"Dude" wrote:

Still, what complete idiotic, power hungry, stupid, short sighted etc.
etc. etc. thinks user fees are a fix?

I wittily replied:

The complete idiotic, power hungry, stupid, short sighted etc. etc. etc.
administration we elected.


"Dude" retorted:

Oh, let's not be partisan. Can't we agree both sides have demonstrated
enough foolishness?

To which I say:

Not partisan, just the facts. In our democracy, we get the government we
elect. If we elect morons, why are we surprised that they govern (and set
FAA policy) moronically?




Then "Dude" wrote:

Let's say we want a $20 fee per flight for using the IFR system.
Would it not be
easier just to raise the fuel tax a penny or two? That would raise the
same amount would it not?

Do you burn 2000 gallons of fuel on a typical IFR flight?


And the ever-clever "Dude", noted:

Yes, when its IMC, I mostly take Southwest. Besides, my per passenger
fuel use is similar to Southwest's, so what's the difference?


Upon which I am happy to point out to "Dude":

Actually, if you fill a couple of seats in a single engine piston airplane
you are probably below Southwest's average fuel per occupied seat-mile by a
good margin.

That said, a $.01/gallon extra tax on aviation fuel will not cover the cost
of the ATC system, which in any case is far more than an average of $20 per
IFR flight. I also agree with you (and many other posters) that user fees
are a very bad idea, primarily because they will discourage the safety
benefits of IFR operation.

--
-Elliott Drucker