|
Title: US gov paying airlines to not fly passengers Post by: hugolp on August 12, 2011, 07:32:40 PM New low in stupidity.
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2011/08/new-policy-government-now-pays-airlines.html Quote Mark Perry explains We're all familiar with various government agricultural policies over the years that have paid farmers not to farm, with the goal being to reduce the supply of crops like corn and soybeans and thereby support higher commodity farm prices... Now comes a story from the Associated Press of a new government scheme that might be called "Getting Paid for Not Flying Any Passengers": On some days, the pilots with Great Lakes Airlines fire up a twin-engine Beechcraft 1900 at the Ely, Nev., airport and depart for Las Vegas without a single passenger on board. And the federal government pays them to do it. Federal statistics reviewed by The Associated Press show that in 2010, just 227 passengers flew out of Ely while the airline got $1.8 million in subsidies. The travelers paid $70 to $90 for a one-way ticket. The cost to taxpayers for each ticket: $4,107. Ely is one of 153 rural communities where airlines get subsidies through the $200 million Essential Air Service program, and one of 13 that critics say should be eliminated from it." Maybe we could put Matt Damon and Mark Cuban on a committe to decide where else planes should fly without passengers. Title: Re: US gov paying airlines to not fly passengers Post by: miscreanity on August 13, 2011, 08:10:42 AM Title: Re: US gov paying airlines to not fly passengers Post by: BTC_Junkie on August 14, 2011, 10:07:28 PM This is under the ax in the new budget cuts passed last month.
In reality though, a lot of these airports could not survive without some sort of subsidy. Title: Re: US gov paying airlines to not fly passengers Post by: hugolp on August 16, 2011, 07:45:31 AM This is under the ax in the new budget cuts passed last month. Do you have a link? Quote In reality though, a lot of these airports could not survive without some sort of subsidy. Exactly, its pure pork. Title: Re: US gov paying airlines to not fly passengers Post by: BTC_Junkie on August 16, 2011, 09:20:52 PM This is under the ax in the new budget cuts passed last month. Do you have a link? Quote In reality though, a lot of these airports could not survive without some sort of subsidy. Exactly, its pure pork. My original source was a discussion on NPR last week (a little hard to link), but a quick Google search found this: http://www.vicad.com/news/2011/aug/08/bc_airport_cuts_080711_148004/?business ... not a great source but has a little info. Title: Re: US gov paying airlines to not fly passengers Post by: MatthewLM on August 16, 2011, 09:58:00 PM Don't the cabin crew get a little freaked out? :P
Title: Re: US gov paying airlines to not fly passengers Post by: hugolp on August 17, 2011, 05:55:24 AM My original source was a discussion on NPR last week (a little hard to link), but a quick Google search found this: http://www.vicad.com/news/2011/aug/08/bc_airport_cuts_080711_148004/?business ... not a great source but has a little info. Thanks. So they are reducing some of the subsudies but not stopping them. The most funny part is this: Quote However, the bill also includes language that gives Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood the authority to continue subsidized service to the 13 communities if he decides it's necessary, according to the Associated Press. Typical from politicians, we say we cut, but we dont really. |
