down to the oldest lesson of
economic policy: a strong sense of monetary and fiscal
discipline. This is not a time for ideological intransigence and
partisan posturing on the budget at the expense of the deficit rising
still higher. Surely we would all be better off if other countries did
their part. But their failures must not deflect us from what we can
do, in our own self-interest.

A wise observer of the economic scene once commented that "what can be
left to later, usually is -- and then, alas, it's too late." I don't
want to let that stand as the epitaph of what has been an unparalleled
period of success for the American economy and of enormous potential
for the world at large.

tony roberts

April 14th 05, 03:21 AM

> What did you find surprising?

Well - it was the first blatantly racist post I ever saw here.

Tony

--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE
>
> >

> > > Serves them right. It's just too bad that general aviation is virtually
> > > dead in a country that served as an early incubator for flight.
> > >
> > > Makes you wonder how people so dunder-headed ever spawned men like
> > > Bleriot...
> > > --
> > > Jay Honeck
> > > Iowa City, IA
> > > Pathfinder N56993
> > > www.AlexisParkInn.com
> > > "Your Aviation Destination"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Tony Roberts
> > PP-ASEL
> > VFR OTT
> > Night
> > Cessna 172H C-GICE

John Godwin

April 14th 05, 03:24 AM

tony roberts > wrote in news:nospam-
FA1EBF.19243613042005@shawnews:

>> What did you find surprising?
>
> Well - it was the first blatantly racist post I ever saw here.

Racist?

--

tony roberts

April 14th 05, 03:33 AM

> Racist?

>>Makes you wonder how people so dunder-headed ever spawned men like
>>Bleriot...

That's not racist? One of us is missing something.

Tony

--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

Peter Duniho

April 14th 05, 04:09 AM

"tony roberts" > wrote in message
news:nospam-4C4A18.19360913042005@shawnews...
>> Racist?
>
>>>Makes you wonder how people so dunder-headed ever spawned men like
>>>Bleriot...
>
> That's not racist? One of us is missing something.

I think technically, "racist" would be restricted to actual racially
oriented comments. "French" isn't so much a race, as a culture, community,
or nationality.

As for the comment itself, if you find it surprising, you haven't read much
of Jay's non-flying commentary, if any.

Offensive? Sure. Surprising? Not in the least.

Pete

Dave Stadt

April 14th 05, 04:40 AM

"tony roberts" > wrote in message
news:nospam-FA1EBF.19243613042005@shawnews...
> > What did you find surprising?
>
> Well - it was the first blatantly racist post I ever saw here.
>
> Tony

I don't believe, in fact I know, "French" is not a race.

>
> --
>
> Tony Roberts
> PP-ASEL
> VFR OTT
> Night
> Cessna 172H C-GICE
> >
> > >
>
> > > > Serves them right. It's just too bad that general aviation is
virtually
> > > > dead in a country that served as an early incubator for flight.
> > > >
> > > > Makes you wonder how people so dunder-headed ever spawned men like
> > > > Bleriot...
> > > > --
> > > > Jay Honeck
> > > > Iowa City, IA
> > > > Pathfinder N56993
> > > > www.AlexisParkInn.com
> > > > "Your Aviation Destination"
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Tony Roberts
> > > PP-ASEL
> > > VFR OTT
> > > Night
> > > Cessna 172H C-GICE

Matt Barrow

April 14th 05, 05:06 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:fvg7e.11984$GJ.11256@attbi_s71...
>
> If my government taxed gasoline so that it cost $7.50 per gallon, I would
be
> standing on my representatives desk right now. And so would millions of
> Americans.

No they won't!

Day after tomorrow is tax day and no one is even flinching. MOF, as much as
people detest the tax code, only a very small percentage would be willing to
change it (and give up THEIR goodies/subsidies).
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050412/ap_on_re_us/taxes_ap_ipsos_poll

--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

Matt Barrow

April 14th 05, 05:08 AM

"tony roberts" > wrote in message
news:nospam-4C4A18.19360913042005@shawnews...
> > Racist?
>
> >>Makes you wonder how people so dunder-headed ever spawned men like
> >>Bleriot...
>
> That's not racist? One of us is missing something.
>
France is a nation, not a race.

You are definitely missing something and I think it's between your ears.

John Godwin

April 14th 05, 06:19 AM

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in
:

> You are definitely missing something and I think it's between your
> ears.

Ah, we move from racism to condescension.

--

Matt Whiting

April 14th 05, 11:49 AM

John Godwin wrote:

> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in
> :
>
>
>>You are definitely missing something and I think it's between your
>>ears.
>
>
> Ah, we move from racism to condescension.
>

More like accuracy. :-)

Matt

Matt Barrow

April 14th 05, 02:49 PM

"John Godwin" > wrote in message
8.7...
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in
> :
>
> > You are definitely missing something and I think it's between your
> > ears.
>
> Ah, we move from racism to condescension.

It's called reality.

Matt Barrow

April 14th 05, 02:56 PM

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> John Godwin wrote:
>
> > "Matt Barrow" > wrote in
> > :
> >
> >
> >>You are definitely missing something and I think it's between your
> >>ears.
> >
> >
> > Ah, we move from racism to condescension.
> >
>
> More like accuracy. :-)
>
If he's hanging around in here, one would hope he knows the difference
between geography and biology! :~)

--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

Mike Rapoport

April 14th 05, 03:24 PM

"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
>> If my government taxed gasoline so that it cost $7.50 per gallon, I would
>> be
>> standing on my representatives desk right now.
>
>
> how brave.
>
>> And so would millions of
>> Americans.
>
>
> mostly the guys needing 3 jobs and so many others with no social security.
>
>

Actually, our fiscal situation is even worse. If we put a $4 tax on
gasoline, we could balance the budget but it wouldn't make social security
viable. The US has become totally addicted to spending tomorrow's money
today.

Mike
MU-2

Matt Barrow

April 14th 05, 03:31 PM

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> Actually, our fiscal situation is even worse. If we put a $4 tax on
> gasoline, we could balance the budget but it wouldn't make social security
> viable. The US has become totally addicted to spending tomorrow's money
> today.

Close; the addiction is to spending OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY!!

Mike Rapoport

April 14th 05, 04:05 PM

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>>
>> Actually, our fiscal situation is even worse. If we put a $4 tax on
>> gasoline, we could balance the budget but it wouldn't make social
>> security
>> viable. The US has become totally addicted to spending tomorrow's money
>> today.
>
> Close; the addiction is to spending OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY!!
>

True. Seems to be inevitable in a democracy.

Mike
MU-2

Matt Barrow

April 14th 05, 04:44 PM

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> >>
> >> Actually, our fiscal situation is even worse. If we put a $4 tax on
> >> gasoline, we could balance the budget but it wouldn't make social
> >> security
> >> viable. The US has become totally addicted to spending tomorrow's
money
> >> today.
> >
> > Close; the addiction is to spending OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY!!
> >
>
> True. Seems to be inevitable in a democracy.
>

In non-democracies, too! More like it's human nature.

K. Ari Krupnikov

April 14th 05, 07:23 PM

"Mike Rapoport" > writes:

> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
>
> > Close; the addiction is to spending OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY!!
>
> True. Seems to be inevitable in a democracy.

Luckily, that problem never plagues dictatorships. Since everything in
the country belongs to its dictator, he's only ever spending his own
money :=)

Ari.

--
Elections only count as free and trials as fair if you can lose money
betting on the outcome.

AliR

April 14th 05, 08:44 PM

> If my government taxed gasoline so that it cost $7.50 per gallon, I would
be
> standing on my representatives desk right now. And so would millions of
> Americans. For some odd reason, the French just go "Se la vie" and shrug
> their shoulders.
>

Don't worry it will be up there pretty soon, the price of avgas has doubled
in the last 4 years, say double up again in another 4 and there you have it.

AliR.

Jay Honeck

April 14th 05, 08:54 PM

>>>Makes you wonder how people so dunder-headed ever spawned men like
>>>Bleriot...
>
> That's not racist? One of us is missing something.

Might want to look up "racist" in the dictionary BEFORE accusing me of
racism, Tony.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 14th 05, 08:55 PM

> Offensive? Sure. Surprising? Not in the least.

You're "offended" by my broadsiding the French?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 14th 05, 09:00 PM

>> If my government taxed gasoline so that it cost $7.50 per gallon, I would
> be
>> standing on my representatives desk right now. And so would millions of
>> Americans.
>
> No they won't!
>
> Day after tomorrow is tax day and no one is even flinching.

I think you're wrong, Matt.

The Federal tax code has been carefully -- even diabolically -- written so
that the average Joe on the street has NO idea what he's actually paying in
taxes. By forcing employers to withhold the tax BEFORE the employee ever
sees the money, the Gubmint not only guarantees payment, it guarantees
acquiescence.

Bottom line: The government keeps the tax laws inscrutably complex quite on
purpose, lest they provoke an uprising.

Gas prices, on the other hand, are plain as day transparent, and people are
already ****ed as hell. The Bush administration is crapping their pants
right now, watching GW's approval rating plummet, primarily because of
rising gas prices.

If it hit $7.50 a gallon, you would see a revolution in America.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 14th 05, 09:07 PM

> But I like to be brought to the ER after an accident ASAP and beeing
> searched
> for an insurance card _after_ the emergency treatment.

Martin, I don't know what kind of propaganda they've been feeding you in
Austria, but in America no one cares about who's paying for the bills here
until after the emergency medical services are rendered.

And, in fact, we *do* have nationalized health care in this country for the
indigent. Those who deny this fact clearly have no concept of how our
medical system works. (Mary's "other" job is doing statistical computer
analysis for a major health care provider, and she spent 20 years as a
Medical Technologist "in the trenches" drawing blood, etc. She analyzes
budgets, and gets to see, first hand, how Medicare and other government
programs pay 100% of health care costs for anyone who walks in the door
without insurance..)

Could the system be set up in a more efficient way? Hell, yes. But it *is*
functioning, and our health care *is* quite excellent.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 14th 05, 09:08 PM

>> For some odd reason, the French just go "Se la vie" and shrug
>> their shoulders.
>
> come on ... it is "C'est la vie"

My French ancestors are spinning in their graves, I'm sure...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Gig 601XL Builder

April 14th 05, 09:33 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:AZz7e.14314$xL4.12721@attbi_s72...
> Gas prices, on the other hand, are plain as day transparent, and people
> are already ****ed as hell.

No actually there not plain as day. When I pull up to the pump see that gas
is $2.479/gal I have no idea what part of that is tax.

In Arkansas the same goes for liquor tax. It is built into the advertised
price but not by law only by tradition. I owned a liquor store for a few
years and considered advertising the retail price and then adding the state
liquor and state, county and local sales taxes at the register.

My employees freaked out at the idea. They felt the customers would get
****ed and they were right.

Newps

April 14th 05, 09:58 PM

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:AZz7e.14314$xL4.12721@attbi_s72...
>
>>Gas prices, on the other hand, are plain as day transparent, and people
>>are already ****ed as hell.
>
>
> No actually there not plain as day. When I pull up to the pump see that gas
> is $2.479/gal I have no idea what part of that is tax.

In many states, I'm in one, it is required by law to have the state and
federal tax amounts listed on each pump.

Newps

April 14th 05, 09:58 PM

Martin Hotze wrote:

>
> But I like to be brought to the ER after an accident ASAP and beeing searched
> for an insurance card _after_ the emergency treatment.

Careful for that hook in your mouth, they're pretty sharp.

Peter Duniho

April 14th 05, 11:51 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:JUz7e.14308$xL4.10941@attbi_s72...
>> Offensive? Sure. Surprising? Not in the least.
>
> You're "offended" by my broadsiding the French?

How can it be that you are so surprised that I might take offense, and yet I
am not surprised at all that you might give it? I would have thought you'd
"know" me better by now.

I'm offended by any generalized denigration or unjustified stereotyping of
any broad group of people. You seem to do this a lot, and thus wind up
offending me on a fairly regular basis. You seem like a friendly enough
guy, which makes it just that much harder to understand how it is you seem
to have your head up your ass when it comes to acceptance and understanding
of opinions that differ from your own.

Your statement is certainly offensive to the French themselves, as well as
to anyone who keeps an open mind about how cultural, philosophical, or
political differences can exist without either group of people having those
differences being particularly more ignorant than the other.

Frankly, I think pretty much most people are stupid. It's anti-social of me
to have that opinion, I realize. In that respect, it might seem
hypocritical of me to be offended at you (essentially) calling another group
of people stupid. But, if the French are "dunderheads" as a group, they
certainly aren't unique in that respect. I'd say Americans are just as
dunderheaded as they are. Probably no more so, but certainly no less so.
The problem here isn't so much that you called the French stupid, but that
you seem to think we as Americans are somehow better than they are.

By the way, as long as we're talking about stupid people...I would much
rather interact with a stupid person who has a kind and generous heart, than
a smart person who constantly stereotypes and belittles those who are
different from him. Guess which kind of person you seem to me to be.

Pete

Peter Duniho

April 14th 05, 11:55 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:34A7e.14321$xL4.3090@attbi_s72...
> Martin, I don't know what kind of propaganda they've been feeding you in
> Austria, but in America no one cares about who's paying for the bills here
> until after the emergency medical services are rendered.

That (probably) depends on the emergency.

Both times I was admitted to the ER with a collapsed lung, they made sure
they had my insurance information before I was treated.

As usual, you seem to be living in a different America than many of the rest
of us.

> And, in fact, we *do* have nationalized health care in this country for
> the indigent. Those who deny this fact clearly have no concept of how our
> medical system works.

Tell that to the local homeless people my wife and I help feed on a weekly
basis. I'm sure they'd love to hear how they shouldn't have had to pay
their medical expenses after all.

See above.

Pete

G Farris

April 15th 05, 12:31 AM

It's amazing how prejudices and misinformation fly.

I read an article by a French guy - supposed to be a world-famous scholar -
about cultural differences between French and Americans. He said (I
paraphrase) "France is basically an agricultural society, so French understand
that it can't rain every day, and that a good year is likely to be followed by
a poorer year, hence their conservatism - Americans slaughtered the Indians
and that explains everything you need to know about them".

Many French really believe that blacks are not admitted to US hospitals, and
if you check in with ten bullets in the chest, but don't have cash to pay
they throw you back out in the alley to bleed. At the same time, they will
tell you their health care is "free" - they don't seem to worry about the fact
that a flat-rate 21% comes off every paycheck - even the poorest - to pay for
it and it's still running up colossal deficits.

For all of these differences, flying in France is not that different from the
US - except for the fuel price, that is. For the recreational and VFR pilot,
most of France is class "G" - below 11500ft - above this it is "D", and
they'll never let you in under VFR. But stay below that and you go pretty much
where you want. Airspace restrictions require you to call for clearances
pretty often - but I've never had a request refused, and this keeps you in
contact almost constantly with someone or other - because information services
(particularly weather reporting) are poor to non-existant. Once you get into
IFR and commercial operations costs are much higher than in the US, and there
are a lot of regulations. Only about 15% of PPL's in France are IFR rated,
against roughly 50% in the US. Typical cost for an IR rating is $20K (from
PPL). Night flying is not included in the standard PPL, and requires a logbook
endorsement - there are special routes to follow, usually related to noise
abatement. Rental rates reflect the high fuel cost, but they include a sort of
"nationalized" insurance which I understand is not bad (never had to use it).
Landing and parking fees are ubiquitous, but moderate. A $100 hamburger
becomes a $200 Cote de Boeuf. The country is very beautiful, and despite its
rather small size contains an astonishing wealth and variety of different
conditions - from blue/green seacoast to mountains higher than any in the US,
to vinyards and vast farmlands, gorges and valleys. Weather in the north is a
bit of a problem - through nine months of the year VFR conditions are the
exception, which makes basic VFR training longer and more expensive than in
Florida or California. Private airplane use for transportation is much less
common than in the US, but this is not only due to the cost, but to the fact
that other forms of transportation are much more developed. It's hard to
justify a 180nm business trip from Paris to Poitiers, in any plane, when the
train has you there in 90 minutes flat, and it's $80 round trip.

Just some random reflections from an American, living in France.

G Faris

William W. Plummer

April 15th 05, 12:44 AM

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:JUz7e.14308$xL4.10941@attbi_s72...
>
>>>Offensive? Sure. Surprising? Not in the least.
>>
>>You're "offended" by my broadsiding the French?
>
>
> How can it be that you are so surprised that I might take offense, and yet I
> am not surprised at all that you might give it? I would have thought you'd
> "know" me better by now.
>
> I'm offended by any generalized denigration or unjustified stereotyping of
> any broad group of people. You seem to do this a lot, and thus wind up
> offending me on a fairly regular basis. You seem like a friendly enough
> guy, which makes it just that much harder to understand how it is you seem
> to have your head up your ass when it comes to acceptance and understanding
> of opinions that differ from your own.
>
> Your statement is certainly offensive to the French themselves, as well as
> to anyone who keeps an open mind about how cultural, philosophical, or
> political differences can exist without either group of people having those
> differences being particularly more ignorant than the other.
>
> Frankly, I think pretty much most people are stupid. It's anti-social of me
> to have that opinion, I realize. In that respect, it might seem
> hypocritical of me to be offended at you (essentially) calling another group
> of people stupid. But, if the French are "dunderheads" as a group, they
> certainly aren't unique in that respect. I'd say Americans are just as
> dunderheaded as they are. Probably no more so, but certainly no less so.
> The problem here isn't so much that you called the French stupid, but that
> you seem to think we as Americans are somehow better than they are.
>
> By the way, as long as we're talking about stupid people...I would much
> rather interact with a stupid person who has a kind and generous heart, than
> a smart person who constantly stereotypes and belittles those who are
> different from him. Guess which kind of person you seem to me to be.
>
> Pete
>
>

Your message is offensive. MYOB.

Blueskies

April 15th 05, 01:11 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:AZz7e.14314$xL4.12721@attbi_s72...
>
> If it hit $7.50 a gallon, you would see a revolution in America.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

Everyone was thinking there would be a revolution back in the 70's when it hit 60 cents a gallon! The only revolution I
saw was to watch the auto industry crumple and dollars go overseas to the imports...

Matt Barrow

April 15th 05, 01:17 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:AZz7e.14314$xL4.12721@attbi_s72...
> >> If my government taxed gasoline so that it cost $7.50 per gallon, I
would
> > be
> >> standing on my representatives desk right now. And so would millions
of
> >> Americans.
> >
> > No they won't!
> >
> > Day after tomorrow is tax day and no one is even flinching.
>
> I think you're wrong, Matt.
>
> The Federal tax code has been carefully -- even diabolically -- written so
> that the average Joe on the street has NO idea what he's actually paying
in
> taxes.

You mean they don't look at line 45 of their 1040? :~)

Various pundits have been showing us "Tax Freedom Day" for as long as I
remember, but no one has jumped up on footstools, much less their
representatives desk.

> By forcing employers to withhold the tax BEFORE the employee ever
> sees the money, the Gubmint not only guarantees payment, it guarantees
> acquiescence.

> Bottom line: The government keeps the tax laws inscrutably complex quite
on
> purpose, lest they provoke an uprising.

And the people (see poll I quoted) are willing to acquiese to it, rather
than lose their "goodies".

> Gas prices, on the other hand, are plain as day transparent, and people
are
> already ****ed as hell. The Bush administration is crapping their pants
> right now, watching GW's approval rating plummet, primarily because of
> rising gas prices.

John Kerry, Al Gore, Bill and Hillary Clinton have all stated, in public,
that Americans should be paying $4.50 to $5.00 a galllon and their support
is about 45% of the people.

>
> If it hit $7.50 a gallon, you would see a revolution in America.

It depends on how soon it happened. Remember all those jokes about quotes
from the 1950's, that if things keep going they way there were, a house
would cost $50,000? Or a weeks groceries would be $25?

Remember the analogy of the frog in boiling water.

Matt Barrow

April 15th 05, 01:33 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:AZz7e.14314$xL4.12721@attbi_s72...
> >> If my government taxed gasoline so that it cost $7.50 per gallon, I
would
> > be
> >> standing on my representatives desk right now. And so would millions
of
> >> Americans.
>
> Gas prices, on the other hand, are plain as day transparent, and people
are
> already ****ed as hell. The Bush administration is crapping their pants
> right now, watching GW's approval rating plummet, primarily because of
> rising gas prices.
>
> If it hit $7.50 a gallon, you would see a revolution in America.

And they would elect someone like John Kerry.

We'd have $7.50 gas AND rationing/mile-long-lines.

Remember the mid-70's?

Matt Barrow

April 15th 05, 01:34 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:05A7e.15730$GJ.8906@attbi_s71...
> >> For some odd reason, the French just go "Se la vie" and shrug
> >> their shoulders.
> >
> > come on ... it is "C'est la vie"
>
> My French ancestors are spinning in their graves, I'm sure...
>
> ;-)

I knew there was something about you I didn't like! :~)

Matt Barrow

April 15th 05, 01:35 AM

"Blueskies" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:AZz7e.14314$xL4.12721@attbi_s72...
> >
> > If it hit $7.50 a gallon, you would see a revolution in America.
> > --
> > Jay Honeck
> > Iowa City, IA
> > Pathfinder N56993
> > www.AlexisParkInn.com
> > "Your Aviation Destination"
> >
>
> Everyone was thinking there would be a revolution back in the 70's when it
hit 60 cents a gallon! The only revolution I
> saw was to watch the auto industry crumple and dollars go overseas to the
imports...

