A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travelling Style » Air travel
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Which airports needed? (was: Southwest Airlines not so "luvy"?)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 23rd, 2004, 07:28 PM
Ulf Kutzner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Which airports needed? (was: Southwest Airlines not so "luvy"?)

Jeff W schrieb:

"George Conklin" wrote in message thlink.net...
"Jeff W" wrote in message
m...
"George Conklin" wrote in message

thlink.net...
"Jeff W" wrote in message
m...
randee wrote in message

...
Just because the law is there won't make it happen, as numerous

airports
can testify.

Or as my whole state can testify. I'm starting to wonder where the
line is drawn where anything government related follows it's own rules
closely. Because it seems if the law has a slight chance of not being
do-able, we ignore it.

I see we have moved into the realm of paranoia and away from

real-world
financing.

Well, 26 million people and all the newspapers must be paranoid since
lawmakers in this state pass laws and consitutional amendments that
are openly not enforced and complied with.


26 million people run airports?



They even have press
conferences on it.
I don't see why passing a law that an airport has to break even would
be the first and only obligation to be fulfilled over all overs.


You don't seem to know the difference between airside and the landside at
all. All I see now from you is paranoid comments. I lived through the
collapse of a hub, and saw the consequences. Other airlines moved in and
that was that.
It was no big deal.


Let's back up for a second and look what's being proposed. All
airports must break even. In concept I would agree and like the idea,
but when we think ahead of what happens:
Most people don't live in NY with 3 overcrowded airports. Florida
would go from it's 20 international airports, some crowded, most dead
and tax subsidized, to about 4 commerical hubs. Maybe 5 or 6
optimistically will stay open because of UPS and fedex, but that would
be all. Who knows in other states what will be left, say Georgia, how
many airports will break even? What happens in the Mid-West? The deep
south? Probably not much since it cost so much to fly away from hubs
anyway.

Then we have the other side of it. A law that says something must
break even or produce a profit. Where's this been said before. Toll
roads, not followed at all. Civic Centers, not supposed to break
even, but it sure helps them get built when you say they will and make
a "law" on that. Some mass transit projects, same as the last one.
Laws on public input at government meetings, not always followed.
Class size reduction laws, nope to expensive, we aren't going to
comply. Same with high speed rail. Corporate income tax, voluntary.
Sunshine laws, lot of closed door meetings and decisions going on.
I seriously doubt airports would be the only agency that must comply
with any type of state, federal, or state amendment laws with nothing
else complying. And once again, I don't think 26million people, and
all major newspapers filling up their pages with this junk counts as
paranoia. Unless Paranoia equals not being rosey and optimisitic?

Also, go back to not everyone being next to a hub and other factors,
roads will be overburdened and a bigger rental car and highway lobby
will come. The rental car companies are practically dictating the 2
billion dollar intermodal hub in Miami right now. Who knows what's
going on in Orlando which hosts the worlds largest rental car parking
lot.

Like I said, I like the concept, but I really don't like consequences
when I think about it.


Why not discuss that in rec.travel.air?

Regards & F'up2, ULF
  #2  
Old March 24th, 2004, 01:29 AM
George Conklin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Which airports needed? (was: Southwest Airlines not so "luvy"?)


"Ulf Kutzner" wrote in message
...
Jeff W schrieb:

"George Conklin" wrote in message

thlink.net...
"Jeff W" wrote in message
m...
"George Conklin" wrote in message
thlink.net...
"Jeff W" wrote in message
m...
randee wrote in message
...
Just because the law is there won't make it happen, as

numerous
airports
can testify.

Or as my whole state can testify. I'm starting to wonder where

the
line is drawn where anything government related follows it's own

rules
closely. Because it seems if the law has a slight chance of not

being
do-able, we ignore it.

I see we have moved into the realm of paranoia and away from
real-world
financing.

Well, 26 million people and all the newspapers must be paranoid

since
lawmakers in this state pass laws and consitutional amendments that
are openly not enforced and complied with.

26 million people run airports?



They even have press
conferences on it.
I don't see why passing a law that an airport has to break even

would
be the first and only obligation to be fulfilled over all overs.


You don't seem to know the difference between airside and the

landside at
all. All I see now from you is paranoid comments. I lived through

the
collapse of a hub, and saw the consequences. Other airlines moved in

and
that was that.
It was no big deal.


Let's back up for a second and look what's being proposed. All
airports must break even. In concept I would agree and like the idea,
but when we think ahead of what happens:
Most people don't live in NY with 3 overcrowded airports. Florida
would go from it's 20 international airports, some crowded, most dead
and tax subsidized, to about 4 commerical hubs. Maybe 5 or 6
optimistically will stay open because of UPS and fedex, but that would
be all. Who knows in other states what will be left, say Georgia, how
many airports will break even? What happens in the Mid-West? The deep
south? Probably not much since it cost so much to fly away from hubs
anyway.

Then we have the other side of it. A law that says something must
break even or produce a profit. Where's this been said before. Toll
roads, not followed at all. Civic Centers, not supposed to break
even, but it sure helps them get built when you say they will and make
a "law" on that. Some mass transit projects, same as the last one.
Laws on public input at government meetings, not always followed.
Class size reduction laws, nope to expensive, we aren't going to
comply. Same with high speed rail. Corporate income tax, voluntary.
Sunshine laws, lot of closed door meetings and decisions going on.
I seriously doubt airports would be the only agency that must comply
with any type of state, federal, or state amendment laws with nothing
else complying. And once again, I don't think 26million people, and
all major newspapers filling up their pages with this junk counts as
paranoia. Unless Paranoia equals not being rosey and optimisitic?

Also, go back to not everyone being next to a hub and other factors,
roads will be overburdened and a bigger rental car and highway lobby
will come. The rental car companies are practically dictating the 2
billion dollar intermodal hub in Miami right now. Who knows what's
going on in Orlando which hosts the worlds largest rental car parking
lot.

Like I said, I like the concept, but I really don't like consequences
when I think about it.


Why not discuss that in rec.travel.air?

Regards & F'up2, ULF



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ Edward Hasbrouck Air travel 0 March 18th, 2004 10:16 AM
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ Edward Hasbrouck Air travel 0 February 16th, 2004 11:03 AM
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ Edward Hasbrouck Air travel 0 January 16th, 2004 10:20 AM
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ Edward Hasbrouck Air travel 0 December 15th, 2003 10:48 AM
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ Edward Hasbrouck Air travel 0 November 9th, 2003 10:09 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.