I would expect something this full of logical faux pas from a high school paper. Not from one of the leading news dailies in the country.
The USA Today last Wednesday (the 13th) gave their opinion of H.R. 2881, the FAA funding bill that has been proposed recently. The funding plan, commonly called "user fees", would enact a pay-for-use tax on some services rendered by the FAA, including flight into some controlled airspace, and arrivals and departures at some of the major airports in the United States. The general aviation community, composed of all aviation not military or airlines, is strongly opposed to this new funding program, on the basis that the current funding system, if used properly, is more than good enough for the maintainence, upkeep, and modernization of the air traffic control system.
The general aviation community believes this new funding program to be unfair towards general aviation, and giving breaks to the airlines that they don't necessarily deserve.
The USA Today opinion is to give airline passengers a break, apparently believing that this new funding system would automatically fix the problems that the airlines have encountered as of late.
I wrote to the editor, this is what I said:
"I am writing to question your position on aviation user fees put forth in the February 13 edition. Far from making any intelligent case for user fees, your editors chose instead to repeat, nearly verbatim, the poor excuse for arguments that the airlines have been cramming down our throats recently. With a profit margin of only around 1%, airlines (and their passengers) are far from "subsidizing" us "high fliers" in our corporate jets and private aircraft. I work for a company that provides fractional aircraft ownership programs for its clients. These clients, in addition to their share of the aircraft, are responsible to pay for every flight hour they are using the aircraft. The price per flight hour is nearly $2,000; more, I think, than anyone has paid at the ticket counter recently. I would urge the editors to re-examine their position, rather than swallow uncritically the excuses from an industry defending their unwillingness to do the hard work of streamlining that needs to be done."
The article begins by explaining the delays and cancellations, which did reach an all-time high last year. While this statistic is deplorable and unfortunate, to lay blame on the airlines for all the missed events as the article does is stretching things quite a bit, in my opinion. Things happen, and passengers on any airline understand that there is some elements of travel that are beyond anyone's control. That being the case, most intelligent people "pad" their vacations and trips with extra days to compensate for this element of the unknown.
The article then attempts to blame these delays and cancellations on the broken system. I am not so naive to imagine that the air traffic system does not need modernaization, however, as I said in the beginning of this post, the current funding system only needs minor tweaks to be able to meet the demands of upkeep and modernization, as well at the future growth of the industry. And a quick note on that, who would you guess is going to be responsible for a large majority of that growth?
And, contrary to what the writer may want you to think, modernizing the entire air traffic control system is not as easy as putting a GPS navigation system on your dashboard and heading down the highway. Most aircraft in the air now have GPS on board, by the way. Most aircraft now have at least the option of traffic avoidance systems which can track nearby aircraft and warn of an impending collision, or at the very least, alert the pilot to other aircraft. I digress.
The article goes on to make the argument that this is a Republican problem, laying blame at the feet of the current administration, and the House Transportation Committee. In fact, far from being a governmental problem, it is much more complex. The article is correct in stating that some of the blame lies in the government's not being willing or able to explore viable alternatives to the funding system, but I would say that an equal share of the blame could be given to the airlines, who continue to use more and more smaller jets, as opposed to fewer larger jets, and as a result, increase congestion at their major hubs.
The statistics given in the next paragraph are proof of that. General aviation was responsible for only 16% of the air traffic control expenses in 2005. That means that the airlines are responsible for 84% of the cost of our airports and air traffic control systems.
And this whole argument is a bit of a red herring anyway, since the congestion at the major hubs, with the resultant delays and cancellations (a major airline argument for user fees) would not be solved by changing the funding mechanism through user fees anyway. The problem of congestion is a problem of too many aircraft in one place, and we will not solve that by making general aviation pay more into the system.
The user fee system being suggested would charge a fee for every arrival and departure for non-airline aircraft at certain airports. Currently, it would be limited to the main airports in the busiest Class B airspace, Chicago O'Hare, Atlanta, LAX, New York, Detroit, etc. As the article states, it is a small fee, easily absorbed (on first glance) by the "high fliers". But as a private pilot, and an employee of a business that operates general aviation aircraft, I am a member of the general aviation community. And I take exception to being called a "high flier". That term denotes somewhat of a "jet set" attitude, and the writer makes it clear the assumption that he is operating from is one where general aviation is merely a bunch of rich people who don't need that money anyway.
Clearly, there those people around. But they are not the majority of general aviation at all. I certainly could find a use for more money. I haven't flown in months because I have to pay to fly, and right now I have other obligations for that money.
And besides, that whole class warfare attitude has no place in this debate, or any debate, for that matter.