Yup, and they elected Jimmy Carter...and the rest, as they say, is history.

Bob Fry

April 15th 05, 01:49 AM

"Mike Rapoport" > writes:

> The US has become totally addicted to spending tomorrow's money
> today.

Worse: we are not even spending our own money. We are spending Other
People's Money at vast rates, $2 Billion every day, according to Paul
Volcker. How long will that keep up? When will this house of cards
collapse and we will actually have to earn our living instead of
borrowing it?

Bob Fry

April 15th 05, 01:53 AM

"AliR" > writes:

> > If my government taxed gasoline so that it cost $7.50 per gallon, I would
> be
> > standing on my representatives desk right now. And so would millions of
> > Americans. For some odd reason, the French just go "Se la vie" and shrug
> > their shoulders.
> >
>
> Don't worry it will be up there pretty soon, the price of avgas has doubled
> in the last 4 years, say double up again in another 4 and there you have it.

Yup. Only the money will go to support corrupt mid-east governments
who after hiring foreign labor to do their own work, hand the money
left over to terrorists. Wait...that doesn't sound *so* different
from what I see here....

Bob Fry

April 15th 05, 02:00 AM

"William W. Plummer" > writes:

> Peter Duniho wrote:
[snip]
> Your message is offensive. MYOB.

Peter's message was thoughtful and on target, and while he sure
doesn't need me to defend him, I do anyway. Calling out a poster who
regularly stereotypes and disparages entire nations and continents is
very much all of our business.

Bob Noel

April 15th 05, 02:25 AM

In article >, (G Farris)
wrote:

[snip]
> For all of these differences, flying in France is not that different from the
> US - except for the fuel price, that is.

interesting statement, but it seems to me that your discussion
below contradicts that claim.

> For the recreational and VFR pilot,
> most of France is class "G" - below 11500ft - above this it is "D", and
> they'll never let you in under VFR. But stay below that and you go pretty
> much
> where you want. Airspace restrictions require you to call for clearances
> pretty often - but I've never had a request refused, and this keeps you in
> contact almost constantly with someone or other - because information
> services
> (particularly weather reporting) are poor to non-existant. Once you get into
> IFR and commercial operations costs are much higher than in the US, and there
> are a lot of regulations. Only about 15% of PPL's in France are IFR rated,
> against roughly 50% in the US. Typical cost for an IR rating is $20K (from
> PPL). Night flying is not included in the standard PPL, and requires a
> logbook
> endorsement - there are special routes to follow, usually related to noise
> abatement. Rental rates reflect the high fuel cost, but they include a sort
> of
> "nationalized" insurance which I understand is not bad (never had to use it).
> Landing and parking fees are ubiquitous, but moderate. A $100 hamburger
> becomes a $200 Cote de Boeuf. [snip]

--
Bob Noel
looking for a sig the lawyers will like

Newps

April 15th 05, 02:50 AM

> "AliR" > writes:

>>>
>>
>>Don't worry it will be up there pretty soon, the price of avgas has doubled
>>in the last 4 years, say double up again in another 4 and there you have it.

Maybe where you live but not here, or anywhere else I know of. I have
owned a plane for 7 years. Avgas has always been over $2 a gallon here
at my home field, usually around $2.50. Now it is $3.60. At the
outlying fields you might have occasionally found a sale at $1.99, those
places now sell it for $2.60 +- .05.

Gary Drescher

April 15th 05, 02:59 AM

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
> "William W. Plummer" > writes:
>
>> Peter Duniho wrote:
> [snip]
>> Your message is offensive. MYOB.
>
> Peter's message was thoughtful and on target, and while he sure
> doesn't need me to defend him, I do anyway. Calling out a poster who
> regularly stereotypes and disparages entire nations and continents is
> very much all of our business.

Agreed. Not to mention the absurdity of saying "MYOB" regarding a public
newsgroup post.

--Gary

George Patterson

April 15th 05, 03:28 AM

tony roberts wrote:
>>Racist?
>
>
>>>Makes you wonder how people so dunder-headed ever spawned men like
>>>Bleriot...
>
>
> That's not racist? One of us is missing something.

Since when are the French a separate race?

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

George Patterson

April 15th 05, 03:30 AM

William W. Plummer wrote:
>
> MYOB.

That *is* his business, and the business of any considerate, thinking adult.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

Larry Dighera

April 15th 05, 03:36 AM

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 19:44:08 -0400, "William W. Plummer"
> wrote in
>::

>Your message is offensive.

I didn't find it offensive.

What is offensive is your failure to trim included text.

Jay Honeck

April 15th 05, 04:03 AM

>> If it hit $7.50 a gallon, you would see a revolution in America.

> Everyone was thinking there would be a revolution back in the 70's when it
> hit 60 cents a gallon! The only revolution I saw was to watch the auto
> industry crumple and dollars go overseas to the imports...

Well, of course it all depends on how quickly the price were to hit $7.50
per gallon. If we're talking over the course of 30 years, obviously no one
will care (although they should.)

If we're talking over the course of 30 months, it would be a political
bloodbath.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 15th 05, 04:04 AM

>> > come on ... it is "C'est la vie"
>>
>> My French ancestors are spinning in their graves, I'm sure...
>
> I knew there was something about you I didn't like! :~)

Yeah, that's the side of my family no one talks about...

We all have *some* skeletons in our closets...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 15th 05, 04:18 AM

> Your statement is certainly offensive to the French themselves, as well as
> to anyone who keeps an open mind about how cultural, philosophical, or
> political differences can exist without either group of people having
> those differences being particularly more ignorant than the other.

Ah, yes -- just more shades of gray. Never any "right" or "wrong", eh,
Pete?

It must be hard to live in a world where it's impossible to discern good
from bad.

> Frankly, I think pretty much most people are stupid.

And you say *I'm* offensive? What hypocrisy!

> By the way, as long as we're talking about stupid people...I would much
> rather interact with a stupid person who has a kind and generous heart,
> than a smart person who constantly stereotypes and belittles those who are
> different from him. Guess which kind of person you seem to me to be.

And I would much prefer to interact with someone who can make a point
without resorting to personal attacks, rather than with a pompous,
sanctimonious old wind sock.

Guess which kind of person you seem to be?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 15th 05, 04:25 AM

> Both times I was admitted to the ER with a collapsed lung, they made sure
> they had my insurance information before I was treated.

Given your general attitude and treatment of others, I am not surprised.

> As usual, you seem to be living in a different America than many of the
> rest of us.

See above.

> Tell that to the local homeless people my wife and I help feed on a weekly
> basis. I'm sure they'd love to hear how they shouldn't have had to pay
> their medical expenses after all.

You clearly have no concept of how the medical system in America works. If
you are indigent (which, by most definitions, includes "homeless people")
you pay NOTHING for health treatment in America.

In fact, in Iowa, Illinois and Wisconsin, you don't even have to be
indigent. The State will pay your medical bills 100% if you and/or
Medicare/Medicaid cannot pay them.

Of course, that means you and I pay those bills -- there is no free lunch,
after all -- but that's another topic.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Eduardo K.

April 15th 05, 04:36 AM

In article <34A7e.14321$xL4.3090@attbi_s72>,
Jay Honeck > wrote:
>> But I like to be brought to the ER after an accident ASAP and beeing
>> searched
>> for an insurance card _after_ the emergency treatment.
>
>Martin, I don't know what kind of propaganda they've been feeding you in
>Austria, but in America no one cares about who's paying for the bills here
>until after the emergency medical services are rendered.

Nice... Down here you wont get treatment at all in a private hospital
unless somebody writes a BLANK check and leaves it on admissions...

And yes, there are laws against it nobody cares about...

--
Eduardo K. | Darwin pone las reglas.
| Murphy, la oportunidad.
http://e.nn.cl |
| Yo.

Eduardo K.

April 15th 05, 04:38 AM

In article >,
Bob Fry > wrote:
>"Mike Rapoport" > writes:
>
>> The US has become totally addicted to spending tomorrow's money
>> today.
>
>Worse: we are not even spending our own money. We are spending Other
>People's Money at vast rates, $2 Billion every day, according to Paul
>Volcker. How long will that keep up? When will this house of cards
>collapse and we will actually have to earn our living instead of
>borrowing it?
>

THat would explain why the Dolar-Euro rate is now over 1.30

--
Eduardo K. | Darwin pone las reglas.
| Murphy, la oportunidad.
http://e.nn.cl |
| Yo.

Dave Stadt

April 15th 05, 05:07 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:H9G7e.15664$Bb3.8637@attbi_s22...
> >> If it hit $7.50 a gallon, you would see a revolution in America.
>
> > Everyone was thinking there would be a revolution back in the 70's when
it
> > hit 60 cents a gallon! The only revolution I saw was to watch the auto
> > industry crumple and dollars go overseas to the imports...
>
> Well, of course it all depends on how quickly the price were to hit $7.50
> per gallon. If we're talking over the course of 30 years, obviously no
one
> will care (although they should.)
>
> If we're talking over the course of 30 months, it would be a political
> bloodbath.

Not to mention the economic disaster. You could probably buy United for the
cost of a 172.

> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

Dave Stadt

April 15th 05, 05:10 AM

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
> "William W. Plummer" > writes:
>
> > Peter Duniho wrote:
> [snip]
> > Your message is offensive. MYOB.
>
> Peter's message was thoughtful and on target, and while he sure
> doesn't need me to defend him, I do anyway. Calling out a poster who
> regularly stereotypes and disparages entire nations and continents is
> very much all of our business.

But in this case it was true.

Dave Stadt

April 15th 05, 05:11 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:3oG7e.15692$Bb3.7756@attbi_s22...
> > Your statement is certainly offensive to the French themselves, as well
as
> > to anyone who keeps an open mind about how cultural, philosophical, or
> > political differences can exist without either group of people having
> > those differences being particularly more ignorant than the other.
>
> Ah, yes -- just more shades of gray. Never any "right" or "wrong", eh,
> Pete?
>
> It must be hard to live in a world where it's impossible to discern good
> from bad.
>
> > Frankly, I think pretty much most people are stupid.
>
> And you say *I'm* offensive? What hypocrisy!
>
> > By the way, as long as we're talking about stupid people...I would much
> > rather interact with a stupid person who has a kind and generous heart,
> > than a smart person who constantly stereotypes and belittles those who
are
> > different from him. Guess which kind of person you seem to me to be.
>
> And I would much prefer to interact with someone who can make a point
> without resorting to personal attacks, rather than with a pompous,
> sanctimonious old wind sock.
>
> Guess which kind of person you seem to be?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Slam and dunk.

Peter Duniho

April 15th 05, 08:35 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:3oG7e.15692$Bb3.7756@attbi_s22...
>> Frankly, I think pretty much most people are stupid.
>
> And you say *I'm* offensive? What hypocrisy!

I said it was. I'll be the first to agree I'm not perfect.

> [...]
> And I would much prefer to interact with someone who can make a point
> without resorting to personal attacks, rather than with a pompous,
> sanctimonious old wind sock.

Sorry you feel that way. IMHO, you were due for a personal attack. I'm
sick and tired of seeing your self-centered, insulting, narrow-minded
statements here. I think I've been quite restrained, and having vented a
bit, I will continue to be restrained.

Can you say the same?

Pete

Peter Duniho

April 15th 05, 08:50 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:kuG7e.15707$Bb3.7647@attbi_s22...
>> Both times I was admitted to the ER with a collapsed lung, they made sure
>> they had my insurance information before I was treated.
>
> Given your general attitude and treatment of others, I am not surprised.

Really? And what is my general attitude and treatment of others? Very few
people get the kind of raking over the coals you got. Just because you're
being a jerk and getting the "general attitude and treatment" you deserve,
don't mistake that for the "general attitude and treatment" the rest of the
world gets from me.

> [...]
> You clearly have no concept of how the medical system in America works.
> If you are indigent (which, by most definitions, includes "homeless
> people") you pay NOTHING for health treatment in America.

I'll show your post to the folks trying to figure out how to get their
medical expenses covered. I'm sure it will make them feel MUCH better.

Pete

[email protected]

April 15th 05, 10:38 AM

Hmmm, I think about migrating to France.
$9.80/USgallon overhere at the moment.

-Kees, The Netherlands

P.S. No money left to start a revolution.

Dylan Smith

April 15th 05, 11:44 AM

In article <fvg7e.11984$GJ.11256@attbi_s71>, Jay Honeck wrote:
> Americans. For some odd reason, the French just go "Se la vie" and shrug
> their shoulders.

It's "C'est la vie" - and if you think that, you don't know the French
well at all. They are famous for shutting down the country if they don't
get what they want. French people generally are also fairly left-wing;
they aren't US Republicans.

> I only feel bad for the common men who gaze skyward, fruitlessly. What a
> shame.

Generally, they don't. They just fly planes that burn less fuel.

Why must so many threads in this NG turn into vitriolic political rants?

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[email protected]

April 15th 05, 12:31 PM

They also shut the country down during lunch time ;-)
Good idea by the way.

-Kees

Jay Honeck

April 15th 05, 02:17 PM

> Hmmm, I think about migrating to France.
> $9.80/USgallon overhere at the moment.

Yikes! I hope you have wonderful, um, whatever, for all that money.

Sorry to hear that, Kees.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bob Fry

April 15th 05, 02:18 PM

"Jay Honeck" > writes:

> They've got the government they deserve.

Ladieees and gentlemen, straight from http://www.whitehouse.gov, the
Government You've Got! If you live in the USA, that is. And you
deserve it!

Q -- really understand how is it the new plan is going to fix that
problem?

THE PRESIDENT: Because the -- all which is on the table begins to
address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculate,
for example, is on the table; whether or not benefits rise based upon
wage increases or price increases. There's a series of parts of the
formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those
different cost drivers, affecting those -- changing those with
personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more
likely to be -- or closer delivered to what has been promised.

Does that make any sense to you? It's kind of muddled. Look, there's a
series of things that cause the -- like, for example, benefits are
calculated based upon the increase of wages, as opposed to the
increase of prices. Some have suggested that we calculate -- the
benefits will rise based upon inflation, as opposed to wage
increases. There is a reform that would help solve the red if that
were put into effect. In other words, how fast benefits grow, how fast
the promised benefits grow, if those -- if that growth is affected, it
will help on the red.

Okay, better? I'll keep working on it.

Jay Honeck

April 15th 05, 02:36 PM

> It's "C'est la vie" - and if you think that, you don't know the French
> well at all. They are famous for shutting down the country if they don't
> get what they want.

So, to sum up, what you're saying is that the French people simply don't
value general aviation enough not to tax it out of existence?

>> I only feel bad for the common men who gaze skyward, fruitlessly. What
>> a
>> shame.
>
> Generally, they don't. They just fly planes that burn less fuel.

They would have to fly a plane that burned less than half the gas of a
Cessna 152 for French students to be on even keel with their American
counterparts. I'm not sure I know of any certified trainers that burn just
2 - 4 gallons per hour?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[email protected]

April 15th 05, 03:02 PM

In most countries flying is for the rich people.
The ones who fly here were rich ones.

To be honest, a short hop over the border saves about $2/gallon. My
little plane just burns 4.7 gallon/hour. I can live with that.

Have a nice weekend,
Kees

Mike Rapoport

April 15th 05, 03:04 PM

"G Farris" > wrote in message
...
> It's amazing how prejudices and misinformation fly.
>
> I read an article by a French guy - supposed to be a world-famous
> scholar -
> about cultural differences between French and Americans. He said (I
> paraphrase) "France is basically an agricultural society, so French
> understand
> that it can't rain every day, and that a good year is likely to be
> followed by
> a poorer year, hence their conservatism - Americans slaughtered the
> Indians
> and that explains everything you need to know about them".
>

I like this guy..whoever he is.

Mike
MU-2

Matt Barrow

April 15th 05, 03:35 PM

"Dylan Smith" > wrote in message
...
> In article <fvg7e.11984$GJ.11256@attbi_s71>, Jay Honeck wrote:
> > Americans. For some odd reason, the French just go "Se la vie" and
shrug
> > their shoulders.
>
> It's "C'est la vie" - and if you think that, you don't know the French
> well at all. They are famous for shutting down the country if they don't
> get what they want. French people generally are also fairly left-wing;
> they aren't US Republicans.
>
> > I only feel bad for the common men who gaze skyward, fruitlessly. What
a
> > shame.
>
> Generally, they don't. They just fly planes that burn less fuel.

Could you provide some numbers to support that cliam? I mean, what
percentage of the populous are pilots?, that sort of thing?

>
> Why must so many threads in this NG turn into vitriolic political rants?
>

Like the "foreigners" that whine that their gas is so expensive (hey,
they're all democracies), but they are so much better than the US?

Matt Barrow

April 15th 05, 03:46 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:mrP7e.17987$GJ.17055@attbi_s71...
> > It's "C'est la vie" - and if you think that, you don't know the French
> > well at all. They are famous for shutting down the country if they don't
> > get what they want.
>
> So, to sum up, what you're saying is that the French people simply don't
> value general aviation enough not to tax it out of existence?
>
> >> I only feel bad for the common men who gaze skyward, fruitlessly.
What
> >> a
> >> shame.
> >
> > Generally, they don't. They just fly planes that burn less fuel.
>
> They would have to fly a plane that burned less than half the gas of a
> Cessna 152 for French students to be on even keel with their American
> counterparts. I'm not sure I know of any certified trainers that burn
just
> 2 - 4 gallons per hour?

And the fact that France is about 600 miles across it's longest
girth...about from Denver to Kansas City. Just not that far to go.

Newps

April 15th 05, 04:22 PM

wrote:

> They also shut the country down during lunch time ;-)
> Good idea by the way.

And all of August.

Martin Hotze

April 15th 05, 07:24 PM

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 23:31:43 +0000 (UTC), G Farris wrote:

>He said (I
>paraphrase) "France is basically an agricultural society, so French understand
>that it can't rain every day, and that a good year is likely to be followed by
>a poorer year, hence their conservatism - Americans slaughtered the Indians
>and that explains everything you need to know about them".

well, even here many people say that the French are somewhat self centered.
AFAIK not really many are happy speaking a foreign language, they also try
to find French words for new technology terms (that we speak in english in
our language).

>Many French really believe that blacks are not admitted to US hospitals, and

yep, there are stupid people everywhere.

>if you check in with ten bullets in the chest, but don't have cash to pay
>they throw you back out in the alley to bleed. At the same time, they will
>tell you their health care is "free"

there is no such thing like a free lunch. many people see it as "free" if
it is a service brought to you by the state (who finances all these things
through taxes).

> - they don't seem to worry about the fact
>that a flat-rate 21% comes off every paycheck

this depends and varies from state to state. this is a rather complex and
IMHO hard to explain. But I'll try if someone is interested (and if I have
the chance to be not lost in translation *doh*)

> - even the poorest - to pay for

NACK

we have a thing that is called 'negative tax'

>it and it's still running up colossal deficits.

yes, it is. and we lose social services and have to co-pay more and more.
and less services are paid by social security (varies from state to state
and from security agency to security agency; we in Austria have close to
30).

#m
--
<http://www.hotze.priv.at/album/aviation/caution.jpg>

Martin Hotze

April 15th 05, 07:29 PM

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:17:52 GMT, Jay Honeck wrote:

>Yikes! I hope you have wonderful, um, whatever, for all that money.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^

you can legally buy pot there ... :-)

#m
--
<http://www.hotze.priv.at/album/aviation/caution.jpg>

Nils Rostedt

April 15th 05, 11:20 PM

"Jay Honeck" wrote ...
>>> I only feel bad for the common men who gaze skyward, fruitlessly. What
>>> a
>>> shame.
>>
>> Generally, they don't. They just fly planes that burn less fuel.
>
> They would have to fly a plane that burned less than half the gas of a
> Cessna 152 for French students to be on even keel with their American
> counterparts. I'm not sure I know of any certified trainers that burn
> just 2 - 4 gallons per hour?
> --
> Jay Honeck

Have a look at the multitude of airplanes that use the Rotax 912 or 912S
engine. The Diamond Katana is probably the best known in the US among the
certified breed.

But in addition there is the European ultralight (or microlight) category,
which is not to be confused with US ultralights - it's very similar to the
new US Light Sport Aircraft, albeit a little lighter (about 1100 lb vs. 1400
lb). Thousands of fly-for-fun pilots in Europe enjoy those planes, with one
or two seats and a Rotax or Jabiru up front.

The cost crunch hits hardest in the four-to-six person "transportational"
aircraft category. The European solution is the diesel engine, as seen on
the Diamond DA40 Star.

/ Nils

Bob Fry

April 16th 05, 01:51 AM

"Jay Honeck" > writes:

> Makes you wonder how people so dunder-headed ever spawned men like
> Bleriot...

"Jay Honeck" > writes:

> And I would much prefer to interact with someone who can make a point
> without resorting to personal attacks

I guess sterotyping and insulting entire countries is A-OK...

Bob Fry

April 16th 05, 01:55 AM

Dylan Smith > writes:

> Why must so many threads in this NG turn into vitriolic political rants?

Because one very ignorant poster repeatedly insults large blocks of
people by country of origin.

G Farris

April 16th 05, 02:01 AM

Where do you fly in Austria?
Send me an e-mail - remove the $GAS from below :

Morgans

April 16th 05, 02:32 AM

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
> Dylan Smith > writes:
>
> > Why must so many threads in this NG turn into vitriolic political rants?
>
> Because one very ignorant poster repeatedly insults large blocks of
> people by country of origin.

