User fees in Obama's budget proposal

jesse said:
Well--I'd just do the opposite of what Kenny says :D
Click to expand...

Indeed, I find this to be good operating procedure 90% of the time. :D

I ran for president in this election, but the Constitution got in the way. I can't figure out why... we as a nation ignore it when it's convenient, and it would really convenient for me to be president! ;)
 
Unlike the previous administration that wanted to privatize everything, I think the current administration just wants to create a new source of funding so they can use the general fund contributions for other things (pay for social programs).
 
If users fees are what we need we should:

Make all roads, toll roads add these fees to our auto fuel taxes. The more you use the system(roads) the more you pay. Every town or city could make money on your driving through. This would leave more money for our GENERAL TAX FUND. This would also get all those little cars out of the way of those big transort trucks.

Make all users of the welfare system pay a users fee. If you never use it why should you pay for it. This would leave more money for our GENERAL TAX FUND

I will just fly off my farm land on roads near my destinations and buy fuel at the Conoco stations, No aviation fuel tax and fly over all our new toll gates.
 
dogman said:
If users fees are what we need we should:

Make all roads, toll roads add these fees to our auto fuel taxes. The more you use the system(roads) the more you pay. Every town or city could make money on your driving through. This would leave more money for our GENERAL TAX FUND. This would also get all those little cars out of the way of those big transort trucks.
Click to expand...

Have you not seen where they want to put GPS units in your car and charge you by the mile :D
 
SkyHog said:
Yikes! That would take my vote away from ya :D Can you at least write an exception to the anti-gun law that lets me keep mine?
Click to expand...

Sure. Guns for all--I'd likely go with Switzerland's technique and dish out Sig550 rifles after sending all 20-30 yr old men through basic military training. I'm sure this would go over well...
 
Trapper John said:
How much activity does the military generate compared to airlines and GA in general? I doubt it's as big as you claim, but without specifics we can't pin it down.
Click to expand...

Locally, we have a pair of HI-TACAN approaches (they got rid of the HI-ILS ones a year or two ago) and arresting gear on three runways. There's some F-16's and some choppers based here but I've seen KC-135's, F/A-18 Hornets, A-10 warthogs, etc. fly in and out fairly frequently. Interestingly enough, the F-16's that are based here use the National Guard ramp, but the visiting military planes all go to the East Ramp where the FBO is. :dunno:

We're a class C, and according to airnav the military uses the field almost as much as the airlines, averaging around 22 operations per day. Whether they're heading to Volk Field, going to play in the MOA, or shoot the hell out of the poor trees and critters in R-6904B, I don't know - But I do see them out and about quite a bit (the based F-16's, that is). It's not an unusual occurrence to see a pair of other fighters on the GA ramp either.

Just one data point - But I would imagine that the military continues to have as much activity as ever while civilian flying has gone down dramatically, so they're using a larger percentage of the resources.
 
jesse said:
Sure. Guns for all--I'd likely go with Switzerland's technique and dish out Sig550 rifles after sending all 20-30 yr old men through basic military training. I'm sure this would go over well...
Click to expand...

Actually, as cool as it is that we have an all-volunteer military, I think it would do us a lot of good to have forced foreign service of a military or civilian variety (ie, you either do a stint in the military or a stint in the peace corps). It would certainly give us all a much bigger appreciation of what we have here in the US.
 
User Fees on roads: "Lexus lanes"

User Fees on airplanes: "Fair to charge everyone who uses the system"

Please explain the dichotomy.
 
flyersfan31 said:
User Fees on roads: "Lexus lanes"

User Fees on airplanes: "Fair to charge everyone who uses the system"

Please explain the dichotomy.
Click to expand...
Auto drivers have the non-Lexus lane option as does everyone else. Pilots would not have that option.
 
jesse said:
Sure. Guns for all--I'd likely go with Switzerland's technique and dish out Sig550 rifles after sending all 20-30 yr old men through basic military training. I'm sure this would go over well...
Click to expand...
Make it ALL citizens and I am there with you. No reason that women are exempt from serving, they enjoy the same freedoms as us men so let 'em also share the privilege of defending those freedoms. I also do recognize that not everyone is morally ok with serving the military. As a result this may may not be a doable solution. But making some sort of mandatory service would be.

