A few headlines to close your week with. I mean, a few headlines with which to close your week:
- Obama: proof of chemical weapons a ‘game-changer’ (The Guardian) — Can’t for the life of me figure out why American publications are leading with this. I guess it just sounds different from abroad. The American outlets are stressing that the president says the intel isn’t all in yet. But the more important point is that he’s reiterating that if the WMD use is confirmed, it does indeed cross a red line.
- Congress sends bill to end airport delays to Obama (WashPost) — Thereby causing Democrats to lose a political lever on any efforts to end the sequester.
- 9/11 Plane Debris Found in Lower Manhattan (WSJ) — We’re talking a significant chunk of landing gear.
- Survivors found in collapsed factory (BBC) — That is, the factory that collapsed in Bangladesh on Wednesday. Meanwhile, workers rampaged and burned other factories to protest unsafe conditions.
- Lexington man accused of branding children (thestate.com) — Not to identify them or anything, just to hurt them.
- ‘He stopped loving her today’ (Tennessean) — George Jones, the man Tammy stood by (up to a point), is dead at 81. I can’t resist wondering whether he’ll show up for his own funeral.
Related Posts
Now, if found guilty, that justifies terminating his parental rights….let’s make a law!
How about how, yet again, SC tries nullification? Obamacare blocked by Senate bill. House expected to pass it, too. Bringing the crazy since 1828!
Kill him with fire.
Tire party?
Can we treat this guy as an enemy combatant?
“The American outlets are stressing that the president says the intel isn’t all in yet.” – Brad W.
Judging by last week’s revelation of his former Secretary of State’s personal Benghazi role that had earlier been denied, I would tend to agree with the president … all of the intel has certainly not been corroborated yet.
2. Question: how are air traffic controllers paid? If their salary comes out of the price of airline tickets then why was this something subject to the sequestor in the first place? If paid out of the general revenue then we have a problem with the non-flyers (mostly less wealthy) subsidizing flyers (mostly wealthy). That would make this a form of welfare for the wealthy.
Bud,
So then the Federal Government should stop subsidizing buses and subways? Sometimes I think you just like getting your spleen in a twist…
What you should say is the Federal Government ought to denationalize the air traffic control system because the FAA has proven itself incapable of modernizing its systems to protect the safety of the flying public. Then, you could toss in the barb that if the airline/cargo industries controlled the ATC system, then they would tend to marginalize general aviation flights (the truly fat cats). And you would like to inconvenience those people, right? But instead you are mad that people are employed by the government to facilitate travel? I don’t follow DOT good, FAA bad; I just don’t.
@bud
The non-wealthy don’t pay income taxes.
Air Traffic Controllers are very likely paid as employees of the FAA. Maybe some of the funding comes from local or state governments, but my guess is that they are federal employees.
Where I stand on the recently passed legislation to end furloughs for the air traffic controllers depends on whether flyers pay for their salaries 100% (by way of this being built in to ticket prices) or whether folks who pay income and other non-flying related taxes but don’t fly pay a portion. If the former case is true then I have no problem with the legislation because the non-flyers have no dog in the fight. If even one penny of the controllers salary comes from a source other than ticket sales then I have a big problem with it. So far I haven’t seen much of a discussion on that aspect of the bill.
@bud
Do you ever fly? I’ve flown approximately 50 flights so far this year. It’s not fat cats sipping champagne while mini-skirted stewardesses hover nearby. It’s one step up from Greyhound. It’s most business travelers doing what they have to do. I’ll make sure to ask everyone on my flights to Atlanta and Memphis today whether they paid income taxes this year.
Your jealousy/hatred of people who have non-government, above minimum wage jobs is depressing.
After a bit of digging I think I understand how the air traffic controllers are paid. As Bryan noted they are employees of the FAA which is funded by (1) The Airport and Airway Trust Fund – AATF) and (2) the General Fund. In FY 2011 the AATF provided about 48% of the operations account for the FAA. Here’s the key (from the FAA website) – The remaining portion of FAA’s Operations account is funded through the General Fund.