Why don't you just filter him out, if his ignorance bothers you so?

By responding, it just fuels the fire.
--
Jim in NC

George Patterson

April 16th 05, 03:59 AM

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> Yeah, that's the side of my family no one talks about...
>
> We all have *some* skeletons in our closets...

Yep -- in *my* family, nobody talks about the Schwarzwalders. At least, not
since WWII.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

Andrew Sarangan

April 16th 05, 06:53 AM

It may be true that hospitals provide emergency care without first
asking for insurance. However, they will ask for it afterwards. How else
do you explain the fact that medical bills are a leading cause of
bankruptcies in this country?

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:34A7e.14321$xL4.3090@attbi_s72:

>> But I like to be brought to the ER after an accident ASAP and beeing
>> searched
>> for an insurance card _after_ the emergency treatment.
>
> Martin, I don't know what kind of propaganda they've been feeding you
> in Austria, but in America no one cares about who's paying for the
> bills here until after the emergency medical services are rendered.
>
> And, in fact, we *do* have nationalized health care in this country
> for the indigent. Those who deny this fact clearly have no concept of
> how our medical system works. (Mary's "other" job is doing
> statistical computer analysis for a major health care provider, and
> she spent 20 years as a Medical Technologist "in the trenches" drawing
> blood, etc. She analyzes budgets, and gets to see, first hand, how
> Medicare and other government programs pay 100% of health care costs
> for anyone who walks in the door without insurance..)
>
> Could the system be set up in a more efficient way? Hell, yes. But
> it *is* functioning, and our health care *is* quite excellent.

Martin Hotze

April 16th 05, 07:26 AM

On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 02:59:14 GMT, George Patterson wrote:

>> Yeah, that's the side of my family no one talks about...
>>
>> We all have *some* skeletons in our closets...
>
>Yep -- in *my* family, nobody talks about the Schwarzwalders. At least, not
>since WWII.

mabe they fought against the system back then and you don't know about
having little heroes in your family.

>George Patterson

#m
--
<http://www.hotze.priv.at/album/aviation/caution.jpg>

Bob Noel

April 16th 05, 08:37 AM

In article >,
Andrew Sarangan > wrote:

> It may be true that hospitals provide emergency care without first
> asking for insurance. However, they will ask for it afterwards. How else
> do you explain the fact that medical bills are a leading cause of
> bankruptcies in this country?

how about because medical care costs can be the single largest
expensive in someone's life?

--
Bob Noel
looking for a sig the lawyers will like

Matt Barrow

April 16th 05, 03:25 PM

"Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
1...
>
> It may be true that hospitals provide emergency care without first
> asking for insurance. However, they will ask for it afterwards. How else
> do you explain the fact that medical bills are a leading cause of
> bankruptcies in this country?

There's some logic in that statement...it's just very well hidden.

Matt Barrow

April 16th 05, 03:27 PM

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Andrew Sarangan > wrote:
>
> > It may be true that hospitals provide emergency care without first
> > asking for insurance. However, they will ask for it afterwards. How else
> > do you explain the fact that medical bills are a leading cause of
> > bankruptcies in this country?
>
> how about because medical care costs can be the single largest
> expensive in someone's life?
>
And the fact that very few people carry catastrophic coverage any more,
figuring that $10 doctor visits are a better alternative than covering the
$250-500K situations.

Kinda like getting car insurance to cover oil changes, but limiting coverage
to $1000 and getting waxed when your $25,000 car gets totaled.

Gary Drescher

April 16th 05, 03:32 PM

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Bob Fry" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Dylan Smith > writes:
>>
>> > Why must so many threads in this NG turn into vitriolic political
>> > rants?
>>
>> Because one very ignorant poster repeatedly insults large blocks of
>> people by country of origin.
>
> Why don't you just filter him out, if his ignorance bothers you so?

For the same reason that, if you're sitting at a dinner table and someone
starts gratuitiously disparaging the people next to you, you would probably
want to speak in their defense, rather than just acquiescing in silence.

--Gary

> By responding, it just fuels the fire.
> --
> Jim in NC
>

Bob Fry

April 16th 05, 06:15 PM

"Gary Drescher" > writes:

> > Why don't you just filter him out, if his ignorance bothers you so?
>
> For the same reason that, if you're sitting at a dinner table and someone
> starts gratuitiously disparaging the people next to you, you would probably
> want to speak in their defense, rather than just acquiescing in silence.

Thank you.

In his attitude towards other groups, Jay is not far from the bigots
who disparage ethnic groups (blacks, hispanics, etc.) As a society we
have generally learned over the years that stereotyping and
name-calling are a Bad Thing, first for the individuals in the groups,
and then for all the rest of us. It drags all of us down. It's not
what the American experiment was and is about.

On a personal level, the best vacation I ever had was my trip to
Europe, where my wife and I visited only France. Our nephew married a
French girl and we went to their wedding. We had a fantastic time,
including a trip to a local aéroport where I logged a half hour in an
airplane. The instructor refused to accept any payment for his time
and the club members were gracious and friendly. Virtually everybody
we me in our 20 days there was helpful. France is a beautiful
country, its engineers some of the best in the world, the French
people are not fat, boastful slobs.

So, no, I'm not going to remain silent when some ignorant (and proud
of it) mid-west yahoo vomits on this newsgroup.

Gary Drescher

April 16th 05, 06:18 PM

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
> So, no, I'm not going to remain silent when some ignorant (and proud
> of it) mid-west yahoo vomits on this newsgroup.

Although stereotyping mid-westerners is also undesirable.

--Gary

Larry Dighera

April 16th 05, 09:16 PM

On 16 Apr 2005 10:15:37 -0700, Bob Fry
> wrote in
>::

>On a personal level, the best vacation I ever had was my trip to
>Europe, where my wife and I visited only France.

You speak with the wisdom of a cosmopolitan traveler. I suspect that
Mr. Honeck has never stepped foot in France or anywhere else in
Europe, else how can his provincial attitude be explained?

Matt Barrow

April 16th 05, 10:16 PM

"Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
...
> "Bob Fry" > wrote in message
> ...
> > So, no, I'm not going to remain silent when some ignorant (and proud
> > of it) mid-west yahoo vomits on this newsgroup.
>
> Although stereotyping mid-westerners is also undesirable.
>
Welcome to Bob's world.

Chris

April 17th 05, 12:35 AM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> On 16 Apr 2005 10:15:37 -0700, Bob Fry
> > wrote in
> >::
>
>>On a personal level, the best vacation I ever had was my trip to
>>Europe, where my wife and I visited only France.
>
> You speak with the wisdom of a cosmopolitan traveler. I suspect that
> Mr. Honeck has never stepped foot in France or anywhere else in
> Europe, else how can his provincial attitude be explained?
>
>
Reminds me of the time I was on vacation and passing through Utah. A
waitress in the delightful little town of Torrey said "you have strange
English accents, say where are you folks from?" "England", we replied.
"What state is that in?" she asked. We just smiled. Any further explanation
was going to be a mite challenging.
It is a common occurrence but then I do tend to be in places like Torrey
when I have vacations in the US.

cb

Morgans

April 17th 05, 12:35 AM

You and Gary deserve each other. Pot - Kettle - Black.

You seem to be quite good at slmming goups of people too, such as
midwesterners.

See ya. Not.

Plonk
--
Jim in NC

Newps

April 17th 05, 12:52 AM

Morgans wrote:

> You and Gary deserve each other. Pot - Kettle - Black.
>
> You seem to be quite good at slmming goups of people too, such as
> midwesterners.
>
> See ya. Not.
>
> Plonk

Hey, plonk me too. I also think the French are morons.

Matt Barrow

April 17th 05, 01:07 AM

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Morgans wrote:
>
> > You and Gary deserve each other. Pot - Kettle - Black.
> >
> > You seem to be quite good at slmming goups of people too, such as
> > midwesterners.
> >
> > See ya. Not.
> >
> > Plonk
>
> Hey, plonk me too. I also think the French are morons.
>

Second that!

Andrew Sarangan

April 17th 05, 01:51 AM

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in
:

>
> "Bob Noel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In article >,
>> Andrew Sarangan > wrote:
>>
>> > It may be true that hospitals provide emergency care without first
>> > asking for insurance. However, they will ask for it afterwards. How
>> > else do you explain the fact that medical bills are a leading cause
>> > of bankruptcies in this country?
>>
>> how about because medical care costs can be the single largest
>> expensive in someone's life?
>>
> And the fact that very few people carry catastrophic coverage any
> more, figuring that $10 doctor visits are a better alternative than
> covering the $250-500K situations.
>
> Kinda like getting car insurance to cover oil changes, but limiting
> coverage to $1000 and getting waxed when your $25,000 car gets
> totaled.
>
>
>

20% of employed Americans do not have health insurance. Many small
employers do not provide any kind of health coverage. Those of us
fortunate to be employed by large organizations may not appreciate this.
If those people buy insurance, the high premiums will drive them into
bankruptcy with greater certainty than taking a chance without
insurance. Either way they are doomed.

Newps

April 17th 05, 02:00 AM

Andrew Sarangan wrote:

Either way they are doomed.

A risk? Yes.
Doomed? Gimme a break.

Matt Whiting

April 17th 05, 02:00 AM

Larry Dighera wrote:

> On 16 Apr 2005 10:15:37 -0700, Bob Fry
> > wrote in
> >::
>
>
>>On a personal level, the best vacation I ever had was my trip to
>>Europe, where my wife and I visited only France.
>
>
> You speak with the wisdom of a cosmopolitan traveler. I suspect that
> Mr. Honeck has never stepped foot in France or anywhere else in
> Europe, else how can his provincial attitude be explained?

I can't speak for Jay, but I've travelled extensively in Europe, lived
in England for more than 4 months and have travelled in Asia a little as
well. I don't find the French terribly less friendly than other
Europeans, however, it is true that they are the least friendly of the
Europeans in my experience. The Brits, Germans and Russians are all
friendlier and more helpful to business travelers and tourists alike.

Having said that, the only group in France that I'd particularly single
out as being rude and very unhelpful are the taxi drivers. I used taxis
on my first three business trips there and each was a disaster. I
decided to rent a car and try driving after that figuring it couldn't be
as bad as dealing with French taxi drivers. I was right. Driving in
France wasn't bad at all and much better than putting up with arrogant
cabbies who seem to delight in causing their fares grief.

However, Europe in general doesn't come close to Asia in dealing with
business visitors and tourists. Japan, Taiwan and Korea are miles ahead
of anywhere in Europe.

Unfortunately, I've never had the change to fly privately anywhere other
than the US so I can't compare GA in Asia to Europe, but I don't think
either can compare to the US.

Matt

Morgans

April 17th 05, 03:42 AM

"Newps" > wrote

> Hey, plonk me too. I also think the French are morons.

I'm not plonking the anti French. Just the ones spewing forth loads of
crap, just because someone made a simple statement, jumping the ones who let
their fuel prices rise to crazy highs, while doing nothing.

While the French can be wonderful, there are some who really leave tourists
with a bad taste. I have had the worst service, and been treated more
rudely in France, than anywhere else. I was not being an "ugly American" at
the time, either.

If you ask me, this whole thing has been blasted way out of size. I'm done
with it, now.

See ya!
--
Jim in NC

George Patterson

April 17th 05, 04:18 AM

Martin Hotze wrote:
>
> mabe they fought against the system back then and you don't know about
> having little heroes in your family.

Naw -- they were all over here by then. Changed the name to "Blackwelder", though.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

George Patterson

April 17th 05, 04:20 AM

Gary Drescher wrote:
> "Bob Fry" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>So, no, I'm not going to remain silent when some ignorant (and proud
>>of it) mid-west yahoo vomits on this newsgroup.
>
>
> Although stereotyping mid-westerners is also undesirable.

That's not a stereotype. That's *one* very specific example.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

Dave Stadt

April 17th 05, 04:41 AM

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
> "Gary Drescher" > writes:
>
> > > Why don't you just filter him out, if his ignorance bothers you so?
> >
> > For the same reason that, if you're sitting at a dinner table and
someone
> > starts gratuitiously disparaging the people next to you, you would
probably
> > want to speak in their defense, rather than just acquiescing in silence.
>
> Thank you.
>
> In his attitude towards other groups, Jay is not far from the bigots
> who disparage ethnic groups (blacks, hispanics, etc.) As a society we
> have generally learned over the years that stereotyping and
> name-calling are a Bad Thing, first for the individuals in the groups,
> and then for all the rest of us. It drags all of us down. It's not
> what the American experiment was and is about.
>
> On a personal level, the best vacation I ever had was my trip to
> Europe, where my wife and I visited only France. Our nephew married a
> French girl and we went to their wedding. We had a fantastic time,
> including a trip to a local aéroport where I logged a half hour in an
> airplane. The instructor refused to accept any payment for his time
> and the club members were gracious and friendly. Virtually everybody
> we me in our 20 days there was helpful. France is a beautiful
> country, its engineers some of the best in the world, the French
> people are not fat, boastful slobs.

That's not the France I spent time in.

Dave Stadt

April 17th 05, 04:44 AM

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Newps" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > Morgans wrote:
> >
> > > You and Gary deserve each other. Pot - Kettle - Black.
> > >
> > > You seem to be quite good at slmming goups of people too, such as
> > > midwesterners.
> > >
> > > See ya. Not.
> > >
> > > Plonk
> >
> > Hey, plonk me too. I also think the French are morons.
> >
>
> Second that!

Been there, saw them in action, they are a disgusting lot, make me number
three.

Bob Fry

April 17th 05, 06:02 AM

"Dave Stadt" > writes:

> Been there, saw them in action, they are a disgusting lot, make me number
> three.

Well, most people respond in kind to how they're treated. No doubt
they found you disgusting first.

Jason Dodd

April 17th 05, 08:58 AM

Actually, In Iowa here, it says right on the pump what the individual
taxes per gallon are

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:AZz7e.14314$xL4.12721@attbi_s72...
>
>>Gas prices, on the other hand, are plain as day transparent, and people
>>are already ****ed as hell.
>
>
> No actually there not plain as day. When I pull up to the pump see that gas
> is $2.479/gal I have no idea what part of that is tax.
>
> In Arkansas the same goes for liquor tax. It is built into the advertised
> price but not by law only by tradition. I owned a liquor store for a few
> years and considered advertising the retail price and then adding the state
> liquor and state, county and local sales taxes at the register.
>
> My employees freaked out at the idea. They felt the customers would get
> ****ed and they were right.
>
>

Martin Hotze

April 17th 05, 11:24 AM

On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 03:18:09 GMT, George Patterson wrote:

>> mabe they fought against the system back then and you don't know about
>> having little heroes in your family.
>
>Naw -- they were all over here by then. Changed the name to "Blackwelder", though.

so they fled. what makes you not speaking about them? what have they done?

>George Patterson

#m
--
<http://www.hotze.priv.at/album/aviation/caution.jpg>

Cub Driver

April 17th 05, 11:34 AM

>>On a personal level, the best vacation I ever had was my trip to
>>Europe, where my wife and I visited only France.
>
>You speak with the wisdom of a cosmopolitan traveler.

Wow! What was that trip, a week, two weeks? Time enough, evidently, to
get to the essence of a country.

I

-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

Dave Stadt

April 17th 05, 02:09 PM

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
> "Dave Stadt" > writes:
>
> > Been there, saw them in action, they are a disgusting lot, make me
number
> > three.
>
> Well, most people respond in kind to how they're treated. No doubt
> they found you disgusting first.

I don't remember you being there. No doubt they were being French.

Gary Drescher

April 17th 05, 02:50 PM

"George Patterson" > wrote in message
news:BBk8e.5459$ha3.5006@trndny02...
> Gary Drescher wrote:
>> "Bob Fry" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>So, no, I'm not going to remain silent when some ignorant (and proud
>>>of it) mid-west yahoo vomits on this newsgroup.
>>
>>
>> Although stereotyping Midwesterners is also undesirable.
>
> That's not a stereotype. That's *one* very specific example.

Imagine that the above quote had gratuitously invoked the ethic or religious
identity of the person in question ("ignorant xxxxx yahoo"), instead of
saying 'mid-west'. The implied stereotype would be obvious, even though just
one person is (nominally) addressed. Same for 'mid-west', I'm afraid.

--Gary

Bob Fry

April 17th 05, 04:27 PM

"Dave Stadt" > writes:

> > "Dave Stadt" > writes:
> >
> > > make me number three.
> >
> > Well, most people respond in kind to how they're treated. No doubt
> > they found you disgusting first.
>
> I don't remember you being there. No doubt they were being French.

Awww, Dave, I knew you couldn't stay away. A fake plonk after all, eh?
;-)=

Matt Barrow

April 17th 05, 10:12 PM

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Newps" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > >
> > > Morgans wrote:
> > >
> > > > You and Gary deserve each other. Pot - Kettle - Black.
> > > >
> > > > You seem to be quite good at slmming goups of people too, such as
> > > > midwesterners.
> > > >
> > > > See ya. Not.
> > > >
> > > > Plonk
> > >
> > > Hey, plonk me too. I also think the French are morons.
> > >
> >
> > Second that!
>
>
> Been there, saw them in action, they are a disgusting lot, make me number
> three.

Agreed! That comes from my experience there in/through 1974, 1977, 1989,
1998 and 2000.

Matt Barrow

April 17th 05, 10:17 PM

"Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
1...
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in
> :
> >
> > Kinda like getting car insurance to cover oil changes, but limiting
> > coverage to $1000 and getting waxed when your $25,000 car gets
> > totaled.
> >
> >
> >
>
> 20% of employed Americans do not have health insurance.

But they have all sorts of other toys. I know a few myself. Of course, they
have cell phones that cost $60 or more a month, but not catastrophic health
insurance that costs around the same amount.

>Many small
> employers do not provide any kind of health coverage. Those of us
> fortunate to be employed by large organizations may not appreciate this.

Fortunate? You get a job based on fortunes of life?

> If those people buy insurance, the high premiums will drive them into
> bankruptcy with greater certainty than taking a chance without
> insurance. Either way they are doomed.

Evidently, you have no clue about various forms of insurance and what it
costs. I won't even mention other aspects, as evidenced by the previous
paragraph, such as maturity.

Andrew Sarangan

April 18th 05, 12:25 AM

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in
:

>
> "Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
> 1...
>> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in
>> :
>> >
>> > Kinda like getting car insurance to cover oil changes, but limiting
>> > coverage to $1000 and getting waxed when your $25,000 car gets
>> > totaled.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> 20% of employed Americans do not have health insurance.
>
> But they have all sorts of other toys. I know a few myself. Of course,
> they have cell phones that cost $60 or more a month, but not
> catastrophic health insurance that costs around the same amount.
>
>
>>Many small
>> employers do not provide any kind of health coverage. Those of us
>> fortunate to be employed by large organizations may not appreciate
>> this.
>
> Fortunate? You get a job based on fortunes of life?

That is exactly kind of arrogance that the rest of the world dislikes about
us. Ask any nobel laureate, and they would admit that luck and good fortune
had as much to do with their success as hard work and intelligence. I am
quite well off in life myself, and I have been educated by the best, but I
have never been conceited enough to ignore my good fortunes.

>
>> If those people buy insurance, the high premiums will drive them into
>> bankruptcy with greater certainty than taking a chance without
>> insurance. Either way they are doomed.
>
> Evidently, you have no clue about various forms of insurance and what
> it costs. I won't even mention other aspects, as evidenced by the
> previous paragraph, such as maturity.
>

I will let others decide your comment about maturity. I measure maturity by
how well one can contain himself when faced with opposing views, not by
their political opinions. YMMV

George Patterson

April 18th 05, 02:37 AM

Matt Barrow wrote:
>
> Fortunate? You get a job based on fortunes of life?

Yep. According to the NY Times (the job market section of which I check every
Sunday), roughly 80% of all the professional positions never get advertised. The
people who land them get turned onto the position by their friends. The PC term
for this is "networking." Another way to put it is that you can land a decent
job if you're lucky.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

George Patterson

April 18th 05, 02:42 AM

Gary Drescher wrote:
>
> Imagine that the above quote had gratuitously invoked the ethic or religious
> identity of the person in question ("ignorant xxxxx yahoo"), instead of
> saying 'mid-west'. The implied stereotype would be obvious, even though just
> one person is (nominally) addressed. Same for 'mid-west', I'm afraid.

I disagree. I'm unaware of any stereotypical behavior which might be associated
with mid-westerners. Perhaps I'm simply uninformed in this matter.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

Jay Honeck

April 18th 05, 03:24 AM

> You speak with the wisdom of a cosmopolitan traveler. I suspect that
> Mr. Honeck has never stepped foot in France or anywhere else in
> Europe, else how can his provincial attitude be explained?

I own and operate a hotel in a city that is home to a world-class
university, with 35,000 under- and post-graduate students, and 15,000
faculty members and staff.

As such, I am fortunate to interact with people from all over the world on a
daily basis.

As you can see, I needn't fly to France, as the world comes to me.

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 18th 05, 03:27 AM

> Yep -- in *my* family, nobody talks about the Schwarzwalders. At least,
> not since WWII.

War criminals?

My parents talked about the anti-German prejudice my grandparents (and
others) experienced during World War I. But there was apparently no such
backlash during or after World War II -- at least not in the (admittedly
predominantly German) Midwest...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 18th 05, 03:32 AM

> Yep. According to the NY Times (the job market section of which I check
> every Sunday), roughly 80% of all the professional positions never get
> advertised. The people who land them get turned onto the position by their
> friends. The PC term for this is "networking." Another way to put it is
> that you can land a decent job if you're lucky.

