Why? The high cost of flying..

CharlieD3

CharlieD3

En-Route
Joined
Jun 17, 2019
Messages
3,390
Location
Tennessee
Display Name
Display name:
CharlieD3
To start the conversation...

A Stinson 108-3 cost ~$6484.00 let's call it $6500.00 in 1948...

Converted for inflation.. $69,800 in 2019 dollars. The price of a pretty darn nice SUV.. or a pickup truck.

You can't buy a kit plane 4 seater with an engine that will give you 110knots for that. Even with VFR steam gauges and a basic radio.

Or, look at the original cost of a Navion. Cost to the manufacturer... $9,000.00 in 1947. About 100AMU$ today.

Is it our litigious society? Would there be more demand at those prices?

Starting a conversation here, not a war.

Look forward to discussion, civil discourse.
 
Back then labor was cheap and tooling expensive, which fit the manual labor driven manufacturing model for planes.

Today labor is expensive and tooling more cost effective. The rub, demand has to be high enough to pay for the tooling and it's not.

Making a new Cessna is very labor intensive. Manufacturing cars has become increasing more automated for example from stamping process to fastening. Planes are still hand riveted.

On top of low demand, layer on liability insurance from tort law, complex certification requirements, and high cost of components (engines, avionics, etc.) you get to a price that out stripped inflation.
 
You converted the cost of the airplanes to modern prices and compared them to new truck and SUV prices. Take a truck from the same era and convert the price of it to see how it stacks up to modern ones.

According to NADA a 1948 Chevy 3100 1/2 ton truck cost $1180. That would be $12,571.60 today. That's far less expensive than even the cheapest 2019 model year truck. But when comparing the price spread of the 1948 Chevy vs the 1948 Stinson it seems to line up reasonably close with the 2019 Chevy vs. 2019 Piper or Cessna.
 
Regulations.

The material to make that plane have not gone up significantly and I would argue that even labor has not been the determining factor...all of the regulations, rules, certifications required to comply with today's business and regulatory climate in the US make it cost prohibitive putting more and more out of work.

There is a reason almost all the manufacturing has moved overseas.

I often throw out this example...for a while my company owned and operated a Semi truck to haul our own gear. It took 13 different permits/filings/agencies to operate that vehicle interstate...and would have been more had we been a trucking company for hire.

Sold the truck, fired the driver and we sub that piece out to third parties now because it was so ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
Average salary 1948 $3100
Equivalent today about $32K

About the same 2years income to purchase the hand made plane...
 
Ravioli said:
@CharlieD3 has a dead premise.

You seem to equate purchase price and cost of flying. That's not correct. The high cost of flying is storage, mx, and operation.
Click to expand...

Well then perhaps this post should be titled the high cost of new airplanes. Doesn't make his premise or this discussion any less valid.
 
It's just a dwindling, dying, tiny little over-regulated cottage industry with fewer and fewer participants. Too tough to get new planes certified or to manufacture them and too few pilots to buy them. On one hand it's super complicated, and on the other... it's pretty simple.

Maybe it's slightly harder to get a drug to market than a plane certified, but at least in healthcare you have nearly built-in demand.
 
1948 C-170 ~6500 2019 C-172 $275,000 X42.3
1948 Chev Pickup $1180 2019 Chev Pickup $28,300 X24
1948 Median Income $3150 2019 Median Income $63,000 X20

Quick google search numbers and from previous posts.
Looks like Pickups have increased pretty closely to Income, Note the Quality/longevity has probably improved a bunch.(double?)
Aircraft have about doubled in value compared to income and probably last about the same.

Brian
 
Ravioli said:
@CharlieD3 has a dead premise.

You seem to equate purchase price and cost of flying. That's not correct. The high cost of flying is storage, mx, and operation.
Click to expand...
Just the beginning of the conversation...

The tech in aircraft keeps going up, where consumer tech goes down.

Flying more regulated, with less regulators
 
@CharlieD3

Pick your premise. Are you saying acquisition has some "unusual" inflation? The only new "tech" regulation is ~2k for an all in one ADS-B out device. Where you going on this?
 
Ravioli said:
@CharlieD3

Pick your premise. Are you saying acquisition has some "unusual" inflation? The only new "tech" regulation is ~2k for an all in one ADS-B out device. Where you going on this?
Click to expand...
The topic line says it all.
Cost of aircraft is only one component.

When GA was supposed to take off... Arguably immediately following WWII... It would have been affordable to the middle class.