Alternates to military service could be in a civilian health corps for rural America or a conservation corps. ANy sort of national service would be good. I am tired of hearing people who benefit form the service of a few complaining all the time. Jury duty really gets my goat. Here is the one time in maybe every 3 to 6 years that the government ask you do be a citizen and give something back. People complain and try to get out of it! My goodness, are these not also the same people who complain about the legal system? Mostly yes, and the system stinks because you mostly have people making decision who are not smart enough to get out of jury duty!

My dad taught me that one HAD to serve in order to be a real citizens. That was long before Heinlen came up with the idea too. Far too many people who are self apointed arbiters of what is and is not a real American out there who have done nothing but buy a yellow ribbon sticker, a six pack of beer, and then complain about people they do not like, those people are the ones that need to get up off of their butts and serve.
 
Last edited:
I'd support the all American citizens needing to serve in one way or another, and I'd argue that time is between high school and college. I suspect it would've helped me to do better my first few years of school and not take for granted the opportunity I'd been given.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I'd support the all American citizens needing to serve in one way or another, and I'd argue that time is between high school and college. I suspect it would've helped me to do better my first few years of school and not take for granted the opportunity I'd been given.
Click to expand...
+1, I fully agree.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I'd support the all American citizens needing to serve in one way or another, and I'd argue that time is between high school and college. I suspect it would've helped me to do better my first few years of school and not take for granted the opportunity I'd been given.
Click to expand...
+1 for me too.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I'd support the all American citizens needing to serve in one way or another, and I'd argue that time is between high school and college. I suspect it would've helped me to do better my first few years of school and not take for granted the opportunity I'd been given.
Click to expand...

I'm going to disagree. Even though this is the law in Israel isn't it.

AS an american citizen you are endowed with certain unalienable rights.

One of which is not to be an indentured servent to the state. :mad2:
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Based on what I actually see, quite a bit. At Lincoln, NE, looks like about 1/4 to 1/3 but I don't have time to sit around and watch them. A decent number of airports I lnad at when I fly commercial have Air Force, ANG, or Army Air colocated at them. In NJ, I know I shared airspace with a lot of military aircraft. Please don't try to say the military presence is insignificant. I know they have large MOAs depicted on the charts that cover an incredibly large amount of the USA. That should give some kind of indication there. In any case, you can't pin numbers on it either so you equally can't say I'm wrong. However, since they do use the NAS, it is only right that they pay into it. The best way is throught the general fund as they are doing now.
Click to expand...

I didn't say military traffic was insignificant. And keep in mind the source of the airport operational statistical data is from FAA system data, and any flight without a flight plan isn't going to go in the dataset, so GA traffic would tend to be underreported. But what you seem to be saying is, "The military uses the system more than me, so it doesn't matter if I don't make a full contribution." It's the same thing as saying, "I owe Joe $100, but Leroy owes Joe $200, so Joe should worry about getting his $200 from Leroy before I give him his $100."

Judging from some of the posts from people I recognize as knowledgable, they may not use FSS, but they do use FAA data.
Click to expand...
But if this non-specified "FAA data" isn't delivered by FSS, then the cost of FSS needs to be attributed to GA, doesn't it?

For my flying, my main use of the FSS is to confirm there isn't a TFR nearby. 90% of my flying is local VFR.
This is only part of the discussion. Can they be replaced by DUATs? I'm not unwilling to make concessions.
Click to expand...
I'd fully agree that FSS provides useful services, but for $380 million a year, I'm not sure the benefits outweigh the costs.

You're the one who brought it up when you said that I wasn't paying the full value of my fuel taxes.
Click to expand...
No, what I was saying is the value of the services you receive exceeds your contribution via fuel taxes. Look at the big picture. FAA gets their money from the general fund (about 18%) and from the Aviation Trust Fund (about 82%). The biggest sources of revenue for the trust fund are airline ticket fees at 64% and fuel taxes which are a measly 9% of trust fund revenues. So when you say you're paying your way by fuel taxes, but fuel taxes only pay 9% of the bill, I say you're incorrect.

