James,
I'm thinking inexpensive and rapid continental and intercontinental travel is one of the linchpins that sustains the world's continued economic development.
I tend to believe that certain public-benefit functions are so inherently valuable to the well-being of the populace that they should enjoy public financial support if necessary - Interstate highways, a solid military, libraries, public schools, etc. But, if the decision to support these functions was left to individual citizens many would choose to not fund them because they feel they don't personally benefit from them. There are retirees in my city who publicly chafe at the thought of their taxes going to fund the public schools - from their perspective they're not getting any benefit from it.
Seems to me this is 'well, I don't use it' approach is not really reasonable. Are there excesses? Yes. Are there inefficiently run public works or subsidies for private enterprises? Yes. But for the bulk of these supported functions there is national interest in maintaining the infrastructure, such as the airlines. What if the commercial phone system was not profitable? Or medical care? Just let them shrivel and disappear?
Should everyone in the country have a line-item tax payment form that lets them elect to not pay taxes toward the public services/government programs they do not approve of or feel they do not use?
I'd like to see these people live in the resulting country where everyone felt the same way and put their own personal interests first. Better round up a horse, cause there won't be any public transportation infrastructure to bitch about. No postal service, no law enforcement, no public education or legal system. Without those fundamental anchors of modern society/commercial stability there won't be enough economic activity to sustain wages for everyone, so there won't be money to -not- pay taxes with.
Steve
---- James A III wrote:
Remember the "bailouts"? Last I looked I was already payin' for part
of the flying publics security, fuel, aircraft, maintanence, airline
executive bonuses, airline bankruptcy lawyer fees with my tax bill. As
are we all.
No one forced me to fly, and I haven't in three years, but I'm payin'
for this crap anyway. Government sponsored mass transit of any form is
a BAD IDEA. When people opt to not fly due to further security
involvement the airlines who are on the bubble anyway need to die.
Those who fly need to bear the true cost of their travel w/o subsidies.
Who needs airtravel when you've got a KLR anyway??
Archive Quicksearch at:
http://www.angelfire.com/ut/moab/klr650_data_search.html
List sponsored by Dual Sport News at:
www.dualsportnews.com
List FAQ courtesy of Chris Krok at:
www.bigcee.com/klr650faq.html
Member Map at:
http://www.frappr.com/dsnklr650
Yahoo! Groups Links
Bob.
----- Original Message ----
From: Mike Frey
To: KLR List DSN_klr650@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 11 August, 2006 4:11:15 PM
Subject: Re: [DSN_KLR650] Re: NKLR: Anyone want to buy a plane with me?
I want to buy an airplane! Probably will, at some future point. The
allure of flying is as powerful as the desire to ride bikes, just quite
a bit more expensive.
How many list members would be willing to be subjected to retinal scans
for confirmation of your identity, background, etc., assuming that the
result is safer travel and more efficient passage through security?
Mike
1 hour from FAA checkride
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]