In my experience, networking has very little to do with luck.

Some people call it "schmoozing" -- but in real life, networking is a lot of
hard, sometimes crappy, work, and is often associated with glad-handing
people you would just as soon not deal with.

In this way it's a lot like "customer service" -- except that *you* are the
ultimate customer.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 18th 05, 03:55 AM

> How else
> do you explain the fact that medical bills are a leading cause of
> bankruptcies in this country?

You have pointed out something that needs to be addressed: It's all about
personal responsibility.

People in this country, for some strange reason, simply no longer feel
compelled to pay for the services or goods they have received.

Why, or how, this has evolved is irrelevant. However, it's become such a
terrible problem in America that Congress has been compelled to enact
legislation to restrict bankruptcies, lest the avalanche of defaults destroy
our legal and economic system.

Strangely, rather than blaming the people who have ripped off everyone
around them, you seem to be viewing this phenomenon from the wrong end of
the telescope. You seem to be describing the perpetrators as the victims,
and appear to describe the problem as if it was somehow the fault of someone
other than those people who have chosen not to pay their bills.

Stranger yet, you don't seem to realize that Americans who truly can't pay
their medical bills DON'T HAVE TO PAY THEM. If you are indigent, and sick,
you have no worries, as the state will pay your bills 100%.

It is only the people who have -- or did have, if they had exercised sound
judgment and purchased catastrophic health coverage -- the ability to pay
who now find themselves in jeopardy.

And before you tell us how "unaffordable" health coverage is, do a little
research. Catastrophic health care -- the kind of insurance that doesn't
pay for your broken leg, but DOES pick up everything over and above "x"
amount (you pick the amount) -- is easily affordable by the majority of
Americans without insurance.

The fact that some people choose to roll the dice and hope that they don't
get really sick -- and lose -- has somehow been characterized as a "health
care crisis" in America, when, in fact, these people should be put into the
same category as the "victims" who for years kept building homes along the
shores of the Mississippi River, not far from Iowa City.

Even the Feds, after rebuilding these homes every other year with
"emergency" tax money insurance bail-outs, grew weary of the flood scam, and
have now forced local taxpayers in riverfront communities to build levees
and dikes to protect their cities...

Check out AFLAC insurance. It's affordable, very specific, and for the
cost of a cable TV subscription will cover someone quite adequately in the
event of a catastrophic illness or injury -- the kind that most often drives
a person into bankruptcy.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
"Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
1...
>
>
>
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
> news:34A7e.14321$xL4.3090@attbi_s72:
>
>>> But I like to be brought to the ER after an accident ASAP and beeing
>>> searched
>>> for an insurance card _after_ the emergency treatment.
>>
>> Martin, I don't know what kind of propaganda they've been feeding you
>> in Austria, but in America no one cares about who's paying for the
>> bills here until after the emergency medical services are rendered.
>>
>> And, in fact, we *do* have nationalized health care in this country
>> for the indigent. Those who deny this fact clearly have no concept of
>> how our medical system works. (Mary's "other" job is doing
>> statistical computer analysis for a major health care provider, and
>> she spent 20 years as a Medical Technologist "in the trenches" drawing
>> blood, etc. She analyzes budgets, and gets to see, first hand, how
>> Medicare and other government programs pay 100% of health care costs
>> for anyone who walks in the door without insurance..)
>>
>> Could the system be set up in a more efficient way? Hell, yes. But
>> it *is* functioning, and our health care *is* quite excellent.
>

Matt Barrow

April 18th 05, 04:05 AM

"George Patterson" > wrote in message
news:vbE8e.19229$Xm3.13107@trndny01...
> Matt Barrow wrote:
> >
> > Fortunate? You get a job based on fortunes of life?
>
> Yep. According to the NY Times (the job market section of which I check
every
> Sunday), roughly 80% of all the professional positions never get
advertised. The
> people who land them get turned onto the position by their friends. The PC
term
> for this is "networking." Another way to put it is that you can land a
decent
> job if you're lucky.

Or if you're tenacious and willing to work "outside the box". The rest
shower the job boards with resumes, probably 99% of which don't address a
specific position and are boilerplate.

Which traits would you look for if hiring someone?

Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

Matt Barrow

April 18th 05, 04:14 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:AkF8e.24672$Bb3.14584@attbi_s22...
> > How else
> > do you explain the fact that medical bills are a leading cause of
> > bankruptcies in this country?
>
> You have pointed out something that needs to be addressed: It's all about
> personal responsibility.
>
>
> Check out AFLAC insurance. It's affordable, very specific, and for the
> cost of a cable TV subscription will cover someone quite adequately in the
> event of a catastrophic illness or injury -- the kind that most often
drives
> a person into bankruptcy.

My company provides insurance (AFLAC is the underwriter, Guardian is the
issuer...I think) and split the cost for our 14 employees who pay roughly
$90-110 a month for $250K catastrophic coverage and limited medical
coverage.

No, it doesn't cover hangnails and every little gripe, but when one of my
supervisors fractured an ankle, his costs were $500 for treatment and
therapy.

--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

Dave Stadt

April 18th 05, 04:39 AM

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
> "Dave Stadt" > writes:
>
> > > "Dave Stadt" > writes:
> > >
> > > > make me number three.
> > >
> > > Well, most people respond in kind to how they're treated. No doubt
> > > they found you disgusting first.
> >
> > I don't remember you being there. No doubt they were being French.
>
> Awww, Dave, I knew you couldn't stay away. A fake plonk after all, eh?
> ;-)=

I am afraid you made a left turn. My keyboard has never uttered the word
"plonk."

Morgans

April 18th 05, 04:51 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote

> I own and operate a hotel in a city that is home to a world-class
> university, with 35,000 under- and post-graduate students, and 15,000
> faculty members and staff.

World class university? Ha! The Ohio State University has more than 15,000
people employed, just to clean the toilets! <VBG>
--
Jim in NC

Jay Honeck

April 18th 05, 04:58 AM

> World class university? Ha! The Ohio State University has more than
> 15,000
> people employed, just to clean the toilets! <VBG>

Hey -- we've seen those Ohio State fans (mostly alumnus) at the hotel during
football season!

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Toño

April 18th 05, 06:32 AM

Bob Fry wrote:
> "William W. Plummer" > writes:
>
>
>>Peter Duniho wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>Your message is offensive. MYOB.
>
>
> Peter's message was thoughtful and on target, and while he sure
> doesn't need me to defend him, I do anyway. Calling out a poster who
> regularly stereotypes and disparages entire nations and continents is
> very much all of our business.

I feel compelled to enter my agreement with Bob and Peter. Peter may
have gone a tiny bit too far in his rebuttal, but I think he was right
on target with his sentiments and perceptions.

Keep in mind though that there is a difference between "racism",
"bigotry", "politically incorrect" and "insensitive".

*French* is not a race. It is a nationality. Therefore the comment/s
would not be racist.

The word "bigot" (which, ironically, is derived from French) means "a
person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions
and prejudices". ( < Merriam-Webster ) Therefore the comment about
"dunderheads" would not intrinsically be bigoted unless he was decidedly
adamant about it.

However, "politically incorrect" and "insensitive" are certainly
candidates for discussion if we should wish to splinter off away from
the topic of aviation.

Antonio

Dylan Smith

April 18th 05, 12:23 PM

In article >, Chris wrote:
> Reminds me of the time I was on vacation and passing through Utah. A
> waitress in the delightful little town of Torrey said "you have strange
> English accents, say where are you folks from?" "England", we replied.
> "What state is that in?" she asked. We just smiled. Any further explanation
> was going to be a mite challenging.

Don't worry - I got asked on two separate occasions whether English is
spoken in England, or "whether it's just an accent y'all have". I also
find the "Well is there an Isle of Woman" question gets rather old
rather quick, but I can forgive that - most people in the Isle of Man
haven't heard of Rhode Island so I'd hardly expect them to have heard of
our windswept rock in the Irish Sea.

In any case -- actaully visiting (to live) places strips away much of
the ignorant stereotypes we often harbour - I soon learned that the
United States didn't even remotely fit the stereotypes we normally hold
here (or that are promoted by Hollywood, which seems to believe the US
consists of Los Angeles and perhaps NY and Chicago if they are feeling
generous). I've been to 26 states in the US and it doesn't take long to
realise there's one thing you can't do and that is generalize.

I decided to leave the US not because I didn't like it (I like it a lot
and visit frequently - and I was easily better paid in the US) but because
there are things *other* than the cost of avgas that makes me choose
where I live.

Oh, and France is a beautiful country too, and the Anglo-American
stereotype of the French is also in most cases couldn't be more wrong.
Just because French society has different values to the US doesn't make
them "dunderheaded" either.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Dylan Smith

April 18th 05, 12:58 PM

In article <E_E8e.23627$8Z6.14028@attbi_s21>, Jay Honeck wrote:
> In my experience, networking has very little to do with luck.

Sometimes it does. My last two jobs were got through 'networking' - I
just happened to meet the right people. One was a member of the flying
club. The other the CFI of the glider club. It just so happened I was
the person they were looking for.

Never underestimate the power of 'networking'.

But as for much of my fortunes - yes, they are mostly the product of
luck. I didn't have any control over my birth - it was certainly
fortunate that being born into a middle class British family means I was
born into the world's richest 10%. The vast majority of the world
doesn't have it anywhere as easy.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Jay Honeck

April 18th 05, 01:04 PM

> But as for much of my fortunes - yes, they are mostly the product of
> luck. I didn't have any control over my birth - it was certainly
> fortunate that being born into a middle class British family means I was
> born into the world's richest 10%. The vast majority of the world
> doesn't have it anywhere as easy.

That's for sure. If any of us have luck on our side, it's surely those of
us who were fortunate enough to be born in the "Western world."
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 18th 05, 01:05 PM

> Just because French society has different values to the US doesn't make
> them "dunderheaded" either.

Call it what you will. Anyone -- French, British, or Martian -- dumb enough
to tax avgas up to $7.50 per gallon is dunderheaded.

And that's on a *good* day.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 18th 05, 01:11 PM

> to tell you the truth: I've heard from some universities around the world
> (in
> the news etc.), but I've never heard from your university. But this is
> only me.

Hey -- didn't you hear? We just received national press coverage for being
the university with the highest percentage of "binge drinking" in the
nation?

;-)

Ah, to be young again...

Actually, the University of Iowa is routinely ranked in the top ten in the
country, and it's generally considered number one in the U.S. for literature
and writing. If you've ever heard of the "Writer's Workshop," it's based
right here in Iowa City.

Of course, being Austrian, I suppose it's a long shot that you would have
heard of an English language writer's workshop?

Grad students from all over the world flock here to attend it, and admission
is incredibly prestigious. Once you've "been to the workshop" you are
generally considered "somebody" in the literary world.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 18th 05, 02:09 PM

> That's for sure. If any of us have luck on our side, it's surely those of
> us who were fortunate enough to be born in the "Western world."

Oh, crap -- there I go again, being "racist"...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Mike Rapoport

April 18th 05, 02:27 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:aTE8e.23567$8Z6.2699@attbi_s21...
>> You speak with the wisdom of a cosmopolitan traveler. I suspect that
>> Mr. Honeck has never stepped foot in France or anywhere else in
>> Europe, else how can his provincial attitude be explained?
>
> I own and operate a hotel in a city that is home to a world-class
> university, with 35,000 under- and post-graduate students, and 15,000
> faculty members and staff.
>

I thought you lived in Iowa.

Mike
MU-2

> As such, I am fortunate to interact with people from all over the world on
> a daily basis.
>
> As you can see, I needn't fly to France, as the world comes to me.
>
> :-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

Jay Honeck

April 18th 05, 02:37 PM

> I thought you lived in Iowa.

Ha!

As opposed to, say, Idaho?

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Mike Rapoport

April 18th 05, 03:07 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:zoN8e.26116$8Z6.5821@attbi_s21...
>> Just because French society has different values to the US doesn't make
>> them "dunderheaded" either.
>
> Call it what you will. Anyone -- French, British, or Martian -- dumb
> enough to tax avgas up to $7.50 per gallon is dunderheaded.
>

Why? Societies make choices about what they want their governments to
provide and what to tax to pay for it. France (and most of the rest of
Europe) has chosen to provide extensive social benefits and pay for them
with taxes mostly on consumption. The US has also chosen to provide
extensive social benefits and also buy a huge mililtary and pay for it with
taxes mostly on production (and borrowing from their children.).

If you look at it dispassionately, avgas is used primarily for recreation
producing noise and pollution as byproducts. This is particulary true in
France where trains go faster than most aircraft burning avgas. Why does it
make more sense to tax people's productive effort directly through income
taxes than it does to tax avgas?

Mike
MU-2

> And that's on a *good* day.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

Matt Barrow

April 18th 05, 03:19 PM

Matt Barrow

April 18th 05, 03:26 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:UmN8e.26114$8Z6.8446@attbi_s21...
> > But as for much of my fortunes - yes, they are mostly the product of
> > luck.

History is rife with stories about people of "noble birth" winding up insane
and destitute, and, OTOH, most of our wealthiest people were born on the
wrong side of the tracks.

> > I didn't have any control over my birth - it was certainly
> > fortunate that being born into a middle class British family means I was
> > born into the world's richest 10%. The vast majority of the world
> > doesn't have it anywhere as easy.

"Palace to poor house in two generations" -- American witicism from the late
1800's

>
> That's for sure. If any of us have luck on our side, it's surely those of
> us who were fortunate enough to be born in the "Western world."

And even that isn't enough for most, and some of the wealthiest people
are/were from Hong Kong, and Chinese are often the weathiest people in the
countries in which they reside, often causing servere envy.

Mike Rapoport

April 18th 05, 03:33 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:aKO8e.26241$8Z6.17556@attbi_s21...
>> I thought you lived in Iowa.
>
> Ha!
>
> As opposed to, say, Idaho?
>
> ;-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

I don't think anyone in ID is claiming that we have a "world class"
universitee...unaverasty...er...college. Some claim that we have "world
class" skiing but that isn't true either.

Mike
MU-2

Morgans

April 18th 05, 11:11 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote \
>
> Hey -- didn't you hear? We just received national press coverage for
being
> the university with the highest percentage of "binge drinking" in the
> nation?
>

I'm IMPRESSED!!!!

Who would have thunk it?

Better than U of Wisc, who has the Bud song as one of their pep songs?

Better than Ohio State? (where I did my share of influencing the stats, when
I was there)

Oh, that's right! The missing factor. Out in the middle of the cornfields
of Iowa, there is not much else to do but drink! Or write. (yea right Jay,
good try!)

;-)
--
Jim in NC

David CL Francis

April 19th 05, 01:16 AM

Jay,

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 at 20:00:32 in message
<AZz7e.14314$xL4.12721@attbi_s72>, Jay Honeck >
wrote:
>The Federal tax code has been carefully -- even diabolically -- written so
>that the average Joe on the street has NO idea what he's actually paying in
>taxes. By forcing employers to withhold the tax BEFORE the employee ever
>sees the money, the Gubmint not only guarantees payment, it guarantees
>acquiescence.
>
As has the UK tax code.
>Bottom line: The government keeps the tax laws inscrutably complex quite on
>purpose, lest they provoke an uprising.
>
Similar in the UK with all sorts of tax credits etc. The UK citizen's
ability to offset expenses against tax is also very limited.

>Gas prices, on the other hand, are plain as day transparent, and people are
>already ****ed as hell. The Bush administration is crapping their pants
>right now, watching GW's approval rating plummet, primarily because of
>rising gas prices.
>
>If it hit $7.50 a gallon, you would see a revolution in America.

Just did a quick sum. I am paying £0.855 per litre for regular unleaded.
This is the equivalent at an exchange rate of $1.80 to the GBP to $5.83
per US Gallon.

(3.78541 litres per US Gallon)
--
David CL Francis

Bob Fry

April 19th 05, 03:21 AM

"Mike Rapoport" > writes:

> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:zoN8e.26116$8Z6.5821@attbi_s21...
> >> Just because French society has different values to the US doesn't make
> >> them "dunderheaded" either.
> >
> > Call it what you will. Anyone -- French, British, or Martian -- dumb
> > enough to tax avgas up to $7.50 per gallon is dunderheaded.
> >
>
> Why? Societies make choices about what they want their governments to
> provide and what to tax to pay for it. France (and most of the rest of
> Europe) has chosen to provide extensive social benefits and pay for them
> with taxes mostly on consumption. The US has also chosen to provide
> extensive social benefits and also buy a huge mililtary and pay for it with
> taxes mostly on production (and borrowing from their children.).

Would that we were taxing ourselves, but we're not. And we're not
borrowing from our children, but from the rest of the world. One day,
not so far away, the rest of world will get tired of it. I think
within 10-15 years the world's goods will be priced in something other
than the US dollar (probably the Euro) and then our consumption will
come to an abrupt halt.

Dunderheaded is when you consume way more than you produce, when you
borrow not to invest in production but in consumption, when you launch
wars half way around the world on the basis of lies or gross
incompetence, when your only national energy policy is drilling more
holes and nothing else.

Dunderheaded is also when you think you know everything by having a
few foreign guests stop by.

Mike Rapoport

April 19th 05, 03:51 AM

"Bob Fry" > wrote in message
...
> "Mike Rapoport" > writes:
>
>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
>> news:zoN8e.26116$8Z6.5821@attbi_s21...
>> >> Just because French society has different values to the US doesn't
>> >> make
>> >> them "dunderheaded" either.
>> >
>> > Call it what you will. Anyone -- French, British, or Martian -- dumb
>> > enough to tax avgas up to $7.50 per gallon is dunderheaded.
>> >
>>
>> Why? Societies make choices about what they want their governments to
>> provide and what to tax to pay for it. France (and most of the rest of
>> Europe) has chosen to provide extensive social benefits and pay for them
>> with taxes mostly on consumption. The US has also chosen to provide
>> extensive social benefits and also buy a huge mililtary and pay for it
>> with
>> taxes mostly on production (and borrowing from their children.).
>
> Would that we were taxing ourselves, but we're not. And we're not
> borrowing from our children, but from the rest of the world. One day,
> not so far away, the rest of world will get tired of it. I think
> within 10-15 years the world's goods will be priced in something other
> than the US dollar (probably the Euro) and then our consumption will
> come to an abrupt halt.

We are borrowing from the rest of the world but we are leaving the repayment
to our children.

Mike
MU-2

Highflyer

April 19th 05, 06:14 AM

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Been there, saw them in action, they are a disgusting lot, make me number
> three.
>

I too have been there, as well as a few other places, and I have also seen
them in action. I found them to be warm, friendly, helpful, and generous.
Sometimes a bit stubborn, but not compared to my wife. :-)

I found the local people to be warm, friendly, helpful, and generous in the
following places among others not mentioned.

France, England, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, Brittany, Ireland, Norway,
Sweden, Finland, Russia, Estonia, Germany, Holland, Luxembourg, Belgium,
Switzerland, Spain, Andorra, Greece, Italy, Egypt, Turkey, South Africa,
Zimbabwe, Madagascar, Botswana, Sudan, Kenya, Swaziland, Australia, New
Zealand, Indonesia, China, Japan, Chili, Argentina, Peru, Mexico, Canada,
and even many places in the USA.

While I have encountered an occaisional obnoxious lout in several of the
above places, the highest percentage of such louts was in the USA and the
next largest percentage in Japan. Ireland was a distant third in the lout
competition and after that it is such a minor scattering as to be relatively
insignificant.

What can I say. We certainly do not have a monopoly on boors and louts in
the USA but we seem to produce more than our fair share. In fact there
seems to be a high correlation with the number of lawyers in the population!
Do you suppose there is a linkage here or just a spurious correlation? :-)

Highflyer
Highflight Aviation Services
Pinckneyville Airport ( PJY )

tony roberts

April 19th 05, 07:33 AM

A familiar sight in European airports is a certain American, he usually
wears a floral shirt that is long overdue for a wash, he has a camera
hanging around his neck, he is always red and perspiring profusely, he
almost always has a wife called Martha who sits at least 200 ft away
from him, and he holds very loud conversations with her, with no regard
to the other passengers who have the misfortune to be seated between
them.

The conversations, while different, are similar, depending on the
airport that they are in.
They usually start off complaining about the inefficiency of whatever -
followed by -
Goddam warm English beer, bunch of French fags, No wonder the
Germans lost the friggin war, damn Italians (except he says eyetallianns
similar to eyerackies and eyeranians), bunch of Greek assholes,
Friggin Turks - what do they know, Egyptians bunch of robbing *******s
etc. etc. etc.

And you know what? most of the people who meet this asshole think that
that is what Americans are like. They dont even realize that there are
another 300 Americans in the airport that they are not even aware of
because they are behaving like reasonable human beings The ones that are
actually representative of your Nation! (The really bright ones are even
disguised as Canadians but thats another thread :)

So I suggest to you,that never having even been to France, but sitting
there passing judgement from Iowa, that you are only seeing the French
equivelant of the asshole with the wife called Martha.
Unless of course, in Iowa they are made to wear signs pointing out their
Frenchness. Otherwise, unless they attract your attention in some way,
how would you even know that they were French?

And I can tell you that at one time, I also thought that most Americans
were like this character - because that was all that I ever saw.