The balance of the trust fund has been declining, which means expenses exceed receipts. Something needs to be done about that, and the something shouldn't be just getting more from the general fund. One other option is to decrease services.


Trapper John
 
smigaldi said:
Indentured servant to the corporation is ok then? That is what our health care industry has created.
Click to expand...

I'm self employed and buy my own healthcare.

But mandatory service is not indentured servitude to government. It is the appropriate payment to the citizens of the county who have built this country for you.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but since due to physical reasons I was not acceptable to a military academy I would find my being good enough to serve other ways unacceptable to me.
 
Trapper John said:
I didn't say military traffic was insignificant. And keep in mind the source of the airport operational statistical data is from FAA system data, and any flight without a flight plan isn't going to go in the dataset, so GA traffic would tend to be underreported. But what you seem to be saying is, "The military uses the system more than me, so it doesn't matter if I don't make a full contribution." It's the same thing as saying, "I owe Joe $100, but Leroy owes Joe $200, so Joe should worry about getting his $200 from Leroy before I give him his $100."

But if this non-specified "FAA data" isn't delivered by FSS, then the cost of FSS needs to be attributed to GA, doesn't it?

I'd fully agree that FSS provides useful services, but for $380 million a year, I'm not sure the benefits outweigh the costs.

No, what I was saying is the value of the services you receive exceeds your contribution via fuel taxes. Look at the big picture. FAA gets their money from the general fund (about 18%) and from the Aviation Trust Fund (about 82%). The biggest sources of revenue for the trust fund are airline ticket fees at 64% and fuel taxes which are a measly 9% of trust fund revenues. So when you say you're paying your way by fuel taxes, but fuel taxes only pay 9% of the bill, I say you're incorrect.

The balance of the trust fund has been declining, which means expenses exceed receipts. Something needs to be done about that, and the something shouldn't be just getting more from the general fund. One other option is to decrease services.


Trapper John
Click to expand...

John- are you for or against user fees?

Or has the discussion changed to "What should be eliminated or reduced from the FAA budget and how much more should GA pay?"

These are two different discussions.

I'm against user fees but willing to pay my share through increased fuel taxes. I also feel that an amount appropriate to the military use should be paid through the general fund. The 18% you cite strikes me as appropriate to slightly low but I don't have a reference (as I suppose you don't since you don't cite one).
 
Cap'n Jack said:
John- are you for or against user fees?

Or has the discussion changed to "What should be eliminated or reduced from the FAA budget and how much more should GA pay?"

These are two different discussions.

I'm against user fees but willing to pay my share through increased fuel taxes. I also feel that an amount appropriate to the military use should be paid through the general fund. The 18% you cite strikes me as appropriate to slightly low but I don't have a reference (as I suppose you don't since you don't cite one).
Click to expand...

My big gripe is that GA should pay more of it's share. I think fuel taxes are the most efficient way to collect the needed revenue.

As far as the funding data goes, here's the reference:

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d071163t.pdf

See page 7 for the sources of funding for the Trust Fund. See page 10 for the declining Trust Fund balance. There are references on several pages to the percentage, but page 11 will show you.

Discussion of elimination or reduction of services is fair game, I think. Somehow the funding gap needs to be bridged, and I don't think the solution is more money from the general fund.

Trapper John
 
Cap'n Jack said:
I'm against user fees but willing to pay my share through increased fuel taxes. I also feel that an amount appropriate to the military use should be paid through the general fund. The 18% you cite strikes me as appropriate to slightly low but I don't have a reference (as I suppose you don't since you don't cite one).
Click to expand...

+1. I'm willing to shoulder the burden (see William, I'm not ALWAYS anti-tax!! :D) but I just don't see where creating some new bureaucracy overseeing some crazy hodgepodge menu of fees is going to help. Collect it in the most efficient manner you can, and more money drops to the bottom line for spending. The user fee proposal has FAR too much deadweight loss in the collection mechanism.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
I'm against user fees but willing to pay my share through increased fuel taxes. I also feel that an amount appropriate to the military use should be paid through the general fund. The 18% you cite strikes me as appropriate to slightly low but I don't have a reference (as I suppose you don't since you don't cite one).
Click to expand...

flyersfan31 said:
+1. I'm willing to shoulder the burden (see William, I'm not ALWAYS anti-tax!! :D) but I just don't see where creating some new bureaucracy overseeing some crazy hodgepodge menu of fees is going to help. Collect it in the most efficient manner you can, and more money drops to the bottom line for spending. The user fee proposal has FAR too much deadweight loss in the collection mechanism.
Click to expand...
I dunno, it sounds like you two are saying the same thing to me. User fees no, fuel tax ok.
 
smigaldi said:
I dunno, it sounds like you two are saying the same thing to me. User fees no, fuel tax ok.
Click to expand...
Yes. I think Trapper John is saying the same thing too...