I don't think it's anywhere near that now..

A conversation on this is, by necessity, quite broad.

WHY is all GA measured in $AMUs, instead of Benjamins?

If you want a narrow conversation, watch a TED talk.
 
CharlieD3 said:
WHY is all GA measured in $AMUs, instead of Benjamins?
Click to expand...

Can't answer this for you. I happen to despise the term AMU. It's moronic. But I know several people named Benjamin, but nobody who considers that a monetary unit.

Re-asking. Where you going on this?

My point: Flying is expensive. Always has been. Always will be.
 
Flying has not always been expensive.

It was supposed to be a "middle class" endeavor, with a practicality to it.

Just recently, there was an old video from the ~60s 70s posted about empty nesters getting flying lessons, after their kids flew in to visit them.

THAT was what it was supposed to be.

Not, an exclusive club, that names their own monetary units. (AMUs A moniker I hate, as well.)

My PPL cost me $2051.83 total. Paid in full from start to the day I got my ticket in November 1982.

What's it cost today on average? A lot more than the $5472.27 that it would be, corrected for inflation.
 
Truly trivial, from my own cost of training versus my wages.

1957 Private E 1, $60 per month. Instruction in a Piper J 3, no electronics, $15 per hour. My entire month of pay equaled 4 hours of instruction.

Promoted to PFC, shipped overseas, more money but no planes to fly, promoted again to Specialist 3rd class, $100 with OS allowance. Out at 2 years.

1959 Civilian again, $120 per month, Instruction in a Piper J 3, $20 per hour, My entire months pay equaled 6 hours of instruction.

1969 Several promotions, $ 200 per month, Flying club member, Cessna 150, on its 4th engine, crude nav com, $17.50 per hour, My entire monthly pay equals 11 hours of instruction.

12/18/1969, completed my training, licence issued. 5 months of my pay expended to reach this goal.

1977, Commercial and Instrument added while at a much higher rate of pay, but about 4 more months of pay required to get there.

That comes out to 9 months of my total income to reach the C & I goal.

Even back when the cost of flying seems so cheap by modern wage levels, it was not cheap by the prevailing wages for a good blue collar job.

The bigger difference is the planes and equipment that are used for instruction today. The planes I flew for the C & I were fairly recent,and had dual nav coms, with GS on one, plus a transponder. Only the plane reserved for the Instrument check rides had an ADF. A 6 pack was all the gauges the panels had, and only the retractable complex plane had an auto pilot.

The club now has a Cessna 172 M, with a good selection of glass features, and mildly modified engine, and costs about $100 WET.

My retirement monthly pay will buy 25 hours.
 
Last edited:
New aircraft are expensive today for two reasons:

The first is 70 years of used aircraft production... now available, capable and inexpensive. This limits the demand and production volume for new aircraft because there’s no need for them. Technological change has mainly been in the cockpit and it can retrofitted to used planes. Used planes are no less reliable than new ones.

The second is the experimental/kit built aircraft scene which provides much higher performance at the same out of pocket cost as a used plane. 10,000 RVs built has limited the demand and production volume for new factory built aircraft.

Reduced production volume has driven up new factory built aircraft prices, but has not reduced affordable, useful options for the pilot. This is the golden age for owning and flying your own plane as long as you don’t want a new, factory built aircraft.
 
Last edited:
inflation has certainly run away from real wages in healthcare ,education and housing, so disposable incomes are not there to support private aviation at the present pricing level in earnest. Depreciated cans suffer from over regulation when in recreational use (something EAB alleviates, but leaves 4 seaters in the cold), plus labor and parts pricing structures that coincide with new airplane production pricing. that has the double whammy of being both expensive and inordinate; IOW it would be one thing to put a 20k actuator in a 700k retract, but not on a fully depreciated 1968 210. Yet here we are. The OEMs recognize the coffin corner that puts owners in, so they support that gentrification in order to finalize the scuttling of a legacy line they want buried yesterday.

As someone who only begrudgingly owns fac built as captive audience until I can go EAB 2 seater, allowing orphaned fac builts into the same regulatory freebie as EAB would go a long way towards normalizing some of the cost barriers, even in spite of Americans largely downard sliding purchasing power. The rest is pencil whipping galore and catch me if you can. Or quitting. Don't shoot the messenger.
 
A lot of those figures may be pertinent ,but when you write " more and more people out of work", that's not the general case. Our unemployment rates are less than 4%, at historic lows.
 
