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 |
#341
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 17:11:04 -0700, Matt Barrow wrote:
the good thing is that I drive a car needing about 6 liters per 100 kilometers (the other car is a diesel needing about 4 to 5 liters per 100 kilometers). So I do care driving a fuelefficient car, because it saves me money. Somebody run the numbers. What is that in miles per gallon? Just wanted to compare that to my F250 Diesel. About 40MPG and 50MPG for the diesel. btw my numbers reflect only my cars. this fuel consumption does not reflect fuel efficient cars. (IIRC this is something like 3 liters per 100 kilometers) Such a car would likely be "useful" it is always useful to save gas (and money). what is the difference in driving 100 miles within a city or "out in the west"? out in the west where distances are measured in three or even four digits and those are MILES not klicks. even in the city and on short distance your consumption is more than average. it was always weired to see those huge pickups in the city, only the driver and no passengers, the driver only has this car for ... eee .. no idea. hopefuly for fun. no wonder that carpooling lanes can be used when the car is occupied by at least _2_ persons. But Martin is such a good little milch cow!! He'll do as ordered! I don't get your point. I am free to buy whatever car I can afford. But I'd be silly to buy more than I would need. #m -- http://www.hotze.priv.at/album/aviation/caution.jpg |
#342
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 04:20:19 GMT, Mike Rapoport wrote:
So what is your (US) or our (Europe) advantage? High costs for labor and energy, higher transportation costs, more restrictions and laws, lack of people willing to work really hard, etc. etc ... Lots of intellectual property, extensive infrastructure, stable political system, lots of capital and educated people. I am with you except for the educated people. Every country has about the same energy costs. *hehe* not really. For example: Opel (a car brand, owned by GM) has plants here in some European countries. They wanted to close one German facility. One reason was that energy was cheaper in Finnland (IIRC; one of the northern countries), labor was about the same. The US and Europe are well positioned to compete in many industries. not for very much longer. Maybe 1, maximum 2 generations. maybe there are few industries left for us. Mike MU-2 #m -- http://www.hotze.priv.at/album/aviation/caution.jpg |
#343
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 03:53:50 GMT, Mike Rapoport wrote:
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. this is one of the main reasons we have tolls for trucks on a per mile basis. for one to pay for the damage; we also want them to move their cargo on trains. #m -- http://www.hotze.priv.at/album/aviation/caution.jpg |
#344
|
|||
|
|||
In article .net,
"Mike Rapoport" wrote: No, there is a fundemental difference. The road tax on gasoline pays for all the roads are you claiming that, in the USA, the only source of funds to pay for roads is the tax on gas? In MA we have this excise tax which I thought paid for part of the road infrastructure. -- Bob Noel looking for a sig the lawyers will like |
#345
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message link.net... "Matt Barrow" wrote in message ... 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. Considering the spartan facilities GA uses, compared to the regal infrastructure the airlines require, GA is dirt cheap. 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. And GA didn't get $$$BILLIONS in handout in the wake of 9/11. The airlines would counter that they pay wages and their employees pay taxes. It goes on forever. Cyclically. 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. Trucks like to have stickers on their cab/trailers that "I paid $xxx in taxes last year", but the amounts certain;y are not coincident with the damage they cause. Never mind that many are way OVER max. Hell, I paid $900 in Colorado property tax on my bird last year and it certainly didn't go into the CAF. 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. "Midair collisions are extremely rare. In 1999, for instance, only 18 midair collisions occurred, of which 9 involved fatalities. A fatal midair collision, therefore, occurred only once in every 3 million flying hours (based on an estimated 27 million hours flown in 1999)." -- AOPA GA Fact Sheet Only two of the 18 (AIUI) were under ATC control. ?? -- Matt --------------------- Matthew W. Barrow Site-Fill Homes, LLC. Montrose, CO |
#346
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message link.net... No, there is a fundemental difference. The road tax on gasoline pays for all the roads and the taxes on aviation do not come close to paying for airports. Maybe where you come from; in most states fuel taxes go into the general fund (often in contravention of several state and federal laws). |
#347
|
|||
|
|||
"Bob Noel" wrote in message ... In article .net, "Mike Rapoport" wrote: No, there is a fundemental difference. The road tax on gasoline pays for all the roads are you claiming that, in the USA, the only source of funds to pay for roads is the tax on gas? In MA we have this excise tax which I thought paid for part of the road infrastructure. In many states the fuel taxes and property taxes on vehicles all goes into the General Fund. Some of it comes back into the highway fund, but often, not even half. |
#348
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message link.net... "Martin Hotze" wrote in message ... "Mike Rapoport" wrote: It isn't important whether anybody likes it or not, what is important is realize that it is inevitable and change what and how we do things so we do not compete where we are at a major disadvantage. So what is your (US) or our (Europe) advantage? High costs for labor and energy, higher transportation costs, more restrictions and laws, lack of people willing to work really hard, etc. etc ... #m -- http://www.hotze.priv.at/album/aviation/caution.jpg Lots of intellectual property, extensive infrastructure, stable political system, lots of capital and educated people. Every country has about the same energy costs. The US and Europe are well positioned to compete in many industries. http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/ (EU vs. USA) by a think tank in Stockholm, Sweden Read particularly the summary at the bottom and some of he charts comparing the various EU countries against the US. For example, if the single EU countries were compared along side the US states, they would mostly be in the bottom six or so (down with Alabama or West Virginia). The big factors are regulation and taxes. In essence, the EU is, productivity wise, where the US was in 1978 and falling behind. Matt --------------------- Matthew W. Barrow Site-Fill Homes, LLC. Montrose, CO |
#349
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message link.net... "Matt Barrow" wrote in message ... "Mike Rapoport" wrote in message news Given that only a small percentage of Chineese are participating in their "new" economy, it will be a long time before this happens. Remember that Japan's economy stalled after they became (and remain) the richest developed nation on a per capita basis. Even after their economy puked, what, 2/3rds of it's value? -- Matt --------------------- Matthew W. Barrow Site-Fill Homes, LLC. Montrose, CO How are you arriving at that? What was the NIKKEI at it's peak and bottom? It's now at 11,045 and wasn't it at around 40,000 at it's peak in 1990? |
#350
|
|||
|
|||
"Morgans" wrote in message ... "Newps" wrote Ahem...120,000 is not now and never will be a "metro area". Think again. In Iowa, and other Midwest and plains states, that is a downright huge metro area. Such as are the wide open spaces in the US. -- The feds consider a "Metro Area" to be 1 million population or more and have since the 60's I think. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Soaring near Paris, France (Not Texas :-) | [email protected] | Soaring | 17 | November 13th 04 06:39 PM |
News from France | HECTOP | Piloting | 12 | April 1st 04 01:16 AM |
Russia joins France and Germany | captain! | Military Aviation | 12 | September 9th 03 09:56 AM |
France Bans the Term 'E-Mail' | bsh | Military Aviation | 38 | July 26th 03 03:18 PM |
"France downplays jet swap with Russia" | Mike | Military Aviation | 8 | July 21st 03 05:46 AM |