User Fees

wrote in message
news:GpM_d.9280$GI6.1852@trnddc05...
"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?

If something other than a moron ran for public office I would gladly vote
for them.

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
m...

wrote in message
news:GpM_d.9280$GI6.1852@trnddc05...
"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?

If something other than a moron ran for public office I would gladly vote
for them.

The ultimate paradox of democracy. Only people unfit to have power put
themselves forward to be elected and we give them the power.

This debate on user fees is interesting and having gone through the same
experience in Europe where the airlines are claiming that they subsidise GA,
I know the way it going to turn out.

What never gets taken into the math is the money spend by ordinary people
through GA training themselves to be pilots which the airlines cherry pick.

Imagine what it would be like if the airlines had to pay all the costs of
pilot training from ab initio.

The airlines get a really good deal from GA and rather than being subsidised
by GA, I think GA subsidises the airlines.

However the blind cannot see!

cb

wrote in message
news:GpM_d.9280$GI6.1852@trnddc05...
snip
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?

I believe the cynics version of the quote is that "we get the government
that we (collectively) deserve"

Most people base their votes on prejudice, habit, image, and name
recognition or contrived and diversionary issues like fear, abortion, gay
marriage, or get tough law and order that have little real impact on voters
real lives but make them feel they are deciding important issues.

We allow ourselves to be seduced because we want to be seduced, it gives us
the moral high ground that allows us to bitch later.

Blue skies to all

snip

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.

So Dude is saying:

Now you have gone off the reservation. I never claimed it would.

In article 4fK_d.12274$oa6.4378@trnddc07, wrote:

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

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

yep - the Clinton administration was looking at user fees.

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

"Dude" wrote in message
...

And then we could use the money to buy gear and pay controllers instead of
creating an all new department to manage the fee system!


Up here in Taxachusetts there's a long-standing feud over tolls on the
Massachusetts Turnpike. The law that authorized the bond issue to build the
pike said, tolls will be charged until the bonds are paid off, then the
tolls shall end. Well, the bonds were paid off more than 10 years ago, but
the tollbooths persist. A couple years back when the debate flared up, the
tollbooth defenders said, "well, if we quit collecting tolls, the state will
need to come up with that $200 million some other way." Funny part is, the
accountants opened the books and figured that staffing and maintaining the
tollbooths cost the state about 60 cents on every dollar of tolls they
collected. So the net cost to the state of shutting down the tolls would be
only $80 million.

Of course, the tollbooths remain. I feel quite certain that long after the
nuclear war with China, when the whole world devolves into a Mad Maxian
opera of barbarity, the last functioning piece of the government of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts will be running the tollbooths on the
Masspike...

-cwk.

"Colin W Kingsbury" wrote in message
link.net...


Up here in Taxachusetts there's a long-standing feud over tolls on the
Massachusetts Turnpike. The law that authorized the bond issue to build the
pike said, tolls will be charged until the bonds are paid off, then the
tolls shall end. Well, the bonds were paid off more than 10 years ago, but
the tollbooths persist.

Same deal here in Florida. Florida's turnpike was paid off about a decade
ago, the promise was always that the tolls would go away when the bonds were
paid. The reality was that they instead drastically increased the tolls.

The basic lesson here is that there is no such thing as a temporary tax.

Vaughn

"Vaughn" wrote in message
...

"Colin W Kingsbury" wrote in message
link.net...


Up here in Taxachusetts there's a long-standing feud over tolls on the
Massachusetts Turnpike. The law that authorized the bond issue to build
the
pike said, tolls will be charged until the bonds are paid off, then the
tolls shall end. Well, the bonds were paid off more than 10 years ago,
but
the tollbooths persist.

Same deal here in Florida. Florida's turnpike was paid off about a
decade
ago, the promise was always that the tolls would go away when the bonds
were
paid. The reality was that they instead drastically increased the tolls.

The basic lesson here is that there is no such thing as a temporary
tax.

Vaughn

Same story in Illinois.

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
m...

"Vaughn" wrote in message
...

"Colin W Kingsbury" wrote in message
link.net...


Up here in Taxachusetts there's a long-standing feud over tolls on the
Massachusetts Turnpike. The law that authorized the bond issue to build
the
pike said, tolls will be charged until the bonds are paid off, then the
tolls shall end. Well, the bonds were paid off more than 10 years ago,
but
the tollbooths persist.

Same deal here in Florida. Florida's turnpike was paid off about a
decade
ago, the promise was always that the tolls would go away when the bonds
were
paid. The reality was that they instead drastically increased the tolls.

The basic lesson here is that there is no such thing as a temporary
tax.

Vaughn

Same story in Illinois.

Gentlemen,

You guys fought the war of independence to get away from unfair taxation.

why have you surrendered now?

Colin W Kingsbury wrote:

Up here in Taxachusetts there's a long-standing feud over tolls on the
Massachusetts Turnpike. The law that authorized the bond issue to build the
pike said, tolls will be charged until the bonds are paid off, then the
tolls shall end. Well, the bonds were paid off more than 10 years ago, but
the tollbooths persist. A couple years back when the debate flared up, the
tollbooth defenders said, "well, if we quit collecting tolls, the state will
need to come up with that $200 million some other way." Funny part is, the
accountants opened the books and figured that staffing and maintaining the
tollbooths cost the state about 60 cents on every dollar of tolls they
collected. So the net cost to the state of shutting down the tolls would be
only $80 million.

The same thing is going on here in New Jersey, only they figured the cost of
collecting the tolls at over 80 cents on the dollar. When you figure in the
Federal highway funds that they can't get because the GSP and NJT are toll
roads, the State would make a net *profit* by eliminating the toll booths.

The problem is that the State set up a bureaucracy decades ago to run the toll
roads. This group knows that their jobs and power base disappears if the roads
become free, so they are continually borrowing money to "improve" the toll
system. These loans could not legally be repaid with Federal highway funds. Four
years ago it was "EZPass." The latest effort is to remove half the toll stations
in one direction, expand those in the other direction, and double the tolls.

The signs say "The inconvenience is temporary -- the improvements permanent." So
are the tolls, it seems.

George Patterson
I prefer Heaven for climate but Hell for company.