Ravioli said:
Can't answer this for you. I happen to despise the term AMU. It's moronic. But I know several people named Benjamin, but nobody who considers that a monetary unit.

Re-asking. Where you going on this?

My point: Flying is expensive. Always has been. Always will be.
Click to expand...

Ravioli has issued a silly and inaccurate generalization. Buy a 150.
 
We live in an age where teenagers have an expensive cellphone on a costly plan, and order $5 fancy coffees daily. It isn't just that flying is more expensive, most people don't spend money wanting to learn how to fly in this age of Uber, cellphones, and over priced coffee shops, just to name a few items. Priorities are not buying and flying an airplane, except for a small group of us who caught the flying bug. $200 running shoes, $700 phone, designer jeans, and those fancy coffees, that is the priority for most. Us, the ones who love to fly, we are becoming extinct like the dinosaurs did. Even if the average person made a million dollars a year, they still would not fly, the desire isn't there.
 
Shuswap BC said:
We live in an age where teenagers have an expensive cellphone on a costly plan, and order $5 fancy coffees daily. It isn't just that flying is more expensive, most people don't spend money wanting to learn how to fly in this age of Uber, cellphones, and over priced coffee shops, just to name a few items. Priorities are not buying and flying an airplane, except for a small group of us who caught the flying bug. $200 running shoes, $700 phone, designer jeans, and those fancy coffees, that is the priority for most. Us, the ones who love to fly, we are becoming extinct like the dinosaurs did. Even if the average person made a million dollars a year, they still would not fly, the desire isn't there.
Click to expand...
Heck, a lot of kids today don’t care about learning to drive, much less fly! My kids (youngest is 24) couldn’t wait to get their drivers license, my nieces high school friends don’t seem concerned about driving!
 
geezer said:
Truly trivial, from my own cost of training versus my wages.

1957 Private E 1, $60 per month. Instruction in a Piper J 3, no electronics, $15 per hour. My entire month of pay equaled 4 hours of instruction.

Promoted to PFC, shipped overseas, more money but no planes to fly, promoted again to Specialist 3rd class, $100 with OS allowance. Out at 2 years.

1959 Civilian again, $120 per month, Instruction in a Piper J 3, $20 per hour, My entire months pay equaled 6 hours of instruction.

1969 Several promotions, $ 200 per month, Flying club member, Cessna 150, on its 4th engine, crude nav com, $17.50 per hour, My entire monthly pay equals 11 hours of instruction.

12/18/1969, completed my training, licence issued. 5 months of my pay expended to reach this goal.

1977, Commercial and Instrument added while at a much higher rate of pay, but about 4 more months of pay required to get there.

That comes out to 9 months of my total income to reach the C & I goal.

Even back when the cost of flying seems so cheap by modern wage levels, it was not cheap by the prevailing wages for a good blue collar job.

The bigger difference is the planes and equipment that are used for instruction today. The planes I flew for the C & I were fairly recent,and had dual nav coms, with GS on one, plus a transponder. Only the plane reserved for the Instrument check rides had an ADF. A 6 pack was all the gauges the panels had, and only the retractable complex plane had an auto pilot.

The club now has a Cessna 172 M, with a good selection of glass features, and mildly modified engine, and costs about $100 WET.

My retirement monthly pay will buy 25 hours.
Click to expand...
I appreciate the different perspective. We have never paid our military folks what they're worth... Many military families on food stamps today. It's just wrong. Thanks for serving.
Tusayan said:
New aircraft are expensive today for two reasons:

The first is 70 years of used aircraft production... now available, capable and inexpensive. This limits the demand and production volume for new aircraft because there’s no need for them. Technological change has mainly been in the cockpit and it can retrofitted to used planes. Used planes are no less reliable than new ones.

The second is the experimental/kit built aircraft scene which provides much higher performance at the same out of pocket cost as a used plane. 10,000 RVs built has limited the demand and production volume for new factory built aircraft.