Thus my tax dollars, as an infrequent flyer, goes to subsidize frequent flyers like Doug. Therefore since a sizeable portion of the cost of flying is subsidized by the general public I can comfortably say that I’m appalled at the legislation ending the air traffic controllers furloughs. I say let the parasitic frequent flyers wait.
Whoops, forgot to insert the FAA verbiage:
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is funded primarily by the Airport and Airway Trust Fund (Trust Fund or AATF) which receives revenues from a series of excise taxes paid by users of the national airspace system — and by the General Fund. The Airport and Airway Revenue Act of 1970 created the Trust Fund to provide a dedicated source of funding for the aviation system independent of the General Fund.
Trust Fund revenues are derived from excise taxes on:
• Domestic airline passenger tickets
• Domestic airline passenger flight segments
• International passenger arrivals and departures
• Air cargo waybills
• Aviation fuels
• Amounts paid for the right to provide mileage awards
The Trust Fund has also provided a portion of the funding for FAA’s Operations account; it provided about 48 percent in FY 2011 and 43 percent in FY 2010. The remaining portion of FAA’s Operations account is funded through the General Fund.
Actually bud, Doug and your ticket tax dollars go to subsidize general aviation flights. So next time you are sitting back in coach and have to wait for a private plane or jet to take off at CAE, or next time you are downtown and an airplane takes off from Owens Field, remember that you are helping to pay for that. I think Mark mentioned this above, but it appears to have been lost on you.
bud is paying for fat-cats to operate airplanes, yachts, and private rail cars!
I wonder if anyone still has a private rail car? That would actually be pretty nifty – if you could get hooked up to the fast intermodal express freight trains. Getting tagged onto an AMTRAK train would be a buzz kill though.
Are you going to count the folks who own a Cockaboose?
No. So easy when it doesn’t run…
Mark – I knew a girl at USC back in the early 2000’s who’s father was an executive with AMTRAK. When they travelled it was in a private railcar. At least that’s what she said, and I don’t doubt her.
If you really want to do it, you can charter one from the Lancaster & Chester Railway in Chester, SC:
http://www.landcrailroad.com/luxcharter.html
“Thus my tax dollars, as an infrequent flyer, goes to subsidize frequent flyers like Doug. ”
@bud
And how much of YOUR salary comes from tax dollars? Talk about being subidized.
I’m paying 7.5% tax on my airfare plus a U.S. Federal tax per segment plus an extra 9/11 tax.
I’ve spent approximately $1000 just on the airfare tax this year and another couple hundred
on the other fees.
Do the math, bud. Tell me how much you paid in federal income taxes last year and then multiply it by the percent of the federal budget spent on air traffic controllers. I’ll make a deal with you – I’ll refund you that amount if you tell us what it is. I’m sure I can find enough quarters in my change jar to cover your subsidy.
You don’t get to pick and choose to fund the government on things that you either don’t like or don’t use. That’s not how the government works, bud. Jeez, you sound like a nihilistic tea-party type who doesn’t want “their” tax dollars to pay for the bus system in Columbia because they don’t ride the bus.
How is airline travel different than the bus system?
Your jealousy/hatred of people who have non-government, above minimum wage jobs is depressing.
-Doug
Doug, I’m neither jealous nor do I have hatred. I occassionally fly and don’t want to be burdened with delays. And it is certainly nothing like Greyhound. But let’s keep things in perspective. The average frequent flyer probably makes 3-4 times what the average non-flyer makes. Would you dispute that? So why shouldn’t they pay 100% of the cost to fly? Isn’t that what you want, a system that is pay as you go?
