"Jose" wrote in message
m...
Skylune, in a different, way OT thread, intones...
It kinda reminds me of AOPA logic. For example, user fees: they argue
simultaneously that (1) GA uses very few FAA services and therefore user
fees are not necessary and (2) user fees would impose a ruinous
financial
burden on the GA industry and reduce safety (because pilots might be
less
inclined to use ATC, flight following, etc.) This is weird and
disingenous reasoning.

There was a very good article on GA user fees in the latest Flying magazine
(I think that's where I saw it).

What it boils down to is that GA is basically using the excess capability of
a system that has to be in place for the airlines anyway. If GA goes away
the cost of providing the services to the airlines will hardly be affected,
and the system would not see much, if any, downsizing. The end result is
that GA is not really adding much to the cost of the services it uses - they
would be there with or without GA.