Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: caddie
Can you imagine what it would cost to fly, if the ticket actually represented the costs of the airport, the FAA, the air traffic control system, the costs of training pilots, etc.

The cost of training pilots is already in there. The airlines also pay the airports for gate access and landing fees. These are also already in your ticket, although I have no idea if the costs truly reflect what it costs to run the airpot. Even if I were to concede that air travel costs would go up if the whole system were privatised, I do not have a problem with that. There is no reason why non-fliers should subsidize fliers, particularly since fliers are on average wealthier than non-fliers.

39 posted on 12/18/2001 12:48:36 PM PST by Rodney King
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]


To: Rodney King
Not just privatized, but, the ticketed passengers absorb the costs of development of the entire national air transportation system.

That's a whole different ball game.

I do not like socialism, or pork, or anything that can be done better by the free enterprise system.

But if we were to start from 1776 and insist that there would be no government backing or subsidy of any form of transportation, then you would see a completely different United States today, IMHO.

It would be a lot less advanced, a lot poorer, and maybe parts of it would belong to Spain, France, England, and Germany.

And I don't think we would be commemorating the moonshot anytime soon.

NASA would not have been funded if left to the private sector.

And I'm not saying that all NASA does is necessary.

I am saying that there are things that the Federal government ought to provide for, that no private citizen or corporation can supply, provided that it is of significant value to the country's welfare and security.

And I would maintain that a first-class rail system is exactly that.

More so this year than any other year, except any perhaps up to and including 1830.

43 posted on 12/18/2001 12:57:05 PM PST by caddie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

To: Rodney King
There is no reason why non-fliers should subsidize fliers, particularly since fliers are on average wealthier than non-fliers.

That was true until flying became cheap due to the budget airlines. Today everybody but the poorest fly.

46 posted on 12/18/2001 1:07:16 PM PST by Publius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson