If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
User Fees debate
If someone really wanted to hit the issues on this, they would do a
detailed comparison among three similar countries with similar challenges and traditions, i.e., the U.S., Canada and Australia. Europe has multiple side issues, which make the comparison less useful. On the main point, I don't have an ax to grind, except cheaper is better, but I do know that Canada has a user fee system and I'm not sure about Australia. I think you'll find that Canada has a robust GA world, but like on other issues, they put up with higher taxes and allow greater restrictions without much complaint. I think from a GA standpoint, AOPA will turn out to be right. (As an aside, in fact, the ability of a GA lobby group to affect the outcome, turn to its allies in Congress, both the House and Senate, and otherwise attempt to set aside, amend, adjust and redirect legislation and regulations of this type is something that is consistent with a Republic and difficult to achieve in a Parliamentary system, which is probably how the measure got through largely unnoticed in Canada without the lobbying battle which we expect to unfold here in the U.S.Of course, the irony is that the democratically elected will take out the aviation infrastructure by shoveling it sideways to the private sector just when the cognoscenti are starting to look at GA as an alternative to gridlocked airports and related problems partly caused by deregulating a previously properly regulated industry). |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
User Fees debate
"doylflier" wrote in message oups.com... If someone really wanted to hit the issues on this, they would do a detailed comparison among three similar countries with similar challenges and traditions, i.e., the U.S., Canada and Australia. Europe has multiple side issues, which make the comparison less useful. On the main point, I don't have an ax to grind, except cheaper is better, but I do know that Canada has a user fee system and I'm not sure about Australia. I think you'll find that Canada has a robust GA world, but like on other issues, they put up with higher taxes and allow greater restrictions without much complaint. I think from a GA standpoint, AOPA will turn out to be right. (As an aside, in fact, the ability of a GA lobby group to affect the outcome, turn to its allies in Congress, both the House and Senate, and otherwise attempt to set aside, amend, adjust and redirect legislation and regulations of this type is something that is consistent with a Republic and difficult to achieve in a Parliamentary system, which is probably how the measure got through largely unnoticed in Canada without the lobbying battle which we expect to unfold here in the U.S.Of course, the irony is that the democratically elected will take out the aviation infrastructure by shoveling it sideways to the private sector just when the cognoscenti are starting to look at GA as an alternative to gridlocked airports and related problems partly caused by deregulating a previously properly regulated industry). Why do you believe economic regulation of airlines was proper? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
User Fees debate
Why do you believe economic regulation of airlines was proper? What we had was a group of large, successful, regulated carriers, or in some countries national flag carriers, operating in the private sector much like a utility. Airline tickets were higher, but not prohibitive, people were paid well, service was good and confidence was high among passengers, the public and staff. What we now have is a complete shambles. Planes operated by Chapter 11 carriers and underpaid crew competing with non-union Jet Blue type start-ups, poor service, and hovering vulture capital firms looking for ways to buy out and further strip muscle from the bone for the simple reason that Wall Street requires not just higher earnings every year but an increasing rate of return every year. Yet some industries really are the proper province government. Think whether it really makes sense to privatize sections of the military. Do we really think it's a good idea to get rid of army cooks and have them replaced by Burger King franchises.? We want the troops fed by people who aren't concerned by an increasing rate of return on an annual basis. For the larger countries mentioned, the idea was that regulation created a version of subsidy, which in turn required them to provide service to unprofitable routes, i.e., to operate in the public good. Ditto for FAA services. They exist even where they are not profitable because they are for the public generally. Once completely private, the profit motive will result bare bones or discontinued service in a sector where the watchword ought to be safety, not profit. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
If user fees go into effect I'm done | Larry Dighera | Instrument Flight Rules | 184 | February 20th 07 02:02 AM |
Here come the user fees | Steve Foley | Piloting | 20 | February 16th 07 12:41 AM |
GA User fees | Jose | Piloting | 48 | December 24th 05 02:12 AM |
ATC User Fees | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 80 | May 12th 05 07:20 AM |
User Fees | Dude | Owning | 36 | March 19th 05 05:57 PM |