In article , says...

On 9/4/13 8:12 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 15:47:37 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 11:48:38 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 10:58:12 -0400, wrote:

What "subsidy".

===

The FAA and the air traffic control system.

ATC could easily be privatized (like Canada), as could TSA (it used to
be).

Sure it could, and then the airlines would go broke without the subsidy.

That is nothing more than governmental creep.

If the airlines had to pay back every dime of the FAA cost of ATC it
would be about $10 a flight per passenger. A private operator would do
it cheaper, no doubt.

cite?


Once you actually dig into the numbers, the whole idea of an airline
"subsidy" falls apart.
These are services 100% funded by ticket taxes
http://tinyurl.com/l8m7yp4

Thank you, good job. Ticket taxes are subsidies.

In fact the DOT is actually making over a billion dollars on these
taxes, presumably being spent on other projects.

Cite that.

They collect about $18 billion in ticket taxes and fees, the total
aviation budget for aviation is a tad over $16 billion.

http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/fil...ial-report.pdf

Expense
Air Transportation 16,004,333

Here's more on the subsidies to airlines that apparently you don't know
about:

http://tinyurl.com/l2sgahq



Let's not forget the depreciation allowances airlines get for buying
equipment. These are subsidies.

Let's not forget about all of the union labor that is used to build those new airplanes that
the government allows the airlines to depreciate. Your view of economics is stilted.