While I agree that there needs to be some sort of action to guarantee funding for the needed upgrading and maintenance of the air traffic control system, I do not think that general aviation user fees are the answer. They are merely a short-term solution suggested by the airline industry to prevent them from having to majorly overhaul their business model as they should. The majority of the burden for air traffic control comes from the airlines. In fact, the airline industry is the reason we have the air traffic system that we do in the first place. Therefore, my opinion is that the airlines should carry the majority of the burden for funding it's upkeep and maintenance.
Heres the crappy article, if you want to read it at all.
wingnut
15 February 2008
07 February 2008
Wanna read?
Interesting article about one of those everyday heros you dont hear near enough about. Jill Long is a military aviator and aerobatic pilot. I love the quote at the end of the story! She also has a website, here.
The Wall Street Journal on Wednesday had a great op-ed piece by Arthur Herman, examining the role that the media played in turning the tide in theVietnam conflict. He examines the actual outcome of the 1968 Tet Offensive, as opposed to how that offensive was portrayed by the American media. It is interesting to note how disasterous Tet was, not for American forces, as usually assumed, but for the NVA and Viet Cong. Though Herman does not make the comparison, I would claim that it was similar in circumstance to the Battle of the Ardennes (Bulge), in that North Vietnam's government and military were supposedly on their last legs and had to cease operations for a time to build up for the push, much like Hitler sought to steal victory from the jaws of defeat in late 1944. Both campaigns were militarily disastrous, but the media-savvy North Vietnamese government was able to pinpoint our weakness and exploit it, in a way that Hitler could only have dreamed of.
It is interesting to note the similarities in reporting from Vietnam, and our current engagements in Iraq.
You can read the entire article here.
And I guess Craig Gross and I think alike. Well, about Dobson's reaction to McCain's imminent nomination, at least. And, the more I think about it, Belichick too. I watched the post-game interview and I commented to Shan that this looks like a guy who's team hasn't seen a championship ring in thirty years, not a guy who's team brought him a record-breaking season with a disappointing ending. You can read his comment on it here.
wingnut
The Wall Street Journal on Wednesday had a great op-ed piece by Arthur Herman, examining the role that the media played in turning the tide in theVietnam conflict. He examines the actual outcome of the 1968 Tet Offensive, as opposed to how that offensive was portrayed by the American media. It is interesting to note how disasterous Tet was, not for American forces, as usually assumed, but for the NVA and Viet Cong. Though Herman does not make the comparison, I would claim that it was similar in circumstance to the Battle of the Ardennes (Bulge), in that North Vietnam's government and military were supposedly on their last legs and had to cease operations for a time to build up for the push, much like Hitler sought to steal victory from the jaws of defeat in late 1944. Both campaigns were militarily disastrous, but the media-savvy North Vietnamese government was able to pinpoint our weakness and exploit it, in a way that Hitler could only have dreamed of.
It is interesting to note the similarities in reporting from Vietnam, and our current engagements in Iraq.
You can read the entire article here.
And I guess Craig Gross and I think alike. Well, about Dobson's reaction to McCain's imminent nomination, at least. And, the more I think about it, Belichick too. I watched the post-game interview and I commented to Shan that this looks like a guy who's team hasn't seen a championship ring in thirty years, not a guy who's team brought him a record-breaking season with a disappointing ending. You can read his comment on it here.
wingnut
05 February 2008
GRRRRRRRR
“But what a sad and melancholy decision this is for me and many other conservatives. Should Sen. McCain capture the nomination as many assume, I believe this general election will offer the worst choices for president in my lifetime. I certainly can’t vote for Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama based on their virulently anti-family policy positions. If these are the nominees in November, I simply will not cast a ballot for president for the first time in my life. These decisions are my personal views and do not represent the organization with which I am affiliated. They do reflect my deeply held convictions about the institution of the family, about moral and spiritual beliefs, and about the welfare of our country.”
Dr. James Dobson, founder, Focus on the Family
Dear Doctor Dobson,
I respect your opinion and your right to it, Doctor. I appreciate the way your ministry works to strengthen the families worldwide, and I can see your genuine passion for your ministry, your beliefs, and your concern for this country and the world.
But I am amazed that a man of your influence in this nation, and in this nation's government, is throwing a hissy-fit because your political party is about to choose the "wrong" candidate.
It seems to me that you are all at once disgusted with the status quo, with business as usual in Washington DC, but too comfortable with it to really attempt to create lasting change. Governor Mike Huckabee seems to nearly mirror your stances on many issues, but he does not get even a mention.
Could this be because he is not a leading candidate? Could it be that you do not want to abandon your party for a long shot? Wouldn't want to hitch your wagon to a horse that doesn't move, would you?
I am honestly surprised it took you this long, Doctor, to bemoan the fact that there are no worthy candidates running for office. The rest of us out here in "fly-over country" have been complaining about that since Reagan. Especially the last three election cycles.
There is no-one on any ticket that I really would want to vote for. Apparently, Doctor, you are feeling the same pain as many of us. You are experiencing the same disillusionment as us. Your quote could come from the lips of many of my friends and family.
