Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Airports without cancer scanners  (Read 15627 times)

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #15 on: February 04, 2013, 04:44:51 pm »

Federal subsidies.
You said, "even with."
Did you mean "without"?

No, I'm pretty sure he meant "with."  As in, even with being subsidized, they cannot make a real profit.

However, as Wolvenhaven notes, that's largely due to government interference.

If they tax you to death on one side, and then subsidize you on the other, you can stay in operation.  But you have to toe the line, or they pull the subsidy, and you collapse.  That's why they want everyone being taxed like crazy to pay for socialized medicine, or a dozen other things: if they cut you off, you are being taxed so heavily that you cannot afford to replace what they took away, so you are forever beholden to them.
Logged
"An armed society is a polite society" - this does not mean that we are polite because we fear each other.

We are not civilized because we are armed; we are armed because we are civilized..

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #16 on: February 04, 2013, 05:15:35 pm »

Even with no taxation they couldn't make it.
Logged

Ward Griffiths

  • First 1000
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1050
  • Canvas and Quicklime
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #17 on: February 04, 2013, 10:40:43 pm »

Just about every authorized passenger aircraft owned by a US airline can be converted in a few hours to military cargo use.  Supposedly this means the Congress actually has to declare war or something similar, but we've had a lot of "wars" since the last time Congress did that in 1941.
Logged
--
Ward Griffiths    wdg3rd@comcast.net

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.  (Denis Diderot)

TJames

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #18 on: February 05, 2013, 12:35:15 am »

Maybe they would work in a free market if not so much was spent on roads.
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #19 on: February 05, 2013, 03:09:44 pm »

No. You'd fly from airport to airport but lack short distance transportation.
The reason they don't make money is the whole system was grown through government intervention.
Even the TSA was originally a means to promote confidence to passengers.
Logged

Sam Adams

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 550
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #20 on: February 05, 2013, 03:44:28 pm »

No. You'd fly from airport to airport but lack short distance transportation.
The reason they don't make money is the whole system was grown through government intervention.
Even the TSA was originally a means to promote confidence to passengers.

  We all know the tsa has nothing to do with safety and didn,t originally. Its just an expanding federal police force in your County and town soon. Airlines do make $$ off of frieght and mail. But probably not that much. How much do you think airlines are subsidized, completely or operate tax free, and tax free fuel?
Logged

TJames

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #21 on: February 05, 2013, 10:30:05 pm »

No. You'd fly from airport to airport but lack short distance transportation.
The reason they don't make money is the whole system was grown through government intervention.
Even the TSA was originally a means to promote confidence to passengers.


Like the movie Slipstream.

What I meant to say is that people would spend money on what they think they need. NASA has been working on an automated ATC system that may increase air traffic exponentially. Maybe the free market would have done that. Maybe the free market would allow more air and surface travail at the same price. All I can say is maybe.
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #22 on: February 06, 2013, 06:10:41 pm »

If it had developed outside the scope of government intervention, maybe.
But too many 'maybes' to determine at this moment in the timeline.
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #23 on: February 06, 2013, 06:46:54 pm »

No. You'd fly from airport to airport but lack short distance transportation.
The reason they don't make money is the whole system was grown through government intervention.
Even the TSA was originally a means to promote confidence to passengers.

  We all know the tsa has nothing to do with safety and didn,t originally. Its just an expanding federal police force in your County and town soon. Airlines do make $$ off of frieght and mail. But probably not that much. How much do you think airlines are subsidized, completely or operate tax free, and tax free fuel?
Actually the TSA was a means to regain confidence of passengers in the airlines.
Logged

TJames

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #24 on: November 24, 2013, 05:23:02 pm »

So what do you think you will do when the economy rejects the dollar? The airports will connect to whoever can pay.
Logged

ccrader

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #25 on: November 27, 2013, 07:04:26 pm »

It's impossible to judge whether something that exists now would exist absent the government. After all, the economy is so state controlled, especially in transportation, that nothing has really been put to the market test.
That being said, the current cost of flying might be too high (from taxes) or too low (from subsidies). But regardless of what the price would end up being, it's the fastest transportation we have and I'm sure that some people would be willing to pay for it.
However, flying in a full 747 gets about 100 miles per gallon per person. Not sure how expensive their particular fuel is, so I'm not sure how economically efficient of an option it is.
But in high school my friend's dad had a small plane, and he flew us across Nevada. It couldn't have been too expensive. They did okay but they certainly weren't rich. It's possible that air travel would continue in this form.
Logged

TJames

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #26 on: November 28, 2013, 08:34:03 am »

I think silver has a potential to jump in value as fiat currencies collapse. Many of the mines have gone dry and it is used in many throwaway products. However the first condition could change the second.
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #27 on: November 29, 2013, 06:25:55 am »

The economy will never reject the dollar. In fact, your making a comparison between the value of silver and the dollar in your post.
Logged

TJames

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #28 on: November 30, 2013, 09:32:26 pm »

The dollar is one fiat and maybe fiats will always exist but FRNs are the notes of government employees, who tend to be abusive.
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Airports without cancer scanners
« Reply #29 on: December 02, 2013, 06:31:44 pm »

A fiat is a government decree. The dollar is much more market than the previous standards. But its relative value is as an exchange medium.

Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
 

anything