The point I’m trying to make without getting so caught up in this class warfare nonsensense is that we ALL benefit from the government, not just the poor. Why is that point so controversial to the libertarians and tea-partiers? Given the fact that the ONE aspect of government that is now exempt from the sequestor happens to be an area that almost exclusively benefits people who make in the top 15% isn’t it easy to see who really benefits the most from government? And I can assure you it’s not the poor.
I object to the EPA. Can I get a refund for that, bud?
Doug, you can rant all you want about what I pay in taxes but I’m not the one advocating libertarianism. Therefore the burdent of proof is not on me it on libertarians that have this absurd worldview that government is evil and should be done away with.
@bud
Your mypoic view of the world is the problem. All you care about is that people who make more money than you pay more in taxes.
Go google “nancy pelosi private jets” and then get back to us.
I tell you what Bryan you’re welcome to breath all the dirty air you want. All you have to do is go to China or parts of the former Soviet Union. As for me I think I’ll keep right on breathing good ole American air thanks to the EPA.
So I can or cannot get a refund?
@bud
When you’re losing the argument, change the subject. You threw out a wild theory about poor people subsidizing rich flyers. It’s not true.
I’d LOVE to see the air traffic controllers privatized. Will you allow it? I’d love to see TSA go away completely. Will you allow it?
Your mypoic view of the world is the problem. All you care about is that people who make more money than you pay more in taxes.
-Doug
That’s bulls***.
As a libertarian, my view is not that government is evil. My view is that government is inefficient. Thus we should limit the impact that an inefficient government can have on society and the economy.
Sorry Doug but you’re just flat out wrong on this. I do subsidize frequent flyers. And I don’t resent that fact. But you just can’t seem to see what is so obvious. WE ALL BENEFIT FROM THE GOVERNMENT. Sometimes it just works better than pure capatilism.
Sometimes government is inefficient. But sometimes so is free enterprise. If free enterprise ALWAYS was better we wouldn’t have such a ridiculous imbalance in what people make. But then again to the libertarian maybe that’s just fine. But to me it reflects ineffeciency. Some folks who work very, very hard and make little. Then there are those who don’t work at all and rake in billions (like the Walton Family). (This is not about jealousy or hatred so please don’t go there again, it’s an un-necessary insult that doesn’t fit my beliefs.) I just want an economy that works best. And frankly an unfettered free enterprise system is far, far, far from the best in many, many, many ways.
“If free enterprise ALWAYS was better we wouldn’t have such a ridiculous imbalance in what people make.” – bud
Bud, I don’t think you understand free enterprise. Free enterprise doesn’t guarantee equal outcomes. Some people’s time/labor is worth more than others.
Please folks, READ WHAT I WRITE. I said RIDICULOUS imbalance. I did NOT, repeat did NOT say EQUAL OUTCOMES. That too would be outrageous.
My whole argument is based on the proposition that a COMPLETELY free market fails to deliver the goods and services that people need to live a useful, healthy and productive life; its just not efficient. On the other end of the spectrum a completely SOCIALIST (or communist) society would likewise not work well. What we have now is a rapid movement toward the CAPITALIST side of the equation with the elimination of regulations at every turn. I used the air traffic controllers example to illustrate how this movement affects who benefits and who doesn’t from this change in government philosophy. In this case folks who are better off financially have been given a reward. Not headstart. Not child nutrition programs. Not even the military. What is at stake here is the future prosperity of our country that has nothing to do with the welfare of bud. Either way I’ll do just fine. But my children and grandchildren will suffer if we continue on the path of unfettered capitalism.
“But my children and grandchildren will suffer if we continue on the path of unfettered capitalism.” -bud
Our capitalism here is hardly what I would call “unfettered”. Also, are you saying that in the last 5 years, there are less regulations on the American economy?
If you work hard at a job where your skill is a commodity or not in demand, that’s what you get. Sam Walton worked very hard for years to create the wealth he rightly shared with his family.
When a free enterprise entity is inefficient, it goes away or loses value (K-mart, Sears, Blackberry). When a government entity is inefficient, it doesn’t go away.
