- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
0
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:42 am to The Sad Banana
quote:
No, not you. The airport will build it.
Where's their money tree?
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:43 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
We have an adequate airport terminal. We're going to spend $826 million to build one that appears, at best, slightly more adequate?
Yeah, we need to build one that is thinking 20-30 years ahead, really.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:43 am to Y.A. Tittle
Right next to the ticket oak.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:43 am to The Sad Banana
quote:
No, not you. The airport will build it.
With a significant chunk of fedgov grants Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:43 am to The Sad Banana
quote:
If the money is for the airport and the airport is using the money to better the airport, why are people complaining?
They generally don't know what they are talking about and like to complain about stuff.
As was stated, the types of grants they are using are usually of the "use it or lose it" variety, and the funding agencies dictate what types of project you can fund. You can't use FAA and Aviation Fund grants to build whatever you want, you have to use them to improve aviation. There are similar programs in place for nearly all types of infrastructure.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:44 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
We have an adequate airport terminal. We're going to spend $826 million to build one that appears, at best, slightly more adequate?
It's not so much the appearance as it is the way the current airport functions. Everything that goes on behind what the passenger sees is inefficient. A new airport decreases the cost of operations. This is the major reason for a completely new airport and not just a bandaid.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:45 am to SippyCup
quote:
It's not so much the appearance as it is the way the current airport functions. Everything that goes on behind what the passenger sees is inefficient. A new airport decreases the cost of operations. This is the major reason for a completely new airport and not just a bandaid.
I like that response. Thanks
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:47 am to Woody
quote:Right, that's my point. Now, if they have a problem with how the grants are structured and whatnot, well...call your representative.
They generally don't know what they are talking about and like to complain about stuff.
As was stated, the types of grants they are using are usually of the "use it or lose it" variety, and the funding agencies dictate what types of project you can fund. You can't use FAA and Aviation Fund grants to build whatever you want, you have to use them to improve aviation. There are similar programs in place for nearly all types of infrastructure.
BUT, I maintain that updating infrastructure is most always a good thing.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:47 am to SippyCup
quote:
It's not so much the appearance as it is the way the current airport functions. Everything that goes on behind what the passenger sees is inefficient. A new airport decreases the cost of operations. This is the major reason for a completely new airport and not just a bandaid.
This.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:49 am to GEAUXmedic
great news.. the current airport looks like something from a 3rd world country; certainly not like anything you'd find in a destination city for tourists.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:50 am to Y.A. Tittle
Some people don't understand budgets and purses and that airport money (or any infrastructure) can only be used for airports. You can't take airport grants and give raises to the full-time 3rd grade schoolteacher who only makes a salary of $8,500/year.
PAY DA TEACHERS AND THINK ABOUT DA KIDZ NOT NO STINKIN AIRPORT OMGZ!!&)!:
PAY DA TEACHERS AND THINK ABOUT DA KIDZ NOT NO STINKIN AIRPORT OMGZ!!&)!:
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:51 am to The Sad Banana
quote:
Now, if they have a problem with how the grants are structured and whatnot, well...call your representative.
I just like to look at everything with an eye on efficient use of resources. I think a lot of our overall problems is the notion that there is this magical pot of money that we can use on certain things, where we don't have to consider efficient use of resources in certain endeavors.
I see there may be valid arguments that this, indeed, is an efficient use of resources. The fact that $270+ million was JUST spent on the old terminal remains a bit problematic in my mind.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:52 am to elprez00
The problem with the new airport design I heard (from Cory Johnson rambling on the radio) is that the design is made looking to have our airport on par with some of the international airports across the U.S. The problem is, those airports were built 20 years ago looking forward. Our design is not looking forward to be competitive 20-30 years from now. It's too short sighted.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:52 am to PelicanPoop
quote:
Some people don't understand budgets and purses and that airport money (or any infrastructure) can only be used for airports. You can't take airport grants and give raises to the full-time 3rd grade schoolteacher who only makes a salary of $8,500/year.
PAY DA TEACHERS AND THINK ABOUT DA KIDZ NOT NO STINKIN AIRPORT OMGZ!!&)!:
Yea, that's exactly my point here.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:52 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:And that's absolutely valid.
I just like to look at everything with an eye on efficient use of resources. I think a lot of our overall problems is the notion that there is this magical pot of money that we can use on certain things, where we don't have to consider efficient use of resources in certain endeavors.
I see there may be valid arguments that this, indeed, is an efficient use of resources. The fact that $270+ million was JUST spent on the old terminal remains a bit problematic in my mind.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:53 am to SlidellBammer
quote:look better than Birmingham's Airport by leaps and bounds.
great news.. the current airport looks like something from a 3rd world country; certainly not like anything you'd find in a destination city for tourists.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:54 am to Neauxla
quote:
certainly not like anything you'd find in a destination city for tourists.
what in the hell does that have to do with the discussion? birmingham is not a tourist destination.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 10:00 am to The Sad Banana
quote:
If the money is for the airport and the airport is using the money to better the airport, why are people complaining?
reflex reaction.
Page 4 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News