Sounds like we have a consensus forming.
 
There's about two cents difference between tax on Jet A and Avgas with Jet A being the cheaper tax. If you are paying tax on what you're using regardless of who you are, how is you're not paying your fair share at this point?
 
Everskyward said:
+1 for me too.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't have minded it at all--although--I'm not sure how it'd work since I never finished high school...Hmm.

Perhaps if you drop out you drop right into the military service.

Not like missing a few years of high school matters that much. By the time you get there you know everything you're going to remember. The rest is just several years of cramming your head with useless information you forget as soon as you hand over the test.

I firmly believe the above...5 years later, with no studying I was able to score in the top 1 percent of high school graduates. How? I had already learned what mattered and the rest is stuff they forgot as soon as they tested.
 
Last edited:
jesse said:
I wouldn't have minded it at all--although--I'm not sure how it'd work since I never finished high school...Hmm.

Perhaps if you drop out you drop right into the military service.

Not like missing a few years of high school matters that much. By the time you get there you know everything you're going to remember. The rest is just several years of cramming your head with useless information you forget as soon as you hand over the test.

I firmly believe the above...5 years later, with no studying I was able to score in the top 1 percent of high school graduates. How? I had already learned what mattered and the rest is stuff they forgot as soon as they tested.
Click to expand...

Depends. I still had a few more years of chemistry to learn after high school before I was useful to any research team. It's not exactly something I could learn at home since modern sciences has become fairly capital intensive and some things are still best learned hands-on.

I still use some of the calculus I learned post HS for various things. I am pretty sure you have more than a post HS education in your fiels, albeit picked up in a less formal fashion. What works for some people doesn't work for others.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Depends. I still had a few more years of chemistry to learn after high school before I was useful to any research team. It's not exactly something I could learn at home since modern sciences has become fairly capital intensive and some things are still best learned hands-on.

I still use some of the calculus I learned post HS for various things. I am pretty sure you have more than a post HS education in your fiels, albeit picked up in a less formal fashion. What works for some people doesn't work for others.
Click to expand...

OHH..Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying you walk out of high school knowing enough to accomplish really much of anything. I am saying the exact opposite, for most, it is very inefficient and not much is learned through those years. More social learning than academic, really. That is the problem with structuring the learning for the slowest (mentally) person in your age group somewhere in your state.

In the real world..you don't get that much time to learn something.

You need to work for it--for some fields--college is the best way of doing so. For others, it might not make as much sense....and who knows I might still end up there one day.

I've never had a problem with colleges. I mostly had a problem with the horrendously slow pace of learning throughout primary education. I was absolutely amazed how much time a simple concept consumed and the amount of unnecessary repetition involved. I was working too much to pay any attention to the social side (40 hrs per week) and needed to do so to eat and live. Eventually I ran into conflict with the (high school) administration and that was the last straw for me.

Once again, don't get me wrong, I do not have a problem with the college system. I have a great deal of respect for those that go that route and accomplish it. I may end up doing so someday as well.
 
Last edited:
jesse said:
OHH..Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying you walk out of high school knowing enough to accomplish really much of anything. I am saying the exact opposite, for most, it is very inefficient and not much is learned through those years. More social learning than academic, really. That is the problem with structuring the learning for the slowest (mentally) person in your age group somewhere in your state.

In the real world..you don't get that much time to learn something.

You need to work for it--for some fields--college is the best way of doing so. For others, it might not make as much sense....and who knows I might still end up there one day.