Now - many of my best friends are Americans, and many of them are French,
and I personally have always considered discrimination against
Americans, French, Egyptians, Tibetan, whatever - to be racism. And I
know that the strict dictionary definition of this is not so - for
racism you need to be anti black, anti white, anti whatever - and you
jumped up - technically correctly, stating that I called you a racist
and that you weren't. If I were being technically correct of course, I
would have called you a bigot. Speaking for myself I think I would
prefer to be called a racist than a bigot.
But is either description correct - or maybe - just maybe - sitting
there in your hotel lobby in Iowa - you only ever meet the French
equivelant of the American with the wife called Martha - and that is
what you based you opinion on.

Is that possible?

Tony

In article <aTE8e.23567$8Z6.2699@attbi_s21>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> > You speak with the wisdom of a cosmopolitan traveler. I suspect that
> > Mr. Honeck has never stepped foot in France or anywhere else in
> > Europe, else how can his provincial attitude be explained?
>
> I own and operate a hotel in a city that is home to a world-class
> university, with 35,000 under- and post-graduate students, and 15,000
> faculty members and staff.
>
> As such, I am fortunate to interact with people from all over the world on a
> daily basis.
>
> As you can see, I needn't fly to France, as the world comes to me.
>
> :-)

--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

Dylan Smith

April 19th 05, 10:41 AM

In article <zoN8e.26116$8Z6.5821@attbi_s21>, Jay Honeck wrote:
> Call it what you will. Anyone -- French, British, or Martian -- dumb enough
> to tax avgas up to $7.50 per gallon is dunderheaded.

No it does not, and it is not necessarily 'dumb' to raise taxes in this
way. Just because you disagree with it does not make it dunderheaded or
dumb.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Matt Whiting

April 19th 05, 11:47 AM

Mike Rapoport wrote:
> "Bob Fry" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>"Mike Rapoport" > writes:
>>
>>
>>>"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
>>>news:zoN8e.26116$8Z6.5821@attbi_s21...
>>>
>>>>>Just because French society has different values to the US doesn't
>>>>>make
>>>>>them "dunderheaded" either.
>>>>
>>>>Call it what you will. Anyone -- French, British, or Martian -- dumb
>>>>enough to tax avgas up to $7.50 per gallon is dunderheaded.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Why? Societies make choices about what they want their governments to
>>>provide and what to tax to pay for it. France (and most of the rest of
>>>Europe) has chosen to provide extensive social benefits and pay for them
>>>with taxes mostly on consumption. The US has also chosen to provide
>>>extensive social benefits and also buy a huge mililtary and pay for it
>>>with
>>>taxes mostly on production (and borrowing from their children.).
>>
>>Would that we were taxing ourselves, but we're not. And we're not
>>borrowing from our children, but from the rest of the world. One day,
>>not so far away, the rest of world will get tired of it. I think
>>within 10-15 years the world's goods will be priced in something other
>>than the US dollar (probably the Euro) and then our consumption will
>>come to an abrupt halt.
>
>
> We are borrowing from the rest of the world but we are leaving the repayment
> to our children.

They will just have to default as other debtor nations have done over
the millenia. It would be good to degault while we're still pretty
powerful militarily. :-)

Seriously, I agree with you that we are committing financial suicide as
a nation.

Matt

Jay Honeck

April 19th 05, 02:16 PM

> So I suggest to you,that never having even been to France, but sitting
> there passing judgment from Iowa, that you are only seeing the French
> equivelant of the asshole with the wife called Martha.

I find it hilarious that my single observation about the French -- their
dunderheadedness about taxing Avgas to $7.50 per gallon -- has been
embellished now to include things like Tony's statement, above.

After the tale has been re-told dozens of times, by variously inflamed and
downright apoplectic posters, I have now been accused of committing "racism"
on the entire "French race" and am now "passing judgment from Iowa" on an
entire nation, and a class of people, based solely upon my feeble
observations of the French behavior from the lobby of my hotel!

You guys kill me.

I made one statement, and it is verifiable as fact: The French are
dunderheaded for taxing their aviation fuel to the point where no one can
afford it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[email protected]

April 19th 05, 03:37 PM

Well, it seems a lot of French can afford it.
Hence the number of aerodromes(aprox 400 open for public use, not
counting MLA fields) and French aircraft(a lot).

If you have money enough you do not care what it costs.

-Kees

Matt Barrow

April 19th 05, 04:57 PM

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> We are borrowing from the rest of the world but we are leaving the
repayment
> to our children.
>

In the past (and still to this day) we GAVE to the world and left the
repayment to our children.

I think Finland is the only country to ever pay us back (at least the last I
heard some years ago).

Matt Barrow

April 19th 05, 05:01 PM

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Well, it seems a lot of French can afford it.
> Hence the number of aerodromes(aprox 400 open for public use, not
> counting MLA fields) and French aircraft(a lot).

Hmm...they have more airport than Texas, though they are smaller and much
more densely populated. Texas also has some 15,000 registered aircraft (AOPA
GA Fact Sheet). Something is fishy here.

Newps

April 19th 05, 05:09 PM

Matt Barrow wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
>>Well, it seems a lot of French can afford it.
>>Hence the number of aerodromes(aprox 400 open for public use, not
>>counting MLA fields) and French aircraft(a lot).
>
>
> Hmm...they have more airport than Texas, though they are smaller and much
> more densely populated. Texas also has some 15,000 registered aircraft (AOPA
> GA Fact Sheet). Something is fishy here.

That's irrelavant. How many operations a year do they have?

Chris

April 19th 05, 07:26 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:kw79e.1133$r53.619@attbi_s21...
> I made one statement, and it is verifiable as fact: The French are
> dunderheaded for taxing their aviation fuel to the point where no one can
> afford it.

Jay, you are the dunderhead - sure the fuel is taxed as it is but you are
wrong when you say no one can afford it. There are thousands of French
pilots flying every month, like there are Brits, Germans etc. We pay our
way, with no tax $ subsidising our pleasures, on top of the fuel there are
user fees too for IFR.
We might not be able to fly as much but we enjoy it probably more because
there we do have to make the odd sacrifice.

Your statement is not verifiable as a fact, if no one could afford it there
would be no flying. As there is flying then people can afford it.

Jay Honeck

April 19th 05, 10:39 PM

Strangely, I could find no statistics about French pilots. Anyone know
how many pilots are in France?

However, here are the French airport statistics:

Airports - with paved runways:
Total: 283

Airports - with unpaved runways:
total: 195

Heliports:
3

In other words, France has about the same number of airports as
Wisconsin and Illinois -- making French aviation hardly a topic worthy
of continued discussion.

Anyone who might doubt that aviation is dead in France (by comparison
with the US) should note that the US has more than 19,000 airports,
meaning that France has around 2% of the airports we have.

Some more stats from France:

Category of Aircraft / Number of aircraft
Aeroplane 6347
Amphibius 1
Balloon 675
Glider 1669
Gyroplane 1
Helicopter 792
Other 63

I'm assuming that this number includes all French commercial airliners.
Since the US has around 211,000 aircraft, France has about 3% of the
number of aircraft of the US.

So, I guess the bottom line is that aviation in France is simply
irrelevant, dead or not. Given the miniscule number of airplanes,
airports, and pilots in France, it's surprising to me that they haven't
eliminated avgas taxes all together.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 19th 05, 10:51 PM

BTW: With France's population of 60 million (compared to the US
population of 295 million), statistically France should be expected to
have around 42,000 aircraft and 3,800 airports, all things being equal.

Since they have 6300 and 481, respectively, I'd say their avgas prices
have done a remarkably good job of killing aviation in France.

Of course, this comparison doesn't take into account France's tiny (by
comparison) land-mass (which means they don't have room for as many
airports), but it nevertheless highlights what a horrendous impact
outrageous over-taxation can have on aviation.

What a dunderheaded thing to do!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination

Bob Fry

April 20th 05, 01:54 AM

tr> A familiar sight in European airports is a certain American,
tr> he usually wears a floral shirt that is long overdue for a
tr> wash, he has a camera hanging around his neck, he is always
tr> red and perspiring profusely, he almost always has a wife
tr> called Martha who sits at least 200 ft away from him, and he
tr> holds very loud conversations with her, with no regard to the
tr> other passengers who have the misfortune to be seated between
tr> them.
[cut]
tr> And you know what? most of the people who meet this asshole
tr> think that that is what Americans are like. They dont even
tr> realize that there are another 300 Americans in the airport
tr> that they are not even aware of because they are behaving like
tr> reasonable human beings The ones that are actually
tr> representative of your Nation! (The really bright ones are
tr> even disguised as Canadians but thats another thread :)

>>>>> "JH" == Jay Honeck > writes:

JH> I find it hilarious that my single observation about the
JH> French -- their dunderheadedness about taxing Avgas to $7.50
JH> per gallon -- has been embellished now to include things like
JH> Tony's statement, above.

Jay, what you don't understand is that you are the fat slob in the
floral shirt making an ass of himself and his countrymen by insulting
entire countries in a public place. The rest of us are the 300 other
Americans who don't want to be grouped with you.

Unlike the airport, here in Usenet some of us are criticizing your
statements loudly. But this isn't for your benefit. No, the protests
are for the non-US pilots and aviation aficionados reading this group.
We, the 300 bystanders, are trying to let them know that you are a
minority; that many, even most, Americans are not shallow bigots.

George Patterson

April 20th 05, 01:59 AM

Morgans wrote:
>
> World class university? Ha! The Ohio State University has more than 15,000
> people employed, just to clean the toilets! <VBG>

So OSU puts out more s**t, big deal.

The university of Iowa's doctoral program is ranked #57 in the U.S.; it's #19 if
all you count is public colleges. The undergraduate business school is #32 in
the nation. The undergraduate Engineering college is #59.

Dunno if that's "world class", but it's in the first tier of American schools.

All data from "America's Best Colleges", by U.S. News & World Report.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

Bob Fry

April 20th 05, 01:59 AM

>>>>> "JH" == Jay Honeck > writes:

JH> In other words, France has about the same number of airports
JH> as Wisconsin and Illinois -- making French aviation hardly a
JH> topic worthy of continued discussion.

And Iowa has less airports than either Wisconsin or Illinois, making
Iowa even less relevant to any aviation discussion. So when are you
stopping your posts, so we can talk about *real* aviation states, like
California or Texas?

:-) for the humor impaired.

Bob Fry

April 20th 05, 02:05 AM

>>>>> "JH" == Jay Honeck > writes:

JH> BTW: With France's population of 60 million (compared to the
JH> US population of 295 million), statistically France should be
JH> expected to have around 42,000 aircraft and 3,800 airports,
JH> all things being equal.

And we should have bullet trains, great scenery, world-class cities,
and great wine and cheese. Well, California has all but the first.
How's Iowa doing? World-class hog-calling contests, maybe?

JH> Of course, this comparison doesn't take into account France's
JH> tiny (by comparison) land-mass (which means they don't have
JH> room for as many airports), but it nevertheless highlights
JH> what a horrendous impact outrageous over-taxation can have on
JH> aviation.

JH> What a dunderheaded thing to do!

It's actually rather intelligent. Smallish land area, larger
population, means it's ideal for high-speed transit: airlines and fast
trains. Add some good highways, which they have, and voila, a pretty
decent place to live.

George Patterson

April 20th 05, 02:14 AM

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> Actually, the University of Iowa is routinely ranked in the top ten in the
> country, and it's generally considered number one in the U.S. for literature
> and writing.

Source? The latest rankings I find rank the doctoral program at #57, the
business school at #32, and the engineering school at #59. It's not even on the
charts in the liberal arts field.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

Morgans

April 20th 05, 02:24 AM

"George Patterson" > wrote in message
news:pPh9e.27133$nH4.19733@trndny05...
> Morgans wrote:
> >
> > World class university? Ha! The Ohio State University has more than
15,000
> > people employed, just to clean the toilets! <VBG>
>
> So OSU puts out more s**t, big deal.

Com'on George, lighten up! See the VBG? That means very big grin, by the
way.

It was meant as a good natured jab, directly at Jay, whom I classify as a
friend. (see what lows I have to stoop to, Jay?)<g>
--
Jim in NC

Jay Honeck

April 20th 05, 03:52 AM

> Jay, what you don't understand is that you are the fat slob in the
> floral shirt making an ass of himself and his countrymen by insulting
> entire countries in a public place. The rest of us are the 300 other
> Americans who don't want to be grouped with you.

Sure, "Bob." Whatever.

You are starting to make the same sound as one hand clapping.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Matt Barrow

April 20th 05, 04:51 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:vtj9e.2896$WI3.2616@attbi_s71...
> > Jay, what you don't understand is that you are the fat slob in the
> > floral shirt making an ass of himself and his countrymen by insulting
> > entire countries in a public place. The rest of us are the 300 other
> > Americans who don't want to be grouped with you.
>
> Sure, "Bob." Whatever.
>
> You are starting to make the same sound as one hand clapping.

If "BOB" was following the news, he's see that entire countries (primarily
European) engage in that (making asses of themselves) towards the US.

Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

G Farris

April 20th 05, 10:14 AM

The number of pilots in France can be roughly determined by the ststistical
base of the FNA, to which all pilots, so far as I know, must belong.

They list 47000 pilots, plus another 13000 glider pilots. As many of the
glider pilots may also be included in the first figure (redundancy) and the
discussion is not particularly centered on gliding, I propose we simply ignore
the 13000 figure for the purposes of this discussion, and consider the number
to be 47000. Divided into the overall population figure of almost 60M, this
yields 1 pilot for 1275 pop. The US figure, I believe is about 800000 pilots,
for nearly 300M population - or 1 pilot per 375 pop - 3 1/2 times as many.
Approximately 50% of US pilots are instrument rated, compared with 15% of
French pilots. If you exclude airline pilots, the percentage of IR rated PPL's
in France is anecdotal.

This last statistic is demonstrably related to the acquisition cost of IR
training in France. A PPL with a few hundred hours will expect to pay close to
20K/EUR for an IR rating - which is 2X the cost at Flight Safety Academy,
and several times the average cost paid by US PPL's. Most pilots see in this a
volontary distinction between "private" pilots (relegated almost to
"recreational" status) and "professional" pilots (meaning mostly ATP, employed
as airline pilots - the corporate and ait taxi sectors being also anecdotal).

There has been considerable attention paid of late to the matter of
eliminating this traditional prejudice. With the advent of JAR-FCL licensing
standards, strongly influenced by FAA regulations, there is much demand for a
more "useful" IR program - more accessible to private pilots. Time will tell
what success this initiative will have - for now, the number of licenses
issued in France (all categories) continues to decline every year, and the
costs associated, including fuel costs are indisputably related to this
decline.

The number of airports is not an issue. I have not done a simple calculation
of total land area for number of airports, but the truth is that every major
and almost every minor urban center is served by one or more airports, open to
public use. You can go anywhere you want in France, and find an airport close
to your destination - much as in the US. If you want to go IFR, you still have
many options, and I would even wager that the IFR Airport coverage of the
territory is as good as it is in the US. Too bad there are no IR rated
pilots!!

The balance of power between pilot lobbies and anti-airport lobbies is much
less favorable (to pilots) in France than in the US. The AOPA is present but
of limited effectiveness, while the FNA, who is supposed to fill this role, is
so ineffective that pilots often wonder which side they are on. The
anti-airport lobbies are vociferous and omnipresent - though they focus most
of their energies on major airports and scheduled transport (They have just
obtained a 20K/EUR fine, automatically levied on all planes landing between
midnight and 5:00 at Paris CDG, continental Europe's busiest airport,
regardless of the cause. The fine may also be accompanied by seizure and
impounding of the aircraft). Citizens' attempts to have local airports closed
down have met with little success - not because of any energetic response from
users, mind you, but because French law rather strongly defends their right to
operate, particularly when the airport was there before the neighbors, which
is almost always the case. They have succeeded however in imposing fines and
restriction of operating priviledges for pilots who inadvertently fly over
this or that village in proximity to airports, and one can see police with
rangefinder binoculars enforcing these rules.

With fuel at USD $7.50/gal, and a wet rental rate of EUR195 (USD $255) for a
C-172R, there is little doubt that the pricing and taxing structure is
disuasive. With the entire territory much smaller, and ground transportation
much more effective than in the US, flying is of less utility as well. This
could change with the continued development of the European Union, as it is
now possible to fly toGermany, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Holland etc without
border formalities or customs checks. (This has been theoretically possible
for a few years, however until very recently police continued to impose border
checks and customs inspections for small aircraft. This has now been proven
illegal and should make the 500nm travel radius much more attractive).

One final irony - The progression of European regulation seems to continue
the practice of "pay-per-use". Landing fees, airway fees and fuel surtaxes pay
for the system which, in the US, is subsidized from the general fund. This
really makes the US system more "socialist", as all of the people have to pay
for services used by 0.27% of the population.

G Faris

Cub Driver

April 20th 05, 10:25 AM

>Since they have 6300 and 481, respectively, I'd say their avgas prices
>have done a remarkably good job of killing aviation in France.

There are other reasons, of course, one being that (in effect, for
most purposes) there is no VFR flight.

Most European nations are, by American standards, very congested. It's
probably not a coincidence that the only European posting here
regularly flies on the Isle of Man.

The multiplicity of languages must also be a considerable problem.
It's one thing to travel in Switzerland by road, but doing it in a
lightplane must be a bit scary. French and German (never mind
Italian!) are just not that similar. Add to that the tradition that
ATC should speak in English, and that altitude is expressed in feet
when you are accustomed to meters. Even if you trust yourself to be
perfectly bi- or tri-lingual, how can you be sure that the gent you're
talking to is equally blessed?

-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

Dylan Smith

April 20th 05, 11:05 AM

In article >, Cub Driver wrote:
> There are other reasons, of course, one being that (in effect, for
> most purposes) there is no VFR flight.

Really? I thought much of France's lower airspace was class G airspace
(just like it is around here - it's class G up to FL245). I don't think
I've filed a flight plan in well over a year. I suspect for most rural
living French people the situation is the same.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Dylan Smith

April 20th 05, 11:12 AM

In article >, G Farris wrote:
> French pilots. If you exclude airline pilots, the percentage of IR rated PPL's
> in France is anecdotal.

And that is the thing that IS dunderheaded - is the JAA requirements for
an IR which makes it prohibitive for a typical private pilot. The UK has
a workaround (the IMC rating).

Fortunately, I read there are some voices of sanity in the European
authorities - EASA have said they want to reduce the regulatory burden
and want to see GA as 'vibrant as it is in the US'. It remains to be
seen whether that's just talk though. On the opposite end we have the
airlines convincing our CAA that they are subsidising GA - they do this
by only taking into accout cheques that GA people write to the CAA, and
totally ignore fuel taxes. GA pays fuel duty and VAT. Airlines do not
pay any fuel tax at all - certainly not VAT (which even Jet-A burning GA
pilots have to pay).

> One final irony - The progression of European regulation seems to continue
> the practice of "pay-per-use". Landing fees, airway fees and fuel surtaxes pay
> for the system which, in the US, is subsidized from the general fund. This
> really makes the US system more "socialist", as all of the people have to pay
> for services used by 0.27% of the population.

And that's what always got me about the way many US conservatives argue
the issue. Now I think the US system *is* the best; 'user pays per use'
is woefully inefficient when the fuel duty quite handsomely pays
already. However, I always get a chuckle when US Republican supporters
argue how healthcare shouldn't be subsidised, but argue vigorously that
their airport and GA activities should have Federal subsidy.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Bob Noel

April 20th 05, 11:14 AM

In article >,
Bob Fry > wrote:

> It's actually rather intelligent. Smallish land area, larger
> population, means it's ideal for high-speed transit: airlines and fast
> trains. Add some good highways, which they have, and voila, a pretty
> decent place to live.

that stuff is neither necessary nor sufficient for a decent place to live.

--
Bob Noel
looking for a sig the lawyers will like

Matt Whiting

April 20th 05, 11:35 AM

George Patterson wrote:
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>>
>> Actually, the University of Iowa is routinely ranked in the top ten in
>> the country, and it's generally considered number one in the U.S. for
>> literature and writing.
>
>
> Source? The latest rankings I find rank the doctoral program at #57, the
> business school at #32, and the engineering school at #59. It's not even
> on the charts in the liberal arts field.

He said top ten in the "country", not the "city." :-) You have to
exclude all of those high falutin' urban schools.

Matt

G Farris

April 20th 05, 11:44 AM

In article >,
says...
>
>In article >, Cub Driver wrote:
>> There are other reasons, of course, one being that (in effect, for
>> most purposes) there is no VFR flight.
>
>Really? I thought much of France's lower airspace was class G airspace
>(just like it is around here - it's class G up to FL245). I don't think
>I've filed a flight plan in well over a year. I suspect for most rural
>living French people the situation is the same.
>

Correct. I'm not quite sure what Dan intended by "there s no VFR flight" , but
in a technical sense this is untrue. VFR is quite common and easily undertaken
in France. Since very few non-commercial pilots are IR rated, this is
fortunate. Most fly VFR, without a flight plan, up to FL115, where it becomes
Class D, and in practical terms, off-limits to VFR.

G Faris

[email protected]

April 20th 05, 01:05 PM

Hmm, the meter/feet thing is not a problem at all.
It is just a number on maps etc. and the one on the altimeter.
If the one on the altimeter is larger than the one on the map you are
save as long you do not bust some restricted airspace.

It is only explaining to non-pilots what speed, altitude you are flying
that needs some calculations.
Roughly: 3ft= 1 meter and km/h = kts x 2 -20%
I give up trying to explain things like TAS vs GS, MSL vs AGL and the
like.

To be honest, there is one slight problem with this imperial/metric
thing.
Having a metric plane with a lot of US/UK made parts on it.
You need a very keen eye to grap the right spanner the first time.

Anyway, most pilots here fly VFR and just for fun.
There is hardly any need to take a light plane to go anywhere for
business.
Where I live it is faster just to go by car since every major compagny
or seals rep. is within a couple of hours.
Some examples from where I live to:
-Rotterdam 30 min.
-Amsterdam 1 hrs
-Antwerp 30 min
-Brussels 1 hrs
-Ruhr area 1 hrs to 1.5 hrs
-Luxembourg 3 hrs
-Hamburg 3.5 hrs
-Paris 4 hrs
-London 5 hrs
-Stuttgart 5 hrs
-Munich 7 hrs
-Lyon 7 hrs
The same counts for the most of North Western Europe

So, I only need a plane for fun.
-Kees

Jay Honeck

April 20th 05, 03:26 PM

> you also have a population of 250 or 300 million. Do you want to say that
> every
> other nation with a smaller population is also irrelevant? Man, you are so
> ignorant.

Did you even READ my post, Martin? Man, you are SO ignorant.

;-)

Apparently not, so I will sum up.

It's the relative PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft, and airports that is out
of whack in France. If aviation weren't dead in France, they should have
the same PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft and airports as the US.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
>> In other words, France has about the same number of airports as
>> Wisconsin and Illinois -- making French aviation hardly a topic worthy
>> of continued discussion.
>> (...)
>> So, I guess the bottom line is that aviation in France is simply
>> irrelevant, dead or not.
>
>
> #m
> --
> <http://www.hotze.priv.at/album/aviation/caution.jpg>

Larry Dighera

April 20th 05, 03:44 PM

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:14:46 +0000 (UTC), (G Farris)
wrote in >::

>They list 47000 pilots, plus another 13000 glider pilots. As many of the
>glider pilots may also be included in the first figure (redundancy) and the
>discussion is not particularly centered on gliding, I propose we simply ignore
>the 13000 figure for the purposes of this discussion, and consider the number
>to be 47000. Divided into the overall population figure of almost 60M, this
>yields 1 pilot for 1275 pop. The US figure, I believe is about 800000 pilots,
>for nearly 300M population - or 1 pilot per 375 pop - 3 1/2 times as many.
>Approximately 50% of US pilots are instrument rated, compared with 15% of
>French pilots. If you exclude airline pilots, the percentage of IR rated PPL's
>in France is anecdotal.

If your French statistics are as incorrect as what you believe US
pilot statistics to be, it might be better to completely disregard
your conclusions. You'll find up to date US information here:
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/factcard.pdf

G Farris

April 20th 05, 03:57 PM

In article >,
says...
>

>If your French statistics are as incorrect as what you believe US
>pilot statistics to be, it might be better to completely disregard
>your conclusions. You'll find up to date US information here:
>http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/factcard.pdf

Thanks for the correction. The French statistic was from a current DGAC
publication, while I admit I was "guessing" on the US figure (because I
consider the information to be well-known and readily available to
contributors here, while the actual French numbers were proving elusive to
acquire).

So the corrected comparison becomes : 1 pilot for 1275 pop in France
1 pilot for 472 pop in the US - about 2.7X as many.

Call it three times instead of three and a half. Your call as to whether that
changes the argument fundamentally. Are the US numbers increasing or
declining?

Thanks for pointing out the error.

G Faris

G Farris

April 20th 05, 04:06 PM

Here's the link, by the way, for the report that I got the numbers from.

http://www.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/html/avia_leg/pdf/annexes.pdf

In French, obviously.

Jay Honeck

April 20th 05, 04:11 PM

> If your French statistics are as incorrect as what you believe US
> pilot statistics to be, it might be better to completely disregard
> your conclusions. You'll find up to date US information here:
> http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/factcard.pdf

The US pilot statistics are from the FAA's website.

And you'll verify my other statistics with little effort by using Google.
Some are from the CIA's website (which is very cool, BTW), and some are from
French websites.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Matt Barrow

April 20th 05, 04:34 PM

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Bob Fry > wrote:
>
> > It's actually rather intelligent. Smallish land area, larger
> > population, means it's ideal for high-speed transit: airlines and fast
> > trains. Add some good highways, which they have, and voila, a pretty
> > decent place to live.
>
> that stuff is neither necessary nor sufficient for a decent place to live.
>

For Fry it is.

Stefan

April 20th 05, 05:22 PM

Cub Driver wrote:

> There are other reasons, of course, one being that (in effect, for
> most purposes) there is no VFR flight.

I don't know where you get that from. VFR in France (as in whole Europe)
is not only possible but delightful.

> Most European nations are, by American standards, very congested.

This is in fact one reason. First, distances are much smaller. Second,
for most missions, you are much faster using public transportation or
the car. And third, maybe, Europeans, even pilots, seem to care much
more about noise and pollution. BTW, this is another reason why Thielert
developed the Diesel, not only cost. We just see no point in burning 10
gallons an hour when we can get away with 3 using a modern engine.

> It's one thing to travel in Switzerland by road, but doing it in a
> lightplane must be a bit scary. French and German (never mind
> Italian!) are just not that similar. Add to that the tradition that
> ATC should speak in English, and that altitude is expressed in feet
> when you are accustomed to meters. Even if you trust yourself to be
> perfectly bi- or tri-lingual, how can you be sure that the gent you're
> talking to is equally blessed?

Being Swiss myself, I can tell you that flying here is not scary at all.
Quite the opposite, flying in the Alps is one of the most wonderful
things to do, and a landing at a French altiport is just plain fun.
Airspce structure is rather complicated, but you get used to it rather
quickly. It requires good preparation of the flight, though.

And for the languages... well, ATC speaks English, and they carefully
stick to pre-defines phrases, which even pilots with a limited knowledge
of English can learn by heart (which in fact is what many do). On the
ground, though, things are a bit different, but I've never had problems
to understand people, as long as both parties really want.

Stefan

Stefan

April 20th 05, 05:24 PM

Jay Honeck wrote:

> If aviation weren't dead in France, they should have
> the same PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft and airports as the US.

If aviation were dead in France, they wouldn't build Airbusses.

Stefan

Peter Duniho

April 20th 05, 06:07 PM

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> [...]
> that stuff is neither necessary nor sufficient for a decent place to live.

And aviation is?

Frankly, I'm not that surprised Jay continues to dig his hole. He's just
not the kind of guy to engage in any sort of retrospection. Suffice to say,
however, that:

* Aviation seems to be reasonably healthy in France in the first place,
in spite of the gas prices (his analysis is completely lacking, never mind
that correlation does not show causation)

* Even if the French people decided to eliminate aviation, if that's
what they want to do as a people, I don't see what's so "dunderheaded" about
that. Not the course I'd take, but I fail to see how it's an inherently
"dunderheaded" thing to do.

* Even if it were "dunderheaded" to do so, calling an entire country
"dunderheaded" is still offensive. It's no different than calling all
Americans "dunderheaded", just because 50% of them were "dunderheaded"
enough to reelect a president who willfully fabricated justification for a
war. The other 50% weren't, and saying they are is offensive.

Bob F, I appreciate you pointing out that this isn't so much about getting
Jay to understand his errors (a futile goal, if ever there was one) as it is
about showing the rest of the readership that not all participants of this
newsgroup are as narrow-minded and bigoted as Jay. But I think we've
accomplished that goal...we're not going to get anywhere by continuing to
feed the bigots.

Pete

W P Dixon

April 20th 05, 06:39 PM

Myself, I believe a dunderhead is someone who thinks just one President
fabricated a reason for war when the Democrat they voted for supported the
same dang information. As did the Democratic President before the current
Pres! Geesh must just be a massive conspiracy,...DUCK! Look Out it's the
black helos coming to get you!!! ;) And I shall leave it at that......

Semper Fi !
Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech

Montblack

April 20th 05, 07:50 PM

"Bob Fry"
> And Iowa has less airports than either Wisconsin or Illinois, making
> Iowa even less relevant to any aviation discussion. So when are you
> stopping your posts, so we can talk about *real* aviation states, like
> California or Texas?
>
> :-) for the humor impaired.

I laughed

Montblack

Montblack

April 20th 05, 08:42 PM

("Peter Duniho" wrote)
<snips>
> * Even if it were "dunderheaded" to do so, calling an entire country
> "dunderheaded" is still offensive. It's no different than calling all
> Americans "dunderheaded", just because 50% of them were "dunderheaded"
> enough to reelect a president who willfully fabricated justification for a
> war. The other 50% weren't, and saying they are is offensive.
>
> Bob F, I appreciate you pointing out that this isn't so much about getting
> Jay to understand his errors (a futile goal, if ever there was one) as it
> is about showing the rest of the readership that not all participants of
> this newsgroup are as narrow-minded and bigoted as Jay. But I think we've
> accomplished that goal...we're not going to get anywhere by continuing to
> feed the bigots.

BTW, why is "offensive" always assumed to be a 10? Or, better yet ...11?

Bigots? Racist? Narrow minded? What is and what is not offensive? These seem
like Hate Speech codes on our college campuses.

Is there any sense of proportionality left around here? Dealing with
"correctly PC sensitive types" is like dealing with gang-bangers in the
hood - I perceive you to be diss'n me (maybe someone's tennis shoes got
stepped on) ...bang! Everything is go for the guns.

'These people are dunderheads for over taxing GA' is no longer the starting
point for a fun discussion ...bang.

There goes the neighborhood.

Montblack
"My dear fellow! This isn't Spain ... this is England!"
A Man For All Seasons (1966)
Winner of six Academy Awards - including Best

Jay Honeck

April 20th 05, 09:51 PM

>> If aviation weren't dead in France, they should have the same PROPORTION
>> of pilots, aircraft and airports as the US.
>
> If aviation were dead in France, they wouldn't build Airbusses.

Airbus? Pah. That's not aviation -- that's industry.

I'm talking about real, grass-roots aviation, Stefan -- like Bleriot and
Saint-Exupery practiced.

Every indicator I can find shows that the French have killed general
aviation -- or nearly so -- for everyone but the very rich.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 20th 05, 09:58 PM

> 'These people are dunderheads for over taxing GA' is no longer the
> starting
> point for a fun discussion ...bang.
>
> There goes the neighborhood.

Thanks, Mont, but -- as you may have noticed -- there are very few topics
which *don't* offend Duniho and "Fry". I dare say, it's hard to recall the
last "fun" discussion that included either of them.

It's apparently in their makeup to be in a permanent state of politically
correct bluster. I mean, my gosh -- when we can't even bash someone for
charging $7.80 (it's gone up) per gallon for avgas -- on an AVIATION
newsgroup! -- there is very little room for discussion with people of their
stripe.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 20th 05, 10:07 PM

> You fail to take several things into account. In North America, private
> planes are a viable and often necessary method of transport because of
> the distances and the lack of other transport methods in some areas.

This is totally and categorically false. Outside of Alaska, private
airplanes are not "necessary" for transportation in America at all.

Which is sad, I might add. It would help grow GA if it were otherwise, but
too many people look at piloting as "too hard" (for a zillion reasons) to
achieve.

> All these facts combined reduce private airplanes to "expensive toys"
> in Europe, and they are viewed accordingly

Same here in America, but to a far lesser degree. Most people here think of
owning an airplane as being far more extravagant than boat ownership (for
example), even though the majority of ocean (or even Great Lake) going craft
cost far more than the average used entry level airplane.

And this is, after all, at the heart a discussion of the degree to which any
government should try to engineer society with tax code. In short, is it
intelligent to tax something like general aviation, with so many obvious
economic benefits for your population, to the point of extinction?

I would submit that the answer to that question is clearly "no".
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Chris

April 20th 05, 10:20 PM

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
>>Since they have 6300 and 481, respectively, I'd say their avgas prices
>>have done a remarkably good job of killing aviation in France.
>
> There are other reasons, of course, one being that (in effect, for
> most purposes) there is no VFR flight.
>

Its all VFR and very little IFR for private pilots, but then hey if we
really want to go somewhere, then there is excellent public transport.

Chris

April 20th 05, 10:37 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:Knz9e.4504$c24.1791@attbi_s72...
>> 'These people are dunderheads for over taxing GA' is no longer the
>> starting
>> point for a fun discussion ...bang.
>>
>> There goes the neighborhood.
>
> Thanks, Mont, but -- as you may have noticed -- there are very few topics
> which *don't* offend Duniho and "Fry". I dare say, it's hard to recall
> the last "fun" discussion that included either of them.
>
> It's apparently in their makeup to be in a permanent state of politically
> correct bluster. I mean, my gosh -- when we can't even bash someone for
> charging $7.80 (it's gone up) per gallon for avgas -- on an AVIATION
> newsgroup! -- there is very little room for discussion with people of
> their stripe.

Jay when you have to pay $7.80 for AVGAS complain and swear to give up
flying.

Those of us who do have to pay $7.80 are the ones entitled to gripe about
it. However I am also aware of where my tax £'s go and frankly I do not
worry too much about it. Why, apart from money wasted on some dunderheaded
war, most gets put to good use.
My parents get good medical treatment and they do not have to pay a cent for
it, I put a son through Oxford University for $30,000 (mostly for beer I
think) and many other things.

I consider flying a hobby, a luxury and indulgence. I do not fly to support
my job, British Airways is always the best for that.

What I don't do is take flying for granted. Here its a privilege not a right
but I have to accept that the majority of the country don't give a damn
about it and would not care a jot if it was stopped.

So while I can I will pay my $7.80 a gallon and my eurocontrol charges and
enjoy it and every so often slip over to the US and enjoy flying for $3 a
gallon and be subsidised by your tax $$s. That will taste sweet, knowing
that you are subsidising my flying.

Chris

April 20th 05, 10:44 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:cEt9e.3672$WI3.540@attbi_s71...
>> you also have a population of 250 or 300 million. Do you want to say that
>> every
>> other nation with a smaller population is also irrelevant? Man, you are
>> so
>> ignorant.
>
> Did you even READ my post, Martin? Man, you are SO ignorant.
>
> ;-)
>
> Apparently not, so I will sum up.
>
> It's the relative PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft, and airports that is out
> of whack in France. If aviation weren't dead in France, they should have
> the same PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft and airports as the US.

Math is not your strong subject is it Jay? If aviation in France was dead
then the proportion of pilots is irrelevant. The statement you made at the
start of this debate was that the incontrovertible truth was that GA in
France was dead. That is just not true.

There is no logical reason why there should be the same proportion of pilots
aircraft and airports as in the US.

That would assume the same population make up, the same cultural make up,
the same everything. Well, buddy, France and the US are not the same. This
may come as a bit of a shock to you but they are different. Hence different
approaches to aviation.

Jay Honeck

April 20th 05, 10:48 PM

> So while I can I will pay my $7.80 a gallon and my eurocontrol charges and
> enjoy it and every so often slip over to the US and enjoy flying for $3 a
> gallon and be subsidised by your tax $$s. That will taste sweet, knowing
> that you are subsidising my flying.

Chris, it will only feel like we're subsidizing your flying, after the way
you've been abused. Our airports are 100% supported by the (relatively
small) taxes on our fuel. (Or, rather, they WOULD be, if our legislatures
didn't continually rape the fund for all sorts of things that have nothing
to do with aviation.)

Your obvious enjoyment of such outrageous taxation indicates that you are
apparently suffering from a peculiar psychological side effect of persistent
abuse, whereby you end up falling in love with the prison guards who abused
you the most. This was well documented during World War II, and can be
cured with extensive counseling.

Or a major tax cut.

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Stefan

April 20th 05, 11:11 PM

Jay Honeck wrote:

> Every indicator I can find shows that the French have killed general
> aviation -- or nearly so -- for everyone but the very rich.

If I didn't know it before, I'd do so now: You've never been in France.
I have. You're just plain wrong.

Stefan

Bob Noel

April 20th 05, 11:36 PM

In article >,
"Peter Duniho" > wrote:

> > that stuff is neither necessary nor sufficient for a decent place to live.
>
> And aviation is?

Necessary but not sufficient. (if you know what I mean...)

--
Bob Noel
looking for a sig the lawyers will like

Mike Rapoport

April 21st 05, 01:32 AM

"Wolfgang Schwanke" > wrote in message
...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
> news:cEt9e.3672$WI3.540@attbi_s71:
>
>> It's the relative PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft, and airports that is
>> out of whack in France.
>
> It's probably similar to most of Europe.
>
>> If aviation weren't dead in France, they
>> should have the same PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft and airports as
>> the US.
>
> You fail to take several things into account. In North America, private
> planes are a viable and often necessary method of transport because of
> the distances and the lack of other transport methods in some areas.
> This is not so in Europe, you can get anywhere by rail and/or road.
>

GA in the USA is also heavily subsidized by business aviation, airlines and
the general public. The total of all avgas taxes pay for a tenth of the
$600MM AFSS cost..

> There's plenty of space in North America, and real estate is cheap. So
> building an airport is cheap, and no problem to place it far away from
> settlements whose inhabitants might complain or try to shut it down.
> Not so in Europe, population densities are high by comparison almost
> throughout the entire continent. Real estate is expensive, and wherever
> you decide to build an airport, there's going to be someone around
> who'll complain. These facts make airports expensive.
>
> There are other factors which make aviation more expensive, some have
> to do with regulation. Fuel is one of these factors because of
> taxation, but not the only one and probably not the most important one.
> The same price difference exists with petrol for cars, and we have no
> lack of those here.
>
> All these facts combined reduce private airplanes to "expensive toys"
> in Europe, and they are viewed accordingly. But aviation exists, it's
> not dead. Circumstances are just very different.
>
> Regards
>
> --
> Now is ze time on Sprockets ven ve dance
>
> http://www.wschwanke.de/ usenet_20031215 (AT) wschwanke (DOT) de

Mike Rapoport

April 21st 05, 01:33 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:rwz9e.4513$c24.1150@attbi_s72...
>> You fail to take several things into account. In North America, private
>> planes are a viable and often necessary method of transport because of
>> the distances and the lack of other transport methods in some areas.
>
> This is totally and categorically false. Outside of Alaska, private
> airplanes are not "necessary" for transportation in America at all.
>
> Which is sad, I might add. It would help grow GA if it were otherwise,
> but too many people look at piloting as "too hard" (for a zillion reasons)
> to achieve.
>
>> All these facts combined reduce private airplanes to "expensive toys"
>> in Europe, and they are viewed accordingly
>
> Same here in America, but to a far lesser degree. Most people here think
> of owning an airplane as being far more extravagant than boat ownership
> (for example), even though the majority of ocean (or even Great Lake)
> going craft cost far more than the average used entry level airplane.
>
> And this is, after all, at the heart a discussion of the degree to which
> any government should try to engineer society with tax code. In short,
> is it intelligent to tax something like general aviation, with so many
> obvious economic benefits for your population, to the point of extinction?
>
> I would submit that the answer to that question is clearly "no".
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Turn the question around. How much sense does it make to subsidize
recreational GA?

Mike
MU-2

>

Roger

April 21st 05, 02:12 AM

On 12 Apr 2005 11:25:45 -0700, "Denny" > wrote:

>The difference in price between the USA and Europe is additional taxes
>to support their socialist system...
>
After reading all the off topic responses I think most on here should
get a hobby... like flying.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>denny

Peter Duniho

April 21st 05, 02:21 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:rwz9e.4513$c24.1150@attbi_s72...
> This is totally and categorically false. Outside of Alaska, private
> airplanes are not "necessary" for transportation in America at all.

Inside Alaska, private airplanes are not "necessary". However, they are
highly useful, and the same benefits they provide in Alaska, they provide
elsewhere. For example, here in the Pacific Northwest, I can either spend a
couple of hours sitting in line for a ferry, and spend another couple of
hours riding that ferry, or I can hop in my airplane and make the trip in
under an hour. That's to get somewhere that is reasonably well developed.
For folks who live in remote areas (here in the West, there are plenty of
remote areas left), airplanes often make the difference between spending a
day getting somewhere, and an hour or two.

If private airplanes are "necessary" in Alaska, then they are "necessary"
within the contiguous 48. If they aren't "necessary" here, then you are
using a definition of "necessary" that precludes private airplanes being
"necessary" in Alaska.

Either way, your statement is "totally and categorically false".

> Which is sad, I might add. It would help grow GA if it were otherwise,
> but too many people look at piloting as "too hard" (for a zillion reasons)
> to achieve.

What does "too hard" have to do with "necessary"? Bush flying is pretty
damn hard, and it's "too hard" for most who call themselves pilots. But in
many cases it's necessary, and is done.

>> All these facts combined reduce private airplanes to "expensive toys"
>> in Europe, and they are viewed accordingly
>
> Same here in America, but to a far lesser degree. Most people here think
> of owning an airplane as being far more extravagant than boat ownership
> (for example), even though the majority of ocean (or even Great Lake)
> going craft cost far more than the average used entry level airplane.

Most boats in the US never see salt water, or even something like any of the
Great Lakes. Your comparison is silly. I don't know a single person who
would think of owning an airplane as more extravagant than owning a yacht
suitable for *oceanic* travel (which is a lot different from boat ownership
in general).