Dr. James Dobson, founder, Focus on the Family
Dear Doctor Dobson,
I respect your opinion and your right to it, Doctor. I appreciate the way your ministry works to strengthen the families worldwide, and I can see your genuine passion for your ministry, your beliefs, and your concern for this country and the world.
But I am amazed that a man of your influence in this nation, and in this nation's government, is throwing a hissy-fit because your political party is about to choose the "wrong" candidate.
It seems to me that you are all at once disgusted with the status quo, with business as usual in Washington DC, but too comfortable with it to really attempt to create lasting change. Governor Mike Huckabee seems to nearly mirror your stances on many issues, but he does not get even a mention.
Could this be because he is not a leading candidate? Could it be that you do not want to abandon your party for a long shot? Wouldn't want to hitch your wagon to a horse that doesn't move, would you?
I am honestly surprised it took you this long, Doctor, to bemoan the fact that there are no worthy candidates running for office. The rest of us out here in "fly-over country" have been complaining about that since Reagan. Especially the last three election cycles.
There is no-one on any ticket that I really would want to vote for. Apparently, Doctor, you are feeling the same pain as many of us. You are experiencing the same disillusionment as us. Your quote could come from the lips of many of my friends and family.
Doctor, you are one of the most influential people in America. I recommend that you use your influence to effect real change. That means endorsing a candidate truly in line with your values, not boycotting the election. Let party affiliations fall by the wayside if you truly care about these values.
wingnut
29 January 2008
The Baby Update, or: Two Weeks on Four Hours a Night
Little Elijah has made himself right at home in our living room. The Pack'n'Play that we didn't think we would need and that we got second hand through my mother has seen constant use.
His cradle, lovingly crafted by Eli's Grampa Jasperse out of beautiful cherry wood, has seen less-than-desired usage, probably by the simple fact that Eli seems to favor sleeping all day, not leaving Mommy the option of leaving the living room-kitchen-dining room area of the house for any substantial length of time to sleep in her own bed, therefore negating the use of the cradle, which is in our bedroom. And yes, that was a confusing and record-long sentence.
He does use both, however, and we are grateful for both the family heirloom and the "working" toy garage sale hand-me-down.
The tide is beginning to turn to the cradle's favor though, as Eli is getting less and less nocturnal. Not that Shan and I are hanging "Mission Accomplished" banners on our vehicles, but the other night he did actually sleep through the night, with just an hour and a half of fussiness. Poor, exhausted Mommy slept right through it, leaving Daddy with a crying baby and a snoring wife. Daddy has been abundantly blessed with the Virtue of Patience. And a finished basement with a computer and internet access. However, Mommy did wake up in a panic that morning, sure that little Eli would be shriveled up because we did not keep him on his three hour schedule!
Elijah visited the his doctor today for the two week weigh-in and checkup, and it seems that Mommy and Daddy have a healthy growing typical baby boy on their hands. As a matter of fact, the goal for newborn babies growth is an ounce per day. At his first checkup, Elijah weighed in four ounces past his birth weight, at 7lbs, 8oz. At this check up, he weighed 8lbs, 4oz. So, from birth, he has gained exactly one pound in two weeks.
A bit of quick math, 16 ounces over 14 days, means that our son is the over achiever we always knew him to be. Take that, all you average babies! Our baby is bringing your numbers up! Get used to it, lots of teachers grade on a curve. Did I mention he nearly aced his APGAR test? I am certain he'll be crawling within the month, and walking by spring. He also continues to exceed his daily quota of wet and dirty diapers by at least two. By kindergarten, he'll be fluent in English, Hebrew, and ancient Greek, and have a working knowledge of Biblical archaeology.
Today Daddy was also formally baptized into fatherhood, the culmination of nearly a year's worth of study and practice. Today, Daddy had to change clothes along with Elijah after a burp session. Mommy laughed, having been baptized on the first day, and numerous times since then. She even had the audacity to comment on the size of my baptizm, saying it "wasn't bad" and, "he did that to me twice yesterday while you were at work". Sticks and Stones, though. My son and I shared a bonding moment when he baptized me, and nothing anyone can say will take that away from me.
His eyes are continuing to darken, turning from that weird newborn greyish blue to brown, and he is focusing more now. We can tell that Mommy's voice is recognized. We knew it was before, but now we can tell it on his face. If he's a bit fussy, and Mommy says his name, we can watch him calm down! Unfortunately, this is not a superpower that Daddy posesses.
Daddy does posess the diaper changing power. The reason this is a superpower is the fact that Daddy cannot handle the smell of puke, the smell of poopie, and spiders. Daddy has not had to run from the nursery with his hand in front of his mouth holding back barf, and just this simple fact is enough to claim diaper changing as a superpower. That and Daddy didn't flinch during his son's circumcision, so Daddy must also have the superpower of Stay Strong.
