"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:97A9e.4563$c24.215@attbi_s72...

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.)

--
Jay Honeck


Jay, this is total BS. The amount raised from the tax on avgas is $60
million annually. It doesn't even begin to pay for flight service
stations
nevermind airports or anything else. Even AOPA achknowleged this in a
recent magazine. If we were to support airports with a gas tax gas would
be
$7.80...or more...


Does the tax on Jet-A and other fees support the airlines usages?


The passenger and fuel taxes are all mixed together. I used avgas tax and
FSS because almost all the FSS users are flying piston engine airplanes.
There really aren't any other fees that don't go to the airport owner.

Has anyone ever done a complete breakout of costs vs. revenue of the air
transport system at all levels?

If you consider that most of the system exists for the airlines, with GA as
an incremental user then the airlines are getting a pretty good deal. If
you divide the cost among all users by the number of flights then GA is
getting a good deal. People try to parse the facts to support their
position. Another way to look at it is that GA pilots and companies with
business aircraft pay income taxes and most airlines do not. The airlines
would counter that they pay wages and their employees pay taxes. It goes on
forever. One thing is clear though; piston GA is not paying its way through
fuel taxes as many believe. If the airplane burns 10GPH and flys 100hrs/yr
the fuel tax is only about $200/yr which doesn't cover much of anything.

Interestingly, I recall a few articles a few years ago the over-the-road
trucks pay roughly half of taxes and fees for the interstate and state
highways, but they cause more than 3/4ths of wear-and-tear and damage.

I recall a statistic that one max weight semi truck caused as much damage as
2300cars over the same road. This implies that trucking is indeed
subsidized. The railroads have to maintain their own tracks. The system
doesn't change because there are more truckers than railroads.

When someone else foots the bill, new and more efficient processes and
technologies never seem to get implemented as quickly as when we pay our
own
way (like good, mature adults).

Yes I would support an IFR system like in the UK. You fly without radar
separation below certain altitudes and you don't have to talk to ATC. AFAIK
there has never been a collision.


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