Tell me how much you subsidize frequent flyers. Give me a dollar amount. I’ll pay it all back to you.
I subsidize all sorts of people, including your salary.
Bud,
Just by way of context, how old are you, what is your education level, and what is your employment history?
Yeah, I asked about bud’s employment history before. Got crickets.
Guys,
Bud’s point that he (finally) got around to is correct; government is a necessary part of our economy. Not a necessary evil; necessary.
On the other hand, Doug’s point about government getting into things and then not getting out is also true.
I want the FAA to be more efficient and “competitive”. However, I don’t see how we could franchise out to a private entity control of our national airspace. And what Congress did to enable the FAA to continue without reform was worse than what would happen to it in sequestration. So it kind of ticks me off too – but for an entirely different reason.
The whole point of Sequestration was to set up a set of cuts to government services that were so horrific, the concept would scare Congress into preventing the cuts. By providing one-off fixes or flexibility for specific agencies, it allows congress to mitigate pain without fixing the underlying issues that caused the sequester in the first place.
The idea was dumb. Allowing it to happen was dumber. The fixes that we’ve seen so far are dumber still.
Yup.
I just did some Google-fu and discovered that Canada’s air-traffic control is private (and it’s award-winning). http://www.cato.org/blog/canadas-private-atc-wins-award
Why exactly do we need government employees to help airplanes not run into one another?
Federal Ticket Tax – a 7.5% excise tax on each ticket (collected by the airlines); it goes toward the government’s Airport and Airway Trust Fund which supports the FAA and air traffic control
Segment Tax – This tax is set at $3.70 and is charged per “flight segment”, meaning one take-off and landing. This money is also channeled to the Airport/Airway Trust Fund.
Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) – Another “flight segment” tax and this one varies though it can cost as much as $4.50 per segment, but gets capped out at $18. This helps fund various local airport projects.
Sept.11 Security Fee – This is only $2.50 per segment (and it tops out at $10 per flight), and as you might expect, it funds the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
The idea was dumb. Allowing it to happen was dumber.
-Silence
On that we can agree. But I’m sure we’ll disagree on who’s at fault.
Well, the sequester was Obama’s idea initially, but since Congress is the one who accepted it and then didn’t provide a fix in time to prevent it, I don’t see how it’s anyone’s fault but Congress’, so what’s to disagree on?
Don’t make a partisan issue where one doesn’t exist. There’s plenty of blame to go around.
Agreed, it was everybody’s fault. Hopefully we can all learn from this. This just isn’t the way to run a government.
The really interesting thing here, involving the sequester, is that the air travel delays are really the only single item that seem to have caused anyone any problems, and at most the delays can be described as a minor inconvenience. What happened to all of the doom and gloom, all of the carnage and destruction that was going to occur if the sequester was allowed to go down?
I’d say its’ time to start cutting discretionary spending by about 5% annually, just to see what happens.
Something I meant to include in my previous comment is that the cuts were designed to create the maximum pain to and backlash from the American taxpayer. The cuts were supposed to be so visible and so painful that we’d beg them to please raise our taxes and restore services. This hasn’t happened. Not one iota, even one little bit, aside from the FAA stuff. I’m guessing even that didn’t really generate as much backlash as the news media and members of congress would have us believe.
Keep cutting! I’m not feeling the pain yet.
Mutliply tens of thousands of flyers by 30-45 minute delays and you have more than a minor inconvenience. It means missed connections for many people which results in overnight stays in airports. I was lucky last week – I flew Sunday night before the problems started. Then spent two delays of 30 minutes on the ground in Memphis and Atlanta. My son missed a half day’s work due to a delayed flight in Atlanta on Monday morning.
It was completely avoidable.
A minor inconvenience. Avoidable yes, but thoroughly minor on the scale of problems. It used to take weeks to cross the country by stagecoach! Then it took hours, by jet airplane. Now it takes days again, thanks to federal mismanagement.