Reduced production volume has driven up new factory built aircraft prices, but has not reduced affordable, useful options for the pilot. This is the golden age for owning and flying your own plane as long as you don’t want a new, factory built aircraft.
Click to expand...
Ah! That's certainly a big part of it... All those planes still flying... Sure don't see the same proportion of cars as old as our fleet (of planes) on the road...
hindsight2020 said:
inflation has certainly run away from real wages in healthcare ,education and housing, so disposable incomes are not there to support private aviation at the present pricing level in earnest. Depreciated cans suffer from over regulation when in recreational use (something EAB alleviates, but leaves 4 seaters in the cold), plus labor and parts pricing structures that coincide with new airplane production pricing. that has the double whammy of being both expensive and inordinate; IOW it would be one thing to put a 20k actuator in a 700k retract, but not on a fully depreciated 1968 210. Yet here we are. The OEMs recognize the coffin corner that puts owners in, so they support that gentrification in order to finalize the scuttling of a legacy line they want buried yesterday.

As someone who only begrudgingly owns fac built as captive audience until I can go EAB 2 seater, allowing orphaned fac builts into the same regulatory freebie as EAB would go a long way towards normalizing some of the cost barriers, even in spite of Americans largely downard sliding purchasing power. The rest is pencil whipping galore and catch me if you can. Or quitting. Don't shoot the messenger.
Click to expand...
I think Shuswap has it a little better pegged below... But you are right about the large increases in costs for some basic needs.
Kenny Lee said:
In 1948 people were eating cornbread and white beans. Today we call up pizza delivery or fly for a $100 burger. Dunno about ya’ll but I cant fly and get a burger for $100. We’re all spoiled rotten
Click to expand...
We are spoiled rotten and this is a "first world problem," as SoCal points out... We are blessed that we can fly at all....
SoCal RV Flyer said:
First world problems here, guys. Let's all be thankful that we can fly at all!
Click to expand...
Shuswap BC said:
We live in an age where teenagers have an expensive cellphone on a costly plan, and order $5 fancy coffees daily. It isn't just that flying is more expensive, most people don't spend money wanting to learn how to fly in this age of Uber, cellphones, and over priced coffee shops, just to name a few items. Priorities are not buying and flying an airplane, except for a small group of us who caught the flying bug. $200 running shoes, $700 phone, designer jeans, and those fancy coffees, that is the priority for most. Us, the ones who love to fly, we are becoming extinct like the dinosaurs did. Even if the average person made a million dollars a year, they still would not fly, the desire isn't there.
Click to expand...
Certainly some of it is "supply and demand" as you point out.

Would we rather have those little daily perks for "instant gratification" rather than engage in a discipline that takes commitment and effort over time?

Is "look what fancies I can buy" more important than "look what I can accomplish?"
 
N747JB said:
Heck, a lot of kids today don’t care about learning to drive, much less fly! My kids (youngest is 24) couldn’t wait to get their drivers license, my nieces high school friends don’t seem concerned about driving!
Click to expand...

That's certainly true.

The lack of wanting Independence and it's inherent responsibility is less attractive than being one of the collective.

But that's much broader than the subject at hand. Though it certainly is part of it.
 
CharlieD3 said:
That's certainly true.

The lack of wanting Independence and it's inherent responsibility is less attractive than being one of the collective.

But that's much broader than the subject at hand. Though it certainly is part of it.
Click to expand...

LOL. My son is 20 and his girlfriend is 21. He has a driver's license I don't know if she even does but neither of them drive. It has nothing to do with them wanting to be part of a collective or somehow not being the person you were. They have a lot more options than we did when we were young. A big part of learning to drive when we're young has to do with independence. These days you can have the same independence with Uber.

And yes, I'm getting off your lawn now...
 
Last edited:
Don't forget that the median age in America for home ownership has reached a historic high. That is, younger people are unable to afford a home and are having to wait much longer before they can make that purchase. They're also waiting longer to have children. Finally, yes, as previously mentioned their purchasing power is less than the equivalent of their parents at equivalent ages.

This does not bode well for aircraft sales, a discretionary purchase. I mean, here I am looking at 50yr old cans costing 100k+. I could go buy a new, fancy boat for less.
 
I haven't read all the responses but my take is this...

Demand is lower across the board which in tern drives prices up. Flying isn't this "new" opulent thing it was in the 40's 50's and 60's. The military isn't churning out as many pilots and people aren't willing to invest the time and money it takes to become a pilot on their own. Lower demand means higher prices...

We are spending more on everything else. Look at houses built in the 50's and 60's compared to now. Most were 2k sqft ranch homes with Formica counter tops and vinyl floors. A lot only had 1 or two baths and a carport at best. Now almost every house built is 3k or more, two story with a garage, 4 bathrooms, wood and tile floors, granite counter tops etc.... The average price of a new car keeps rising. Not that a basic car is that much more expensive anymore, it's that people want the works. A Toyota Yaris is as big inside as a Camry used to be and starts at under 16k with more standard features than a fully loaded Camry from the early 2000s yet we buy a 35k camry to replace a 2000 model.