Eli, too, must have superpowers. I dare anyone to challenge his kung-fu grip. He is very alert and aware of his surroundings as well, having the other day discovered his cheek and face, and pain all at the same time. We think he tried to pull his eyeball out, but we're not sure. He gave Mommy a mean roundhouse kick to the kidneys the other day, I think because the "restaurant" didn't open soon enough.
He also is practicing to become a male model. He gave us his first "look" this weekend, pouting his lips just like his hero Derek Zoolander. I tried giving him a faux-hawk yesterday, and it looked sweet. It was short, so really I just combed all the hair to the top of his head, but it was cool nonetheless.
If I could sum up this entire post in one sentence, it would be this: My son Elijah is the cutest, smartest, strongest, healthiest baby around.
wingnut
His cradle, lovingly crafted by Eli's Grampa Jasperse out of beautiful cherry wood, has seen less-than-desired usage, probably by the simple fact that Eli seems to favor sleeping all day, not leaving Mommy the option of leaving the living room-kitchen-dining room area of the house for any substantial length of time to sleep in her own bed, therefore negating the use of the cradle, which is in our bedroom. And yes, that was a confusing and record-long sentence.
He does use both, however, and we are grateful for both the family heirloom and the "working" toy garage sale hand-me-down.
The tide is beginning to turn to the cradle's favor though, as Eli is getting less and less nocturnal. Not that Shan and I are hanging "Mission Accomplished" banners on our vehicles, but the other night he did actually sleep through the night, with just an hour and a half of fussiness. Poor, exhausted Mommy slept right through it, leaving Daddy with a crying baby and a snoring wife. Daddy has been abundantly blessed with the Virtue of Patience. And a finished basement with a computer and internet access. However, Mommy did wake up in a panic that morning, sure that little Eli would be shriveled up because we did not keep him on his three hour schedule!
Elijah visited the his doctor today for the two week weigh-in and checkup, and it seems that Mommy and Daddy have a healthy growing typical baby boy on their hands. As a matter of fact, the goal for newborn babies growth is an ounce per day. At his first checkup, Elijah weighed in four ounces past his birth weight, at 7lbs, 8oz. At this check up, he weighed 8lbs, 4oz. So, from birth, he has gained exactly one pound in two weeks.
A bit of quick math, 16 ounces over 14 days, means that our son is the over achiever we always knew him to be. Take that, all you average babies! Our baby is bringing your numbers up! Get used to it, lots of teachers grade on a curve. Did I mention he nearly aced his APGAR test? I am certain he'll be crawling within the month, and walking by spring. He also continues to exceed his daily quota of wet and dirty diapers by at least two. By kindergarten, he'll be fluent in English, Hebrew, and ancient Greek, and have a working knowledge of Biblical archaeology.
Today Daddy was also formally baptized into fatherhood, the culmination of nearly a year's worth of study and practice. Today, Daddy had to change clothes along with Elijah after a burp session. Mommy laughed, having been baptized on the first day, and numerous times since then. She even had the audacity to comment on the size of my baptizm, saying it "wasn't bad" and, "he did that to me twice yesterday while you were at work". Sticks and Stones, though. My son and I shared a bonding moment when he baptized me, and nothing anyone can say will take that away from me.
His eyes are continuing to darken, turning from that weird newborn greyish blue to brown, and he is focusing more now. We can tell that Mommy's voice is recognized. We knew it was before, but now we can tell it on his face. If he's a bit fussy, and Mommy says his name, we can watch him calm down! Unfortunately, this is not a superpower that Daddy posesses.
Daddy does posess the diaper changing power. The reason this is a superpower is the fact that Daddy cannot handle the smell of puke, the smell of poopie, and spiders. Daddy has not had to run from the nursery with his hand in front of his mouth holding back barf, and just this simple fact is enough to claim diaper changing as a superpower. That and Daddy didn't flinch during his son's circumcision, so Daddy must also have the superpower of Stay Strong.
Eli, too, must have superpowers. I dare anyone to challenge his kung-fu grip. He is very alert and aware of his surroundings as well, having the other day discovered his cheek and face, and pain all at the same time. We think he tried to pull his eyeball out, but we're not sure. He gave Mommy a mean roundhouse kick to the kidneys the other day, I think because the "restaurant" didn't open soon enough.
He also is practicing to become a male model. He gave us his first "look" this weekend, pouting his lips just like his hero Derek Zoolander. I tried giving him a faux-hawk yesterday, and it looked sweet. It was short, so really I just combed all the hair to the top of his head, but it was cool nonetheless.
If I could sum up this entire post in one sentence, it would be this: My son Elijah is the cutest, smartest, strongest, healthiest baby around.
wingnut
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)