Still, thousands of people are dying in Syria, so getting delayed at Hartsfield or missing a half day of work is pretty minor, really.
Well, then let’s set aside all activities until people aren’t dying in Syria.
Tell the family of five who had to spend a night in a hotel because they missed a connection that it was a minor inconvenience. Or the people who missed weddings, funerals, etc.
There was a real impact on thousands of people from this totally avoidable publicity stunt.
I am a bit surprised that the military cuts aren’t more noticeable. Many on the right, including Bill Kristol were having a cow over those cuts a few months back. Apparently we can get by with a smaller military without facing hoards of Al-Qaeda operatives invading our shores.
Given all the suffering in the world, including lost income, meals and many, many other losses suffered by those of modest means, the sick and the elderly the airline delays really are pretty minor. Why can’t congress do it’s job and fix the sequestor problems for everyone, not just for the relatively wealthy?
I will have to comment on this one and take exception to bud’s reference to frequent flyers. Not by any stretch of the imagination, was my income several time higher than the average citizen and would speculate that neither Doug or Silence fit the category either. They probably do very well but based on the information available about both, they earned it. For several years, almost every week it was part of my jot to fly states across the country and to Puerto Rico. My brother flies three weeks a month to a Southeastern state and to the Northeast when he goes to corporate meetings. He doesn’t make a huge salary either. Based on what little we know about your job with the state, your salary and benefits is probably more than my brother’s or what mine was. Point – his flights and mine were paid for by the firms we work(ed) for. Eventually, we built up frequent flyer points but seldom used them because most companies require employees to sign over the miles to the company so they can book flights for other employees for company travel purposes.
When I reached a certain mileage level, one of the perks for being a frequent flyer was the ability to upgrade to first class only “IF”, and I repeat for you bud, “IF” seats were available. If they were not, the company I worked for would not pay for first class seating. If anything, the company booked the least expensive flight they could. Eventually I reached the top level with US Air and even then, if seating was not available in first class, too bad, sit wherever you are assigned.
The same for hotel accommodations. When you reach the top level with Hilton (Hampton Inns) and any airline , you are spending way too much time away from home.
So, save your breath on this one. You lose the argument.
Now, I will admit I am not a financial expert when it comes to a government budget but just looking at the numbers based on 2012 vs. 2013, how is it that a sequester amount of $85 billion can “cripple” an entire economy when you look at the numbers and do some sensible comparisons with 2012 and 2013 which by the way is only one month into the new budget year.
Let’s look at some numbers from last year, 2012, and compare them to this year, 2013.
Total Expenditures Requested for 2012 = $3.729 Trillion
Total Expenditures “Actual” for 2012 = $3.538 Trillion
Actual difference between requested and actual = $191 Billion Less Than Requested.
Now for the actual funds requested and collected for 2012.
Total Revenue Requested for 2012 = $2.627 Trillion.
Actual Revenue for 2012 = $2.449 Trillion.
A real shortfall of $178 Billion in 2012.
Now, we have 2013.
Total Expenditures Requested for 2013 = $3.803 Trillion or a $74 Billion increase over 2012.
Total Revenue Requested for 2013 = $2.902 trillion or a $275 billion increase over 2012.
Considering there is a request for an increase of $275 billion, how can an $85.4 billion sequester break the backs of so many according to the experts in Washington, especially the White House contingent? Here is the kicker. Even with the sequester, there will be an actual increase in spending of $238.4 billion for 2013.
So please, if someone out there without a far left or right slant can offer a legitimate reason on how the sequester will do so much harm, it will be greatly appreciated. As for my simple take on the matter, if everything reverted back to 2012 levels and included the actual increase in spending of $238.4 billion, overall, there is no shortfall due to the sequester. And if you follow the bouncing ball, the sequester will amount to the same in cuts for 10 years but at the same time, the increase in spending of $238 billion will continue at the same time. Are we being lied to again or not?
