In article
outaviation.com,
"Skylune" wrote:

by Jose Apr 11, 2006 at 02:33 PM



So, do GA pilots then get a cut of the extra business we bring to the
state?

(See, I can do stuff that's not my style.




That is another reason (after the old safety/statistics discussion) that
I
would hop in the right seat of your plane anytime. You are not a cowboy.


Seriously, though, your "cut" would be availabilty of GA airports and
airspace that is funded by the users.

I think subsidies make alot of sense for some states, esp remote rural
airstrips in AK or WY. But in the Northeast, Calif, and other built up
areas?? No way. There is no compelling economic/social need to provide
general tax subsidies to what is largely recreational/training usage.
Users should bear the full brunt of the costs. \

http://www.flyidaho.org/nwsltrs/2004/jun04/crusade.html

Pure sophistry! Northwest doesn't want to share "their" airports, but
doesn't want to share in the solution to their desires.

The problem with "Skyloon's" "solution" is that those airports in highly
populated areas are the link with those in the less-densely-populated
areas. The airports are part of a *system* -- not just a bunch of loose
parts.