This same stance continues into the airplane world. You could build a cub replica for 30k today. But nobody wants to build, they want a mostly complete kit they just bolt together. An ipad has more capability that even the best Cubs did yet people are putting Garmin touch screens in everything. There are a ton of used engines that could be overhauled yet most buy new ones to go with their new airplane.

With all this extra spending everyone expects to make more. Plumbers, electricians, mechanics, engineers, contractors and several other jobs were at one point pretty low paying jobs. You couldn't afford a new car, you lived in a small house or trailer and your place of business was a rented office or your back yard. But now these business drive around in new work vans wrapped in vinyl advertisement, mechanic shops are brick building with nice landscaping and fancy waiting rooms. Their houses are huge, everyone is wanting more profit which drives cost up.

The truth is there are some new planes that can be bought new for about the same price with inflation as you could a Cessna 140 and are more capable. I think you can get a new Bushcat for like 75k. I'd imagine that if 6k people a year were willing to buy a 4 seat tube and fabric airplane with a basic VFR panel and a 150 hp engine you could do so for about the same price as you once could especially if you didn't have to go through the certification process. But then again, there are a bunch of tube and fabric vfr airplanes with 150 hp engines already on the market for 30-40k...
 
CharlieD3 said:
Is it our litigious society?
Click to expand...
From my experience this was/is the main cost driver in the last 40 years or so especially in the less than 12500 MGW class. Tort actions effectively shutdown the development/production of GA aircraft until the passage of GARA in the late 90s.

But even then those OEMs that did restart GA production did so very selectively at triple the price. While aviation advocates and the FAA to an extent have tried to jump start GA via LSA, etc, I believe it was too little too late. And where aviation was once one of the few fringe "hobbies" outside everyday life technology/computers/virtual reality have replaced it on the wow factor side.

Add a reduced market, increased liability costs, and a simple lack of interest together and you get a large increase in the buck but a reduction in the bang side. So to me it's not an airframe cost or mx cost/hr issue but an entire system issue. And unless there is some sort of tort cap limit and/or owner mx category implemented I think costs will continue to rise as less people become interested in aviation in general.
 
alfadog said:
LOL. My son is 20 and his girlfriend is 21. He has a driver's license I don't know if she even does but neither of them drive. It has nothing to do with them wanting to be part of a collective or somehow not being the person you were. They have a lot more options than we did when we were young. A big part of learning to drive when we're young has to do with independence. These days you can have the same independence with Uber.

And yes, I'm getting off your lawn now...
Click to expand...

Uber, on line ordering, same day delivery...

More options...

LESS INDEPENDENCE.

LESS INVOLVEMENT.

Large numbers of adult children still at home.

You can do ANYTHING "virtually" so no reason to do anything, really.

It's a tangent I don't want to pursue, but it's certainly part of it.
 
So. Here's what I got so far.

Used planes on the market nearly as good as new ones hurts the market = less demand but ¿higher price? (That's an anomaly.)

Torts and liabilities. From mfg to training to MX.

The ability to get instant gratification elsewhere for less. Sort of.

...

There's more, I'm missing it.
 
Storage, MX, operation was mentioned.

Indeed, these add to the costs...

Back in the day... Tied down (maybe). Gas was less$ sorta. Operation... Gas oil and setasides for MX.

In today's market why is one aircraft $150 an hour while the same aircraft elsewhere (but nearby) $110. And through a club, same aircraft $80? All prices wet. Basically the same age/equipment VFR 172.

I know 9/11 nearly doubled rental prices. And they have only gone up from there.

It's an exclusive club we belong to. I'd like to see less exclusivity, and I think it's a possibility, but I think it revolves around the costs.
 
Another factor has to be the cost of airline flying. Back in the 50s and 60s airline travel was expensive, so by comparison GA was more attractive. Now the airlines are so cheap that any slob can afford to jump on a flight, GA as a means of transportation makes less sense.
 
wheaties said:
I mean, here I am looking at 50yr old cans costing 100k+. I could go buy a new, fancy boat for less.
Click to expand...
And a lot of people do just that. No $12K license. And the fancy boat in the driveway impresses the neighbors, while the airplane is at the airport and the neighbors don't even know you own or fly.
 