On the other hand, boat ownership in general can be achieved with far fewer
resources, with respect to time, money, and personal challenge, than can
airplane ownership in general. In that respect, yes...most people here
think of owning an airplane as more extravagant, and IT IS.

We here in the US do so many ridiculous things, that cost us so much in
terms of economy, it's absurd for any of us to make an unfounded claim that
the French are a) taxing aviation into extinction, and b) that it's somehow
a "dunderheaded" thing to do.

If you're willing to admit to your own "dunderheadedness" with respect to
all the economically harmful policies our government imposes, then perhaps
your insult to the French isn't offensive. But somehow, I don't think
you're prepared to do that.

Pete

Montblack

April 21st 05, 03:53 AM

("Roger" wrote)
> After reading all the off topic responses I think most on here should
> get a hobby... like flying.

Agreed :-)

Montblack

Dave Stadt

April 21st 05, 04:30 AM

"Chris" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:cEt9e.3672$WI3.540@attbi_s71...
> >> you also have a population of 250 or 300 million. Do you want to say
that
> >> every
> >> other nation with a smaller population is also irrelevant? Man, you are
> >> so
> >> ignorant.
> >
> > Did you even READ my post, Martin? Man, you are SO ignorant.
> >
> > ;-)
> >
> > Apparently not, so I will sum up.
> >
> > It's the relative PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft, and airports that is
out
> > of whack in France. If aviation weren't dead in France, they should
have
> > the same PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft and airports as the US.
>
>
> Math is not your strong subject is it Jay? If aviation in France was dead
> then the proportion of pilots is irrelevant. The statement you made at the
> start of this debate was that the incontrovertible truth was that GA in
> France was dead. That is just not true.
>
> There is no logical reason why there should be the same proportion of
pilots
> aircraft and airports as in the US.
>
> That would assume the same population make up, the same cultural make up,
> the same everything. Well, buddy, France and the US are not the same. This
> may come as a bit of a shock to you but they are different. Hence
different
> approaches to aviation.

If you believe GA is in good shape in France and other parts of the EU go to
the AOPA WEB site and read about the new liability insurance requirements
the EU has placed on GA aircraft. $119 million in liability insurance
required for a 182. Doesn't sound healthy to me.

StellaStarr

April 21st 05, 05:22 AM

Jay Honeck wrote:
> BTW: With France's population of 60 million (compared to the US
> population of 295 million), statistically France should be expected to
> have around 42,000 aircraft and 3,800 airports, all things being equal.
>
>
> Since they have 6300 and 481, respectively, I'd say their avgas prices
> have done a remarkably good job of killing aviation in France.
>
> Of course, this comparison doesn't take into account France's tiny (by
> comparison) land-mass (which means they don't have room for as many
> airports), but it nevertheless highlights what a horrendous impact
> outrageous over-taxation can have on aviation.
>

It proves no such thing. American enumeracy at work.
The land mass of France, as far as I can determine from a quick sweep,
is one 18th that of the US. Is their number of pilots and/or airports an
eighteenth of those in this country?

Taxation? How did such a silly premise get started?

George Patterson

April 21st 05, 05:43 AM

Dave Stadt wrote:
>
> If you believe GA is in good shape in France and other parts of the EU go to
> the AOPA WEB site and read about the new liability insurance requirements
> the EU has placed on GA aircraft. $119 million in liability insurance
> required for a 182. Doesn't sound healthy to me.

Read through the actual PDF document. For a private operator, they require a
minimum of 100,000 SDRs/passenger and 1,000 SDRs for luggage. For coverage of
non-passengers, you need 3 million SDRs for a 182. The current exchange rate is
1.51746 dollars to one SDR. While the rate is still crazy, no way can I make it
add up to $119 million. Seems to me that's a policy for $4,552,380 with
sublimits of $151,746 per seat, plus a luggage allowance.

In any case, what's important is the amount of the premium, not the coverage
amount. Liability cases are not settled by juries in Europe, nor are the awards
very high (by American standards). I'd bet the premiums are far lower as well.

Stefan? Wolfgang? Martin? Dylan? What's insurance like over there?

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

Chris

April 21st 05, 08:37 AM

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Chris" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
>> news:cEt9e.3672$WI3.540@attbi_s71...
>> >> you also have a population of 250 or 300 million. Do you want to say
> that
>> >> every
>> >> other nation with a smaller population is also irrelevant? Man, you
>> >> are
>> >> so
>> >> ignorant.
>> >
>> > Did you even READ my post, Martin? Man, you are SO ignorant.
>> >
>> > ;-)
>> >
>> > Apparently not, so I will sum up.
>> >
>> > It's the relative PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft, and airports that is
> out
>> > of whack in France. If aviation weren't dead in France, they should
> have
>> > the same PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft and airports as the US.
>>
>>
>> Math is not your strong subject is it Jay? If aviation in France was dead
>> then the proportion of pilots is irrelevant. The statement you made at
>> the
>> start of this debate was that the incontrovertible truth was that GA in
>> France was dead. That is just not true.
>>
>> There is no logical reason why there should be the same proportion of
> pilots
>> aircraft and airports as in the US.
>>
>> That would assume the same population make up, the same cultural make up,
>> the same everything. Well, buddy, France and the US are not the same.
>> This
>> may come as a bit of a shock to you but they are different. Hence
> different
>> approaches to aviation.
>
>
> If you believe GA is in good shape in France and other parts of the EU go
> to
> the AOPA WEB site and read about the new liability insurance requirements
> the EU has placed on GA aircraft. $119 million in liability insurance
> required for a 182. Doesn't sound healthy to me.

That is rubbish. Our insurance liability requirements have gone to £3m. We
were already insured for $2m. The insurers have increased the cover for no
cost. So what's the deal? $119m for a 182 what a joke read this

Flying Fortress plea

Elly Sallingboe wrote to Alastair Darling yesterday regarding the aircraft's
categorisation under new European insurance regulations for aircraft which
come into force on 1 May. She wrote:

Dear Mr Darling

New Euro charges threaten to ground Britain's last Flying Fortress

As the operator of the UK's last remaining airworthy B-17 Flying Fortress
G-BEDF Sally B, I am writing to you to ask for your help. New EC Regulation
785/2004 (effective from 1 May 2005) has introduced specified minimum levels
of insurance cover for aircraft. Its effect on this aircraft, which is an
important and well-loved living piece of national heritage, based at the
Imperial War Museum Duxford, will be permanently to ground it, unless an
exemption on this European requirement of third party insurance covered by
aircraft operators can be granted, or a new category introduced.

In 2005, this aircraft will have been flying in the UK for an incredible 30
years without any official funding, thanks to a dedicated team of volunteer
professionals (see enclosed press release). It should be a year of
celebration, but instead Sally B's future in this country is imminently and
seriously threatened, and this is why I am asking you please, as a matter of
urgency, to find a solution.

As you know, the new insurance requirements are based on aircraft weight.
Our aircraft weighs 15,150.24kg, and therefore falls just a few thousand kg
outside of Category 5 (see the chart printed below). This puts it in
Category 6, the same as a commercial Boeing 737, requiring a staggering 80
million SDRs - a leap of more than four times as much in the insurance cover
requirement. This new legislation will cost us another £25,000 per year,
which is simply impossible. I would add that the aircraft operates at
dramatically reduced weights from those of a wartime B-17. Clearly it
carries no warload, nor does it fly with full tanks for long-range
operations.

We currently hold £25 million third party insurance. I was advised that,
for the size and weight of the aircraft, this is a prudent amount of cover,
and more than double what has been required in recent years for aircraft
flying in air shows. This would still appear to be prudent according to the
weights given in the chart, if only there was not such a vast leap in cover
required between Categories 5 and 6. I am sure these new charges were not
intended to destroy flying national treasures such as ours, but this is what
is happening.

Unlike commercial aircraft, our historic aircraft is on a British Permit to
Fly, and as such:-

- is not allowed to carry out commercial flights

- is not allowed to fly for hire and reward

- is not allowed to carry passengers

- is not allowed to fly over populated areas.

Despite this:-

- it has its own maintenance company approved by the CAA

- its pilots are all ATPLs with extensive experience on tail wheel and heavy
piston

AND it flies only 20-40 hours per year, between May and October.

I should mention that the General Aviation Department of the CAA has been
trying to do something about this on our behalf for some time. We were
hopeful that the matter could be rectified, but sadly this has not been
possible. This is why I am appealing to you at this late stage, in the hope
that you can please do something to help.

I cannot emphasise too strongly just how vital it is to rectify this
situation. This year, as part of the 60th anniversary commemorations of the
end of the Second World War, Sally B is due to carry out a poppy drop and,
most importantly, to join in the official commemorative flypast over
Buckingham Palace. High profile commemorative events such as these will be
drastically affected if a way forward cannot be found.

Tens of thousands of young American airmen lost their lives flying from UK
bases in B-17s. This aircraft is the only living memorial to their
sacrifice - a flagship of the special relationship that has existed ever
since between our two countries. Its mission is to educate young and old of
this important piece of our national history.

There will be a massive outcry if this beloved aircraft, which represents so
much to so many people, is grounded now, having flown for thirty years
thanks solely to the dedication of its volunteers and supporters, and funds
raised by its own charity, The B-17 Charitable Trust. If something is not
done, this historic aircraft will soon cross the Atlantic to the USA. I
hope you will agree that this would be a tragedy, especially when the cause
is a piece of legislation that appears simply not to have taken account of
historic aircraft such as Sally B.

In these circumstances, and bearing in mind that the aircraft flies only in
the UK, I ask you please to grant the Sally B an exemption so that this
aircraft can continue to fly in the UK, as a matter of urgency, given that
our flying season starts in May. If you would like to find out more about
this unique aircraft, please do look at our website

Now a 182 is not going to pick up more liability than a clapped out B17

G Farris

April 21st 05, 08:40 AM

In article >, says...
>
>Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>> Every indicator I can find shows that the French have killed general
>> aviation -- or nearly so -- for everyone but the very rich.
>
>If I didn't know it before, I'd do so now: You've never been in France.
>I have. You're just plain wrong.
>

I think Jay is neither completely right, nor completely wrong.
I don't know any "very rich" people flying in France, but all ther people I do
know are those who have managed to allocate a sufficient chunk of spare cash.
Many are young, with no family yet, who have a small apartment (or still live
with their parents) and other compromises in life. When they get married, and
baby comes along, flying stops. Often you see them coming back in their 40's,
when they manage to get the budget back on track.

I think it's true, even obvious, that the cost of flying in Europe is the main
reason why there are relatively few who take it up. And I think it's just as
obvious that the fuel price, rental prices and other use taxes account for
much of this expense.

I don't think it's ridiculous to say the authorities in France are "killing"
general aviation. Many - probably most - private pilots in France feel this
way, and it's clearly expressed in the aviation press. The authorities in
Europe do not see GA as a useful, economically beneficial instrument, but as a
high-risk hobby. Add to this the perceived "pollution" (air, noise and
land-use) and you have a double-whammy that Europeans are sensitive to - risk
and pollution.

There is also an attitude difference in pilots. Many Europeans are more
oriented toward leisure flying, and long for the unfettered days when they
could take to the skies in their warbirds and do a few spins. Many Americans
enjoy the challenge of using their planes to go somewhere, and as such their
attitude is much closer to a professional transport mindset. In this respect,
it may be an exaggeration to say the European authorities are "killing" GA -
instead they are setting the standard much higher - squeezing out the leisure
sector, and reducing the activity to those who are willing and able to move up
to a more professional standard - that includes equipment, mission profile and
mindset. American regulations and costs allow plenty of room for both types of
activities (and quite a few others).

The very high investment (time and money) required for IR training in Europe
is a good example of setting the bar high. The weather in northern Europe
precludes any serious notion of transportation under VFR. You cannot plan any
trip several days ahead of time and have a reasonable expectation of being
able to complete it under VFR. If you want to go IFR - you have to make the
grade. The committment level has to be high - otherwise you will stay close to
your home field, and close to the ground, where you will have plenty of
freedom to exercise your risky, polluting hobby.

G Faris

Stefan

April 21st 05, 08:54 AM

George Patterson wrote:

> What's insurance like over there?

At the moment, liability insurance requirements for aircraft up to 2
tons MTOW is around 3 Million dollars (approximately). This may or may
not change in the future, but I tend to think it won't. For heavier
airplanes, it is higher. This includes third party liability (if you
fall onto your neighbour's house, or more realistically, if you taxi
into your neighbour's plane) and passenger injury liability on private
flights. Passengers on commercial flights is another story.

This is about the same as for cars. In Europe, cars are required to have
liability insurance when they are moved on public roads. I think this is
a good idea.

To fully appreciate these numbers, you should bear in mind that
liability in Europe is just this, liability. It pays the expenses, and
that's it. Not 10 millions because your dog can't sleep anymore.

(Because I know absolutely nothing about the US legal system, I feel
sufficielntly qualified to express it like this: We don't have
dunderhead liability laws nor dunderhead juries who pay millions to any
dunderhead guy who burnes his mouth because nobody told him that coffee
usually tends to be hot.)

Stefan

Stefan

April 21st 05, 09:23 AM

G Farris wrote:

> I think it's true, even obvious, that the cost of flying in Europe is the main
> reason why there are relatively few who take it up.

Of course flying cost much more in Europe than in the USA. Roughly said,
VFR on light singles cost twice as much. But I don't think cost is the
main reason. It is one of several reasons. Those who really want to fly
usually can manage it. (OTOH, twins or IFR are out of the range for most
people.)

> I don't think it's ridiculous to say the authorities in France are "killing"
> general aviation. Many - probably most - private pilots in France feel this
> way, and it's clearly expressed in the aviation press.

Don't believe everything that's written in the press, even aviation
press. Yes, regulations are tight. Airspace in Europe is very congested,
and it has been a political decision that commercial aviation gets
priority. But nobody wants to "kill" something.

> There is also an attitude difference in pilots. Many Europeans are more
> oriented toward leisure flying,

Exactly. Private flying here is mostly recreational flying. And as such,
costs are looked at with another view. Do I prefer to spend 5'000 for
flying or do I prefer to go skiing with my family? This decision pushes
out all those who don't *really* want to fly.

On the other hand, don't forget that soaring is much more popular here
than in the USA. When you look at flying as a recreational hobby, then
soaring is much more rewarding than motorized flight (and cheaper, too).
There is a healthy soaring community in most parts of Europe, but
especially in France.

Stefan

Markus Voget

April 21st 05, 12:08 PM

George Patterson > wrote:

> What's insurance like over there?

The annual premium (both liability and hull coverage) for a Katana DA20
owned by a flying club in Germany used to be the equivalent of around $5500
(slightly over 4000 Euro).

Greetings,
Markus

Dylan Smith

April 21st 05, 01:43 PM

In article >, Martin Hotze wrote:
> they apparently have other priorities. They have faster trains, for example. How
> does this compare with the US?

I think this is part of the point; if you made avgas tax free across
Europe, you still wouldn't get anywhere near US levels of GA. That's
because it'll still be much faster, more reliable and cheaper to travel
by train for business purposes and move small freight items by road
(since the distances are far smaller), and larger freight items by rail.

GA would still be largely personal, in-your-free-time types of
activities.
--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Dave Stadt

April 21st 05, 01:49 PM

"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
> > It's the relative PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft, and airports that is
out
> > of whack in France. If aviation weren't dead in France, they should
have
> > the same PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft and airports as the US.
>
>
> they apparently have other priorities. They have faster trains, for
example. How
> does this compare with the US?

No doubt France has fast trains and an excellent rail system. Problem is
when I was there they went on strike every other day which made them
useless.

Dave Stadt

April 21st 05, 01:55 PM

"George Patterson" > wrote in message
news:dcG9e.13130$Fm5.9947@trndny09...
> Dave Stadt wrote:
> >
> > If you believe GA is in good shape in France and other parts of the EU
go to
> > the AOPA WEB site and read about the new liability insurance
requirements
> > the EU has placed on GA aircraft. $119 million in liability insurance
> > required for a 182. Doesn't sound healthy to me.
>
> Read through the actual PDF document. For a private operator, they require
a
> minimum of 100,000 SDRs/passenger and 1,000 SDRs for luggage. For coverage
of
> non-passengers, you need 3 million SDRs for a 182. The current exchange
rate is
> 1.51746 dollars to one SDR. While the rate is still crazy, no way can I
make it
> add up to $119 million. Seems to me that's a policy for $4,552,380 with
> sublimits of $151,746 per seat, plus a luggage allowance.
>
> In any case, what's important is the amount of the premium, not the
coverage
> amount. Liability cases are not settled by juries in Europe, nor are the
awards
> very high (by American standards). I'd bet the premiums are far lower as
well.
>
> Stefan? Wolfgang? Martin? Dylan? What's insurance like over there?
>
> George Patterson
> There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
> mashed potatoes.

AOPA changed the story. Yesterday it said $119 million for a 182, this
morning it is "Almost $5 million."

Jay Honeck

April 21st 05, 02:36 PM

>> Every indicator I can find shows that the French have killed general
>> aviation -- or nearly so -- for everyone but the very rich.
>
> If I didn't know it before, I'd do so now: You've never been in France. I
> have. You're just plain wrong.

Okay, Stefan -- the ball is in your court.

Show me one statistic that disproves that aviation in France hasn't been
decimated by the French government's predatory aviation gas tax strategy.

I've searched, and can't find one.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
"Stefan" > wrote in message
...
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>
> Stefan

Jay Honeck

April 21st 05, 02:42 PM

> (Because I know absolutely nothing about the US legal system, I feel
> sufficielntly qualified to express it like this: We don't have dunderhead
> liability laws nor dunderhead juries who pay millions to any dunderhead
> guy who burnes his mouth because nobody told him that coffee usually tends
> to be hot.)

You'll get no argument from me on this one, Stefan.

We do, indeed, have the most dunderheaded legal system ever devised by man.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 21st 05, 02:49 PM

> It proves no such thing. American enumeracy at work.
> The land mass of France, as far as I can determine from a quick sweep, is
> one 18th that of the US. Is their number of pilots and/or airports an
> eighteenth of those in this country?

Since when do potential pilots decide to become pilots based on the
available *land mass*? What kind of logic is THAT?

In my world, aviation enthusiasts become pilots because they can't resist
the call.

Unless, of course, they can't find the money to pay for it...

> Taxation? How did such a silly premise get started?

Excessive taxation (or, if you will, social engineering) controls EVERYTHING
in society. When you tax something by 300%, you very effectively limit its
use.

As a fellow Iowan you can relate to this example: What is going to happen
to cigarette smoking in Iowa if (when?) the legislature double the tax on a
pack of smokes, as they are debating this very week? Predictions range
from a 13% to 26% drop in smoking.

Works the same with avgas.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 21st 05, 02:51 PM

> and Diamond comes to mind .... an Austrian company (also with a production
> plant
> in Canada).

And they make a terrific product.

But it's not by accident that they have focused their attention on North
America, where semi-healthy general aviation still exists.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 21st 05, 02:55 PM

> they apparently have other priorities. They have faster trains, for
> example. How
> does this compare with the US?

TRAINS?

Please, no swearing. This is an aviation group!

:-)

Actually, I love trains -- my grandfather worked for the Santa Fe railroad
for 50 years -- but to compare train travel with general aviation is like
comparing shuffleboard to skydiving.

If good trains are what is keeping people from learning to fly, I submit
that those folks never wanted to fly in the first place.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 21st 05, 02:57 PM

> what now? private airplanes? or general aviation? what would USA (or
> Europe)
> look like without _General_ _Aviation_?
>
> you still fly checkes from bank to bank, don't you?

Actually, as I understand it, not anymore.

But that kind of flying is considered to be commercial aviation -- not the
grassroots general aviation kind of flying most of us do.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Matt Barrow

April 21st 05, 03:35 PM

"Chris" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Those of us who do have to pay $7.80 are the ones entitled to gripe about
> it. However I am also aware of where my tax £'s go and frankly I do not
> worry too much about it. Why, apart from money wasted on some dunderheaded
> war, most gets put to good use.

****ing it down a toilet is a good use? Gee, you're a good little munchen!

> My parents get good medical treatment and they do not have to pay a cent
for
> it, I put a son through Oxford University for $30,000 (mostly for beer I
> think) and many other things.

Wow!!, glorified parasitism!!

>
> I consider flying a hobby, a luxury and indulgence. I do not fly to
support
> my job, British Airways is always the best for that.

> What I don't do is take flying for granted. Here its a privilege not a
right
> but I have to accept that the majority of the country don't give a damn
> about it and would not care a jot if it was stopped.

> So while I can I will pay my $7.80 a gallon and my eurocontrol charges and
> enjoy it and every so often slip over to the US and enjoy flying for $3 a
> gallon and be subsidised by your tax $$s. That will taste sweet, knowing
> that you are subsidising my flying.

See previous comment.

Jay Honeck

April 21st 05, 03:36 PM

> Have you found one statistic that *PROVES* your point? (that aviation in
> France
> has been decimated by the French govt. aviation tax strategy?)

Okay, let's re-phrase the question, since the statistics I posted obviously
didn't register with you.

