- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Trump's real problem with the privatization of air traffic control
Posted on 6/9/17 at 10:04 am
Posted on 6/9/17 at 10:04 am
Rural citizens and politicians are too addicted to their federal welfare
quote:
But it’s a second and more fundamental rift in American politics that is grounding the air traffic control project: Rural representatives don't like privatization, because rural infrastructure isn’t profitable. When it comes to rural airports, Republicans are suddenly wary of how the invisible hand might squeeze precious public assets.
quote:
What makes the current, federally run ATC system so beloved in rural America? Funding, spending, and politics. The federal Airport and Airway Trust Fund, which provides more than 90 percent of FAA funding, draws almost 75 percent of its budget from “transportation of persons,” which includes ticket taxes, taxes on mileage awards, taxes on international arrivals and departures, and domestic flight taxes (excluding trips to or from rural airports). Translation: Commercial airlines and their passengers pay for the system’s upkeep, including the airports on the ends of its longest and least viable spokes.
This post was edited on 6/9/17 at 10:05 am
7
Posted on 6/9/17 at 10:11 am to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Translation: Commercial airlines and their passengers pay for the system’s upkeep, including the airports on the ends of its longest and least viable spokes.
In the long run, EVERYTHING works better when private companies run things like this.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 10:16 am to Big Scrub TX
having come from a rural area where the airports do depend on such government funding, this article is complete shite.
Most of the rural folks don't give a damn about the small airports. They don't have commercial flights. They don't employ many people. They are just there to serve the stupidly rich in the area. Those people are rich enough they'll make sure they still have an airport for their private use even if government funds go away.
Most of the rural folks don't give a damn about the small airports. They don't have commercial flights. They don't employ many people. They are just there to serve the stupidly rich in the area. Those people are rich enough they'll make sure they still have an airport for their private use even if government funds go away.
This post was edited on 6/9/17 at 10:24 am
Posted on 6/9/17 at 10:29 am to GeeOH
quote:
In the long run, EVERYTHING works better when private companies run things like this.
Sorry, but this really isn't true. Private companies have to return money and value to shareholders or owners and that money has to come from somewhere. Air traffic control has nothing really to sell. Rather, its funding must come from levies and assessments which the "customer" cannot refuse. Can an airplane refuse to buy the service? No, of course not.
The entire business model depends upon a mandatory tax-based funding structure. If it is run by a private company, the service actually becomes more expensive because the taxes must fund both the service and the profit to the owners and shareholders. In other words, the same level of service becomes more expensive, thus less efficient.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 10:35 am to notsince98
quote:
Most of the rural folks don't give a damn about the small airports. They don't have commercial flights
True.
quote:
They don't employ many people.
Wrong
quote:
They are just there to serve the stupidly rich in the area.
Wrong again.
quote:
Those people are rich enough they'll make sure they still have an airport for their private use even if government funds go away.
This has nothing to do with ATC which is the point of the OP.
In a 2015 study the GA "small" airports in LA had a total payroll of almost $300,000,000. It's on LA DOTD's Aviation website if you want to look it up.
Your from KC, MO? Lee Summit has a very nice GA "small" airport that has no commercial traffic but serves the area with biz jets and other smaller aircraft. It has a direct impact on the local economy.
Additionally you can get a used small aircraft for less than the cost of a 3 year old used truck. So what do you consider stupidly rich (stay off the OT since it is for ballers only)?
Posted on 6/9/17 at 10:39 am to Big Scrub TX
bullshite
His problem is the knee jerk reaction against it by liberals and swish republicans
Rural people will be run over like always
And only a tiny sliver of rural people get anything out of atc, typical bigoted lump them all together by leftist city dwellers
His problem is the knee jerk reaction against it by liberals and swish republicans
Rural people will be run over like always
And only a tiny sliver of rural people get anything out of atc, typical bigoted lump them all together by leftist city dwellers
Posted on 6/9/17 at 10:47 am to notsince98
quote:
They are just there to serve the stupidly rich in the area
I'm not stupid.......why do you hate me man?
Posted on 6/9/17 at 10:53 am to TBoy
(no message)
This post was edited on 12/21/21 at 11:12 am
Posted on 6/9/17 at 10:54 am to Big Scrub TX
Slate article, has as much credibility as the communist manifesto.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 10:58 am to Geaux-2-L-O-Miss
Lees Summit is not a rural airport.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 11:18 am to gthog61
quote:
Rural people will be run over like always
Posted on 6/9/17 at 11:25 am to TBoy
quote:
If it is run by a private company, the service actually becomes more expensive because the taxes must fund both the service and the profit to the owners and shareholders. In other words, the same level of service becomes more expensive, thus less efficient.
I would be willing to bet that in almost EVERY instance private companies are able to provide a better product to the end user AND profit for the company shareholders at a lower cost to both customers and the company than the government can.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 11:26 am to Big Scrub TX
My issue with ATC is that in the US they are still not using GPS technology
Posted on 6/9/17 at 11:44 am to notsince98
quote:
Lees Summit is not a rural airport.
Correct, but it doesn't have commercial (passenger) operations so it falls into the same category as all of those "rural" airports that you detest.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 11:55 am to TBoy
quote:
Sorry, but this really isn't true. Private companies have to return money and value to shareholders or owners and that money has to come from somewhere. Air traffic control has nothing really to sell. Rather, its funding must come from levies and assessments which the "customer" cannot refuse. Can an airplane refuse to buy the service? No, of course not.
The entire business model depends upon a mandatory tax-based funding structure. If it is run by a private company, the service actually becomes more expensive because the taxes must fund both the service and the profit to the owners and shareholders. In other words, the same level of service becomes more expensive, thus less efficient.
Wrong. A large portion if ticket costs go to run the programs. And yes, an airport can absolutely decide who the team with to run the system. The government is riddled with inefficiencies and things will NEVER improve if left to them. Look at the system they are using! It's a joke.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 11:59 am to notsince98
quote:
They are just there to serve the stupidly rich in the area.
I don't know if you are considering farmers as stupidly rich since they, at the very least, own assets in land... but farmers use them for crop dusting quite often.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 12:12 pm to TBoy
quote:
If it is run by a private company, the service actually becomes more expensive because the taxes must fund both the service and the profit to the owners and shareholders
This assumes both systems run equally efficient. That is a false assumption. If your statement were true, then there would be no need to privatize anything. We could simply have every service and product manufactured and organized by government through public funding. However, we know that system simply doesn't work in terms of efficiency.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 12:16 pm to Big Scrub TX
So which Louisiana airports will disappear? Lafayette? Alexandria?
Posted on 6/9/17 at 12:21 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
his assumes both systems run equally efficient. That is a false assumption. If your statement were true, then there would be no need to privatize anything. We could simply have every service and product manufactured and organized by government through public funding. However, we know that system simply doesn't work in terms of efficiency.
One only need compare going through security at the TSA check points to going through security at any pro sports arena to understand that point.
Posted on 6/9/17 at 12:26 pm to jimmy the leg
Good question.
We'll probably also lose some rural hospitals if health care reform passes.
We'll probably also lose some rural hospitals if health care reform passes.
This post was edited on 6/9/17 at 12:27 pm
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News