Recently it was announced that Mooney is on the verge of going out of business, (by the end of this month), and is looking for another new owner to continue production. Another shutdown in a long line of shutdowns since the 1920's when the Mooney boys decided to produce airplanes.

I'm sure that many of us here have taken the walking tour of their facility. We know the majority of the facility itself has been around, buildings and all, essentially unchanged, since the 1950's. Even the original metal presses and dies are still used today. Basically, so far as the factory itself is concerned, little has changed except the cost of labor and materials. Granted, the Mooney is a very labor intensive product, with even the cockpit structure being hand welded as it was in the beginning.

We can only speculate as to why the price of a new Mooney now lies somewhere in the 3 quarter million dollar range. Personally, I suspect it's a mixture of reasons, among them, increased labor, material, liability, and regulatory related costs. But the fact remains, at least to the average guy on the street, that demanding 3 quarter million dollars for such a product is either greed, poor business, or insanity.

Who, and where is their market. Who in their right mind is going to spend 3 quarter million dollars for a new Mooney? In my estimation, they are participating in a extremely narrow market. Makes perfect sense to me why they keep going out of business. And we could substitute a half dozen other product names for the Mooney brand.

Personally, I left the Certified arena years ago, and until the regulatory garbage is overhauled, I won't be back.

I think the answer to the original question asked here could be very easily put to rest by the current, or former Mooney owners, but I honestly doubt any would come forth and honestly answer the question.
 
Last edited:
Art Rose said:
Recently it was announced that Mooney is on the verge of going out of business, (by the end of this month), and is looking for another new owner to continue production. Another shutdown in a long line of shutdowns since the 1920's when the Mooney boys decided to produce airplanes.

I'm sure that many of us here have taken the walking tour of their facility. We know the majority of the facility itself has been around, buildings and all, essentially unchanged, since the 1950's. Even the original metal presses and dies are still used today. Basically, so far as the factory itself is concerned, little has changed except the cost of labor and materials. Granted, the Mooney is a very labor intensive product, with even the cockpit structure being hand welded as it was in the beginning.

We can only speculate as to why the price of a new Mooney now lies somewhere in the quarter million dollar range. Personally, I suspect it's a mixture of reasons, among them, increased labor, material, liability, and regulatory related costs. But the fact remains, at least to the average guy on the street, that demanding a quarter million dollars for such a product is either greed, poor business, or insanity.

Who, and where is their market. Who in their right mind is going to spend a quarter million dollars for a new Mooney? In my estimation, they are participating in a extremely narrow market. Makes perfect sense to me why they keep going out of business. And we could substitute a half dozen other product names for the Mooney brand.

Personally, I left the Certified arena years ago, and until the regulatory garbage is overhauled, I won't be back.

I think the answer to the original question asked here could be very easily put to rest by the current, or former Mooney owners, but I honestly doubt any would come forth and honestly answer the question.
Click to expand...

I will likely never be in the position to buy a new airplane. If however I was in the market, I think this would be my rationale. I would want new because depreciation on my taxes and up time is more important than saving a 100k. I'm worth a lot of money, my wife is super hot. She says parachute or I am leaving you and taking all your stuff. I bought a Cirrus...
 
CharlieD3 said:
Uber, on line ordering, same day delivery...

More options...

LESS INDEPENDENCE.

LESS INVOLVEMENT.

Large numbers of adult children still at home.

You can do ANYTHING "virtually" so no reason to do anything, really.

It's a tangent I don't want to pursue, but it's certainly part of it.
Click to expand...

I don't know who you're basing these generalities on but I couldn't disagree more. Nor do I follow your logic in that more options equal less of anything. Young people are plenty active. When I was young, in the hippie days, I guess you could say the same thing about all the drugs we were experimenting with. I did a lot of drugs but it didn't stop me or my friends from doing a lots of real-life stuff too.

PS, here are some of those kids you're sure are doing nothing IRL because they have video games and Uber. Pics taken about two weeks ago.

20191026_092951.jpg 20191026_093006.jpg
 
What I think you’re missing is tied up in this one statement...
CharlieD3 said:
...When GA was supposed to take off... Arguably immediately following WWII... It would have been affordable to the middle class....
Click to expand...

That was aspirational even it its time, and the underlying behavioral assumptions just weren’t and still aren’t correct.
 
Just to reinforce the point already made, not one quarter, but 3 quarter million dollars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top