I've never had a problem with colleges. I mostly had a problem with the horrendously slow pace of learning throughout primary education. I was absolutely amazed how much time a simple concept consumed and the amount of unnecessary repetition involved. I was working too much to pay any attention to the social side (40 hrs per week) and needed to do so to eat and live. Eventually I ran into conflict with the (high school) administration and that was the last straw for me.

Once again, don't get me wrong, I do not have a problem with the college system. I have a great deal of respect for those that go that route and accomplish it. I may end up doing so someday as well.
Click to expand...

Understood. UNL has a lot of potential but only if you can hit the classes during the day. Your job- you can probably swing it and make it work. My job- they expect you to be there all day.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Actually, as cool as it is that we have an all-volunteer military, I think it would do us a lot of good to have forced foreign service of a military or civilian variety (ie, you either do a stint in the military or a stint in the peace corps). It would certainly give us all a much bigger appreciation of what we have here in the US.
Click to expand...

Amen to that! 110% agree!

What is amazing to me is that we send mothers off to war while abile bodied young men sit in bars and play pool, or spend their time in the Spin Zone bashing those who think like we do.
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
What is amazing to me is that we send mothers off to war while abile bodied young men sit in bars and play pool, or spend their time in the Spin Zone bashing those who think like we do.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that is fair--they volunteered. That said, I have no issue with some forced service.
 
Geico266 said:
Amen to that! 110% agree!

What is amazing to me is that we send mothers off to war while abile bodied young men sit in bars and play pool, or spend their time in the Spin Zone bashing those who think like we do.
Click to expand...


:rolleyes:

It really is time for this thread to be moved.
 
smigaldi said:
But mandatory service is not indentured servitude to government. It is the appropriate payment to the citizens of the county who have built this country for you.
Click to expand...

13th Amendment - involuntary servitude absent a criminal conviction.
 
KennyFlys said:
The TSA is trying to take our freedom to exercise this privilege. It only makes sense for for the executive branch and FAA take our money to limit it further.

The ATA and airlines are pushing this under the guise it's going to "spread the cost" over "users" of the NAS. Does anyone really believe the airlines are going to get a break on the costs they pay? They are, of course, part of that evil corporate empire.
Click to expand...

If anybody didn't believe before that the government is out to kill GA, they should now.

Between TSA, local governments, and the proposed fee structure, it is the end of an era.... and a serious loss of GA.

Put a fork in it, we're done.

Who wants to buy my plane?
 
wsuffa said:
If anybody didn't believe before that the government is out to kill GA, they should now.

Between TSA, local governments, and the proposed fee structure, it is the end of an era.... and a serious loss of GA.

Put a fork in it, we're done.

Who wants to buy my plane?
Click to expand...

Not I- After reading about the proposed fee structure, I felt it was the last straw. I stopped browsing in Trade-a-plane and started thinking that, if I had won the AOPA plane, I'd sell it pronto while it still had some value.

If the TSA sets up shop on the GA side of KLNK, I'll probably get checked out in Crete. KMLE (Millard)- a single runway airport is already on the TSA's list. Both these places will lose my money through no fault of their own except being at the wrong place.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Not I- After reading about the proposed fee structure, I felt it was the last straw. I stopped browsing in Trade-a-plane and started thinking that, if I had won the AOPA plane, I'd sell it pronto while it still had some value.

If the TSA sets up shop on the GA side of KLNK, I'll probably get checked out in Crete. KMLE (Millard)- a single runway airport is already on the TSA's list. Both these places will lose my money through no fault of their own except being at the wrong place.
Click to expand...

Bah, can't let fear stop your dreams, I still plan on buying. The sky is always falling to those that worry about the sky falling.
 
Obi Heed Kenobi said:
13th Amendment - involuntary servitude absent a criminal conviction.
Click to expand...
So how was the draft law then? That is involuntary servitude?

But lets consider than making it highly encouraged, like if you serve for two years you get a big chunk of college or trade school paid for. It does not have to be military service, it could be any public service.
 
smigaldi said:
So how was the draft law then? That is involuntary servitude?
Click to expand...

I would assume that the war powers clause supersedes it.

But lets consider than making it highly encouraged, like if you serve for two years you get a big chunk of college or trade school paid for. It does not have to be military service, it could be any public service.
Click to expand...

If you're ok with having an army whose services are purchased.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top