The constant stream of programs and services that “must suffer” because of the sequester and the constant parading of “victims” before the public seems to grow exponentially with each opportunistic political speech coming from Democrats and Republicans alike. Like it or not, the programs chosen to be cut were chosen not for anything other than political gain while ignoring the actual harm inflicted on programs and Americans where the impact would generate the most negative publicity and offer the most benefit in political gain was engineered by the “cocooned” few in Washington who will feel no pain whatsoever.
Well, for one thing Congress controls the expenditures and the issue is that the agencies can’t treat their budgets as reallocatable funds.
So we get government impeding government from getting more efficient – and also have to sit by and listen to them whine. What a wonderful way to run a country.
Maximum possible damage is what congress intended. What they didn’t count on was that no f*cks would be given.
Mark,
I do understand how budgets for agencies are established and reallocation is not an option but going back to the previous year’s budget or reducing it wouldn’t be or shouldn’t be considered reallocation. Or as this simpleton believes, if you have to operate on last year’s budget, then make it work – if you can and are not a total incompetent. 95% of something is much better than 100% of nothing. Many years ago my wife worked for the SC Department of Rehabilitation until she could no longer take the total inefficiency and waste that was a common practice.
Oh well, we get what we vote for don’t we?
Where is ‘Kathryn’s cheerleader response to Bart’s nonsense? Chop, chop ‘Kathryn. Is it just nonsense when it’s nonsense or does common sense have meaning?
What day of the Omer are we up to, Man?
Mab, not Man. Damn autocorrect.
35.
Leadership and humility are the concepts/emotions of the human experience you should be studying.
Mab, You are probably correct about that.
Wait, did I miss Lag b’Omer again?
Chop, Chop back at’cha Mab – Can’t speak for yourself – well, if you could put a coherent sentence together……As Emily Litella would say, “Never Mind”.
There were 815 million “passengers” who flew on domestic airlines last year. That would count each time a person boarded an airplane. For a typical round trip in which a person changed planes once each way that would count as 4 passengers. I can’t find anything on the number of individual persons who actually fly in a given year but I suspect the number is less than 100 million. Probably 10 million individual people account for 700 million “passengers”. But that’s just a wild guess. If anyone has a better estimate then I’ll change my thinking. But, IF that is correct then 2/3 of all Americans are essentially subsidizing the other 1/3 that fly each year.
BUT, let me be very clear, I’m OK with that. My tax dollars goes toward many programs that do not personally benefit me. Some I support, like the FAA. Others I find appalling, like enforcement of Federal drug laws. But regarding the issue at hand what I would like to see is this whole sequestor thing solved for EVERYONE, not just piecemeal for this or that group.
The problem with targeting air travel is that members of Congress, and their top donors, fly a lot. This whole sequester was billed as “the end of the world” but it’s been largely a big nothing. Maybe we should have some more across the board cuts. Obviously, the government is incapable of making the smart, targeted cuts that everyone seems to want.
Agreed. Congress and Federal agencies have proven incapable of making any meaningful “surgical” cuts. If we are serious at all about reducing the deficit and eventually paring the national debt, the “meat axe” approach seems to be the only avenue available.
Anyone else see/hear the news story about GE Capital not financing gun sales or manufacturing? It seems to me that someone at GE corporate should take a look at their own history, and familiarize themselves with some outstanding GE products…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minigun
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101683/
Silence, when you say you are a “defense contractor” — do you mean to say that you are a contractor of legal representation of [what ethics would call] criminals or of weapons?
I’m a warrior from the land of the midnight sun. With a Thompson gun for hire, fighting to be done.
Feinstein’s husband wins California high-speed rail contract… $35,000,000 per mile bid. FYI that comes out to $6,628.78 per foot.
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/senator-feinsteins-husband-wins-35-mil-per-mile-rail-contract-from-california/