Why is aviation in France statistically out of proportion with its
population, as compared with the US, if NOT because of cost?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Larry Dighera

April 21st 05, 03:40 PM

On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 17:54:02 -0700, Bob Fry
> wrote in
>::

>
>Jay, what you don't understand is that you are the fat slob in the
>floral shirt making an ass of himself and his countrymen by insulting
>entire countries in a public place. The rest of us are the 300 other
>Americans who don't want to be grouped with you.
>
>Unlike the airport, here in Usenet some of us are criticizing your
>statements loudly. But this isn't for your benefit. No, the protests
>are for the non-US pilots and aviation aficionados reading this group.
>We, the 300 bystanders, are trying to let them know that you are a
>minority; that many, even most, Americans are not shallow bigots.

"In my opinion, it is a very helpful (and in some instances quite
necessary) virtue to be able to take criticism even if it is offensive
or insulting. In fact, even the most offensive criticism might (and
hopefully does!) contain insights that are valuable, and by
disregarding the entire criticism, you are throwing away that
insight. You may not like it, but it sometimes does pay to listen to
a person that is not as friendly as you'd like her to be."
-- Tobias Dussa >

Stella Starr

April 21st 05, 03:57 PM

Jay Honeck wrote:

>
> Show me one statistic that disproves that aviation in France hasn't been
> decimated by the French government's predatory aviation gas tax strategy.

Decimated since when?
Post a reference statistic and time as a starting point.

What taxes particularly are you referring to?

Where does France get its processed petroleum products and what factors
make the cost of avgas what it is?

You just pulled thos whole argument out of your ass, dear, and while it
might make an interesting thesis for a classroom debate, you should quit
defending it unless you have a lot of facts to back up your assertions.

And why are people required to choose aviation as a pursuit based on the
population of their country? If you took every airport in the US and
laid them next to each other they'd probably take up an area the size of
France, but for some reason you consider it unfair that they haven't
accomplished exactly that phenomenon.

Larry Dighera

April 21st 05, 04:56 PM

On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 13:49:20 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote in <AbO9e.5855$WI3.1063@attbi_s71>::

>What is going to happen
>to cigarette smoking in Iowa if (when?) the legislature double the tax on a
>pack of smokes

Iowa smokers will purchase out of state.

Larry Dighera

April 21st 05, 05:03 PM

On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 13:55:25 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote in <hhO9e.5889$c24.2848@attbi_s72>::

>TRAINS?

High speed (180 mph) European trains are preferable to airline
transportation within Europe. No security lines nor baggage waiting,
and you can walk around and eat first class cuisine en route.

It's possible to travel in your sleep on slower European trains, save
the cost of a night's lodging, and arrive at your destination rested
and ready.

If you haven't tried it, don't knock it.

Montblack

April 21st 05, 05:26 PM

"Stella Starr"
> You just pulled thos whole argument out of your ass, dear, and while it
> might make an interesting thesis for a classroom debate, you should quit
> defending it unless you have a lot of facts to back up your assertions.

(ass)ertions :-)

Montblack

Gig 601XL Builder

April 21st 05, 07:37 PM

"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
>> Why is aviation in France statistically out of proportion with its
>> population, as compared with the US, if NOT because of cost?
>
> it simply doesn't appear on the radar of too many people. when I talk to
> people
> and it comes to aviation and me having a certificate, then most people
> think
> about many burdens, (too) much learning, etc. - they don't believe that it
> is
> rather easy to acomplish - even here in Europe.

Your putting the effect before the cause. Could it be that "it simply
doesn't appear on the radar of too many people" because it costs to damn
much to do it thier?

Gig 601XL Builder

April 21st 05, 08:31 PM

"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wr.giacona@coxDOTnet> wrote:
>
>> Your putting the effect before the cause. Could it be that "it simply
>> doesn't appear on the radar of too many people" because it costs to damn
>> much to do it thier?
>
> no.
>
> and nobody I talked to had the slightest idea about the costs. for sure
> they
> meant that it isn't the cheapest hobby, but compared to skiing (with all
> the
> associated costs) or golfing or other things it is still within reach (I
> made my
> private pilot license here when I was an office clerk for the social
> security
> administration with an average paycheck).
>
> #m
> --
> <http://www.hotze.priv.at/album/aviation/caution.jpg>

Well France has a long tradition of aviation even rivaling the US. What
happened that knocked it of the radar if it wasn't cost. I know cost has
hammered it pretty good here in the US.

El Dorado AR a town of 25,000 in a county with about 50,000 has two airports
ELD and F43. When I was growing up there were three FBOs that rented,
chartered and all that fun stuff. When I got my PPL in 79-80 there were two
and the one I used had three aircraft that stayed rented on the weekend and
were pretty well used during the week. I think the other FBO had two.

Then I went off to school for 4 years. When I returned they were all gone
there have been a couple try to start up since then and they have all failed
miserably. We had no real economic down turn here and we still have more
than our fair share of Doctors, Lawyers and Oil Men.

THe two things that killed it were the cost of AVGAS and Insurance.

Jay Honeck

April 21st 05, 08:57 PM

> Decimated since when? Post a reference statistic and time as a starting
> point.

Well, let's start with the fact that France's efforts at flight pre-date our
own. Is 1903-ish far enough back for you?

> What taxes particularly are you referring to?

Avgas taxes. The price of avgas in France (as the subject of this thread
states) has now exceeded $7.50 per gallon, solely as a result of their very
aggressive tax policies.

> Where does France get its processed petroleum products and what factors
> make the cost of avgas what it is?

I presume that they get their petroleum from the same worldwide supply as
the U.S. -- yet our avgas is "only" $3.30-ish per gallon.

> You just pulled thos whole argument out of your ass, dear, and while it
> might make an interesting thesis for a classroom debate, you should quit
> defending it unless you have a lot of facts to back up your assertions.

As opposed to your well-thought out, carefully crafted counter-arguments?

;-)

The facts are clear. It is your unwillingness to accept them that is
puzzling. Why -- especially in an aviation forum -- are you (and Larry,
Martin, and a couple of other folks) defending a foreign tax system that
more than DOUBLES the price of aviation? This makes no sense to me.

> And why are people required to choose aviation as a pursuit based on the
> population of their country?

They're not. But based on the population of France, there should be many
times more pilots -- ESPECIALLY given their proud heritage of flight.

I'm still waiting for an answer: If it's NOT the outrageous cost of avgas
that has nearly killed general aviation in France, what is it? Why, in the
land of Bleriot and Saint-Exupery, are there so (relatively) few men and
women feeling the call to the skies, if NOT for price considerations?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Dave Stadt

April 21st 05, 08:59 PM

"Stella Starr" > wrote in message
news:8bP9e.5414$r53.3247@attbi_s21...
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> >
> > Show me one statistic that disproves that aviation in France hasn't been
> > decimated by the French government's predatory aviation gas tax
strategy.
>
> Decimated since when?
> Post a reference statistic and time as a starting point.
>
> What taxes particularly are you referring to?
>
> Where does France get its processed petroleum products and what factors
> make the cost of avgas what it is?
>
> You just pulled thos whole argument out of your ass, dear, and while it
> might make an interesting thesis for a classroom debate, you should quit
> defending it unless you have a lot of facts to back up your assertions.

You obviously missed the post with the extensive supporting evidence.

Dave Stadt

April 21st 05, 09:01 PM

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 13:55:25 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> > wrote in <hhO9e.5889$c24.2848@attbi_s72>::
>
> >TRAINS?
>
> High speed (180 mph) European trains are preferable to airline
> transportation within Europe. No security lines nor baggage waiting,
> and you can walk around and eat first class cuisine en route.
>
> It's possible to travel in your sleep on slower European trains, save
> the cost of a night's lodging, and arrive at your destination rested
> and ready.
>
> If you haven't tried it, don't knock it.

I tried it, they were on strike, again and again and again and again.

Jay Honeck

April 21st 05, 09:03 PM

>>What is going to happen
>>to cigarette smoking in Iowa if (when?) the legislature double the tax on
>>a
>>pack of smokes
>
> Iowa smokers will purchase out of state.

The aviation parallel, of course, is simply to witness how many foreign-born
pilots come to America to train -- to escape predatory taxation.

I'm all for people quitting smoking, but adding 60-some cents per pack
tax -- overnight -- seems like a great way to (a) cut tax income for the
State and (b) create a thriving black market.

Heck, I remember in the 1970s my parents would pay a trucker friend to pick
up 50 cartons of cigarettes whenever he drove through Virginia (?) because
they cost a whole dollar less (per carton!) then they did in Wisconsin.
With this proposed tax, the difference could be as much as $12 per carton!

Social engineering through taxation -- even well-meaning efforts -- almost
always seems to have unforeseen consequences.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck

April 21st 05, 09:05 PM

> High speed (180 mph) European trains are preferable to airline
> transportation within Europe. No security lines nor baggage waiting,

That's interesting.

You would think after the train bombings in Spain, there would be as much --
or more -- security efforts expended on them?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

G Farris

April 21st 05, 09:37 PM

In article <9IT9e.5855$r53.47@attbi_s21>, says...
>
>> High speed (180 mph) European trains are preferable to airline
>> transportation within Europe. No security lines nor baggage waiting,
>
>That's interesting.
>
>You would think after the train bombings in Spain, there would be as much --
>or more -- security efforts expended on them?
>--

You are correct!
The security situation on European high-speed trains is a catastrophe waiting
to happen, particularly in France, where their TGV is considered an icon of
national pride. Security has increased slightly, but it would still be
child's play for someone (anyone) to place a bomb in the luggage carrier of
one of these trains. I'm even afraid writing this, because I don't know who
may read - but then it's SO obvious!

This situation is atypical of the French, usually overly security concious.

G Faris

Newps

April 21st 05, 10:46 PM

Martin Hotze wrote:
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
>
>>It's the relative PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft, and airports that is out
>>of whack in France. If aviation weren't dead in France, they should have
>>the same PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft and airports as the US.
>
>
>
> they apparently have other priorities. They have faster trains, for example. How
> does this compare with the US?

We have some fast trains too but we can't get them to stop so they have
been mothballed for a while.

Stefan

April 21st 05, 11:20 PM

Jay Honeck wrote:

> Okay, Stefan -- the ball is in your court.
>
> Show me one statistic that disproves that aviation in France hasn't been
> decimated by the French government's predatory aviation gas tax strategy.

Ok. Let's start at the basics. First, statistics can't prove or disprove
anything. Carefully done (which few are), they can show correlations.
But interpreting those correlations is science (and an art) in itself.
So you started with the wrong question in the first place.

Then, to correct a misinformation: Avgas is not only taxed in France. It
is similiarly taxed throughout Europe. So if you want to bash somebody,
then you must bash whole Europe. (Yes, in this case, generalisation is
allowed.) I'm aware that bashing France is very popular among certain
Americans these days, but it is as it is.

Third, to correct another misinformation: It's not only avgas which is
taxed, but all oil products which is used for engines. (Jet fuel is an
exeption, but this is a long story. So let's forget this for the
moment.) Yes, auto gas is also highly taxed. But, surprize surprize, car
traffic isn't dead at all throughout Europe. Which already is that proof
you asked for.

Yes, "grassroot aviation" as you name it is very expensive in Europe.
Operating a light single under VFR costs about twice what it does in the
USA. But is it because of the taxation? To a small degree. Gas tax
contribute approximately one quarter to the hourly rate.

Frankly, as I said, private aviation is expensive. But somebody with an
average income can afford it if he really wants. (Unemployed are another
story, of course, but I guess they can't afford it in the USA, either.)
I'm not aware of anybody who really wanted to fly and couldn't do it
because of the price. I do know some who fly fewer hours, though.

So why is there less GA in Europe than in the USA? (It undoubtedly is
less.) First, as others mentioned, there are very few occations where GA
for transprotation reasons makes sense. Distances are smaller, so
usually train and/or car is not only cheaper but actually faster, too,
and if you really want to go far, you take an airline.

So GA (that grassroot GA, not biz jets) is a purely recreational
activity. And now comes the bummer: There are actually people out there
who are not interested in learning to fly! They just don't care! Yes,
it's shocking, I know, but it's the way it is. But then, it's maybe not
that surprizing at all: In Europe, nobody cares for baseball, either,
but everybody talks about soccer! Can you imagine this? Or, back to
aviation: In many European countries, soaring is more popular than
motorized flight, and not for financial reasons. Other countries, other
cultures, other hobbies. (Having lived for some time abroad helps a lot
in accepting this.)

So, to summarize: Yes, there is fewer GA in Europe. But even if you
would wipe all avgas taxes, there wouldn't be more.

Stefan

Stefan

April 21st 05, 11:24 PM

Jay Honeck wrote:

> As a fellow Iowan you can relate to this example: What is going to happen
> to cigarette smoking in Iowa if (when?) the legislature double the tax on a
> pack of smokes, as they are debating this very week? Predictions range
> from a 13% to 26% drop in smoking.

Knowing a couple of smokers myself, my prediction is they will just
mumble somewhat, then rise their tobacco budget and continue to smoke.

Stefan

Stefan

April 21st 05, 11:26 PM

Jay Honeck wrote:

> And they make a terrific product.

They make at least four terrific products.

> But it's not by accident that they have focused their attention on North
> America, where semi-healthy general aviation still exists.

I wasn't aware that they have "focused" on North America. They just try
to sell their product worldwide, which of course includes North America.

Stefan

Montblack

April 21st 05, 11:28 PM

("Martin Hotze" wrote)
<snip>
> why do so many people here play soccer? because it is almost always on TV
> and
> almost everybody plays it (except me, I guess *g*). why do so few people
> in the
> US play soccer? why don't I understand the rules of baseball? probably
> because
> you have to be born into that. why do I find cricket boooooring?

Marty Marty Marty

The question that I can't answer is why DON'T more young people play soccer
in the USA after leaving Jr High, High School or College.

You'll see pickup games of basketball and softball (baseball with a bigger
ball, slow pitching and beer drinking) and even mud football, but I have yet
to see a group of neighborhood kids, big or little, out playing soccer up in
the park. I've seen more little kids hitting golf balls than I've seen kids
playing un-organized soccer.

I've seen kids playing hockey, rollerblade-hockey, Frisbee golf, tennis,
volleyball, swimming, biking and still no sight of any pickup games of
soccer.

This seems odd to me since (for over 20 years now) soccer has been pounded
down the throats of little boys and girls throughout this country. It's
their very first team sport for most of them - uniforms, playing card
photos, button photos, team photos, fridge magnet photos, not to mention the
hours and hours of VHS tape Mom and Dad have of their youth soccer games.

All USA children MUST play organized community youth soccer. ..."soccer
moms" term didn't come from nowhere. And yet, it doesn't seem like it's
taking root here, even with 20 years of solid, solid effort.

I'm 100% serious, I wonder why this is? Almost no kids over 14 play soccor
here, unless they're on an organized team.

Montblack
I played High Shcool soccer my sophomore year, in the fall of 1975. I was
the Goalie. Soccer was pretty new to Minnesota High School sports back then.
Played football my next two years. <g>

Stefan

April 21st 05, 11:32 PM

Jay Honeck wrote:

> You would think after the train bombings in Spain, there would be as much --
> or more -- security efforts expended on them?

Most Europeans just reasonably understand that the probability to be hit
by a meteor is higher. It was a cruel crime, but no paranoya on this
side of the pond. How many people die each day on the road?

Stefan

Dave Stadt

April 21st 05, 11:35 PM

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Martin Hotze wrote:
> > "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>It's the relative PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft, and airports that is
out
> >>of whack in France. If aviation weren't dead in France, they should
have
> >>the same PROPORTION of pilots, aircraft and airports as the US.
> >
> >
> >
> > they apparently have other priorities. They have faster trains, for
example. How
> > does this compare with the US?
>
> We have some fast trains too but we can't get them to stop so they have
> been mothballed for a while.

The Boston to Washington high speed train is not running due to not being
able to get brake parts. Anybody know where that train is made?

Chris

April 21st 05, 11:52 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:4UO9e.5395$r53.732@attbi_s21...
>> Have you found one statistic that *PROVES* your point? (that aviation in
>> France
>> has been decimated by the French govt. aviation tax strategy?)
>
> Okay, let's re-phrase the question, since the statistics I posted
> obviously didn't register with you.
>
> Why is aviation in France statistically out of proportion with its
> population, as compared with the US, if NOT because of cost?

Because the US is not France. They country is different. Geographically,
demographically, and culturally. Therefore your notion of proportionality is
bunkum. Your math is the equivalent of saying we have three apples plus 4
oranges so we have seven fruit.
Just so happens that six strawberries and 1 pear also make seven fruit. It
means **** all.

Peter

April 21st 05, 11:55 PM

Dave Stadt wrote:
> "Newps" > wrote in message
> ...

>>We have some fast trains too but we can't get them to stop so they have
>>been mothballed for a while.
>
>
> The Boston to Washington high speed train is not running due to not being
> able to get brake parts. Anybody know where that train is made?

According to the news report on the brake rotors they come from the
consortium of Canada's Bombardier and France's Alstom.

Roger

April 21st 05, 11:55 PM

On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 20:03:58 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:
<snip>
>Social engineering through taxation -- even well-meaning efforts -- almost
>always seems to have unforeseen consequences.
You mean something like prohibition? It created a great market for
the mobs back then.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Chris

April 22nd 05, 12:13 AM

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wr.giacona@coxDOTnet> wrote in message
news:ycT9e.2919$Xg.1811@okepread02...
>
> "Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wr.giacona@coxDOTnet> wrote:
>>
>>> Your putting the effect before the cause. Could it be that "it simply
>>> doesn't appear on the radar of too many people" because it costs to damn
>>> much to do it thier?
>>
>> no.
>>
>> and nobody I talked to had the slightest idea about the costs. for sure
>> they
>> meant that it isn't the cheapest hobby, but compared to skiing (with all
>> the
>> associated costs) or golfing or other things it is still within reach (I
>> made my
>> private pilot license here when I was an office clerk for the social
>> security
>> administration with an average paycheck).
>>
>> #m
>> --
>> <http://www.hotze.priv.at/album/aviation/caution.jpg>
>
> Well France has a long tradition of aviation even rivaling the US. What
> happened that knocked it of the radar if it wasn't cost. I know cost has
> hammered it pretty good here in the US.
>
> El Dorado AR a town of 25,000 in a county with about 50,000 has two
> airports ELD and F43. When I was growing up there were three FBOs that
> rented, chartered and all that fun stuff. When I got my PPL in 79-80 there
> were two and the one I used had three aircraft that stayed rented on the
> weekend and were pretty well used during the week. I think the other FBO
> had two.
>
> Then I went off to school for 4 years. When I returned they were all gone
> there have been a couple try to start up since then and they have all
> failed miserably. We had no real economic down turn here and we still have
> more than our fair share of Doctors, Lawyers and Oil Men.
>
> THe two things that killed it were the cost of AVGAS and Insurance.

I can understand the insurance bit because you have a crap legal system and
until the limit of 18 years was set on product liability the major aircraft
makers had all but given up production. The only significant light aircraft
manufacturers were in Europe, where liability laws are limited.

Aviation in Europe is doing well and it is proved by the fact the first 2 LS
aircraft certified in the US are of European origin where that area has been
vibrant. In some respects the US is catching up with Europe in that respect.

The other development is that of the diesel engine. The lower running costs
promised are driving the developments.

To complete the rebuttal of Jay's asinine remarks, the aviation scene in
Europe is doing rather well. Why? Because there is a lot of innovation going
on to suitable aircraft to operate in our environment and which the US is
taking advantage of.

IFR is not a big issue in Europe for the private pilot. So expensive IFR
systems like WAAS and GPS enabled approaches are irrelevant. Its interesting
that the much hailed Cirrus cannot fly IFR in much of European airspace and
in the UK its just a VFR machine. By Cirrus's own admission its was not
designed they say for Class A airspace. With Class A starting at 1500 ft its
pretty useless. Excellent value for $450,000.

Chris

April 22nd 05, 12:16 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:VAT9e.5840$r53.5583@attbi_s21...
>> Decimated since when? Post a reference statistic and time as a starting
>> point.
>
> Well, let's start with the fact that France's efforts at flight pre-date
> our own. Is 1903-ish far enough back for you?
>
>> What taxes particularly are you referring to?
>
> Avgas taxes. The price of avgas in France (as the subject of this thread
> states) has now exceeded $7.50 per gallon, solely as a result of their
> very aggressive tax policies.
>
>> Where does France get its processed petroleum products and what factors
>> make the cost of avgas what it is?
>
> I presume that they get their petroleum from the same worldwide supply as
> the U.S. -- yet our avgas is "only" $3.30-ish per gallon.
>
>> You just pulled thos whole argument out of your ass, dear, and while it
>> might make an interesting thesis for a classroom debate, you should quit
>> defending it unless you have a lot of facts to back up your assertions.
>
> As opposed to your well-thought out, carefully crafted counter-arguments?
>
> ;-)
>
> The facts are clear. It is your unwillingness to accept them that is
> puzzling. Why -- especially in an aviation forum -- are you (and Larry,
> Martin, and a couple of other folks) defending a foreign tax system that
> more than DOUBLES the price of aviation? This makes no sense to me.
>
>> And why are people required to choose aviation as a pursuit based on the
>> population of their country?
>
> They're not. But based on the population of France, there should be many
> times more pilots -- ESPECIALLY given their proud heritage of flight.
>
> I'm still waiting for an answer: If it's NOT the outrageous cost of avgas
> that has nearly killed general aviation in France, what is it? Why, in
> the land of Bleriot and Saint-Exupery, are there so (relatively) few men
> and women feeling the call to the skies, if NOT for price considerations?

The French are more culturally mature and have perhaps outgrown such
childish pursuits.