Will Richmonders Subsidize JetBlue?

It never ceases to amaze how Richmond’s business elite, while espousing free markets, are at heart state capitalists, sort of like Lee Kwan Yew of Singapore.

The latest ripple: the business community has organized $600,000 in public money to go to a “Save Low Fares Richmond” campaign to keep carriers such as cheap fare carriers as JetBlue and AirTran from continuing to bolt from the capital city’s anemic airport.

Now comes the latest twist. JetBlue has the chutzpah to ask Greater Richmond to pay subsidies so that JetBlue will restart its now discontinued flights from Richmond to JFK Airport in New York. The carrier ended the flights in November because of low ridership. You heard that right — if Richmonders want cheap air service, the public will have to come up with millions of dollars to bankroll a private air carrier.

Richmond’s “behind-the-scenes” business elite such as Kim Scheeler, president and CEO of the Greater Richmond Chamber of Commerce, says he wants to sit down and talk with JetBlue whose CEO pitched the goofy subsidy idea. “If someone asked me to raise X million dollars, I’d be hard-pressed to do it, just because of the economy”

Just because of the economy? Whatever happened to the free market which all these denizens of Adam Smith say brings out the best, the most creative, the most robust ideas? Naturally, the Richmond Times-Dispatch floated the idea as its lead story on its front page to prepare the public for local and regional subsidies.

After all, its publisher, Thomas A. Silvestri, is also chairman of the Richmond Chamber and loves to work behind the scenes out of public view being a “Leader” and making decisions about public money. If the public has something to say, they can write a letter to the editor or attend one of Silvestri’s gong shows called “Public Square” which is another gimmick to make the public believe they are getting information and their voices are heard. From Silvestri’s point of view, it is a lot cheaper to hold these Oprah shows than hire real reporters to do real reporting given Media General’s penchant for valuing profit margins over public service.

The giant hypocrisy here is that the Richmond business elite and the politicians they back, such as soon to be House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, are all rock-ribbed, free market Republicans. We get to hear lots of speeches of how capitalism and the survival of the fittest is the best way to go.

Until it hurts their travel budgets, that is. Air travel in Richmond has been hitting major turbulence. The business elite expanded Richmond International Airport with more than $250 million in new terminals and parking lots. During the go-go economy of George W. Bush, low fare air carriers entered the Richmond market and broke the stranglehold on high prices demanded by U.S. Airways and Delta.

All was well for a few years. You could fly for a couple of hundred bucks instead of a cool thousand. But then the Bush economy blew up. In Richmond, chip-maker Qimonda shut down because of world chip trends. Bad management folded mass retailer Circuit City. The financial mess imploded LandAmerica. Racked by health-related lawsuits, Philip Morris split itself up into separate domestic and international firms. The former doesn’t travel as much because Philip Morris USA has consolidated cigarette making in Richmond after shutting plants in North Carolina in Kentucky. The international company makes higher tar and nicotine products for unsuspecting foreigners out of Switzerland.

This is a long winded way of saying that the free market economy, at least in Richmond, knocked the legs out of the rationale for low priced carriers.

In response, our free market local leadership is considering going the statist route, sort of like the USSR’s former Aeroflot or Lee Kuan Yew’s Singapore Airlines — government subsidies to help out business. They make the same arguments for higher speed rail, which will cost billions of dollars just so executives can zip to D.C.’s Union Station in 90 minutes rather than fight Interstate 95 traffic. And, supposed free market champions like Cantor work behind the scenes to get those government subsidies.

Another irony is that years ago, before 1978 airline deregulation, airlines had to serve secondary markets like Richmond. The government had some say over airfares. Our “Leadership” is very much against government reg (Cantor is always talking about “getting the government off our back.”) Yet, Richmond’s current predicament is very much a result of dereg and now some out there expect the public to pay subsidies to airlines. The logic here is so skewed it is painful to contemplate.

Somehow, the public seems left out of the deal-making. But they can always go to a Public Square.

Peter Galuszka


ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)




Comments


Comments

72 responses to “Will Richmonders Subsidize JetBlue?”

  1. Yep. Your column is spot-on. I hope it gets into print soon.

    A couple of points to consider:

    Buses and trains are more energy efficient than planes (and electric bicycles are more energy efficient than electric cars, but I digress).

    When it comes to transportation, Richmond will talk about bringing new service until it threatens the status quo. For example, the local media will highlight efforts to bring new rail service, but downplay the delays to the current service created by CSX at Acca trainyard.

    RIC has always been a hotbed of Republican hypocrisy. But when it comes to appointments from the City to the Commission, I think Silver and I may be the only ones who have ever objected to an appointee during public comment at City Council- most like because, as El Amin once put it- the fix is already in at that point.

    Some of these same corporate suites are behind the downtown CenterStage white elephant also. If they can't handle the sunshine, they will try to move subsidies into the shadows as was done with CenterStage.

  2. Accurate Avatar

    For what it's worth – in Eugene Oregon, the city did the same thing. The ONLY carrier flying in and out of there was United. The ridership had dropped to where the airline wasn't making any money flying out of that airport. Sure enough the city didn't want to lose a 'major airline', which appears to be a way that cities show how 'big' they are. So the city coughed up some money (around $400K as I recall) to get the airline to stay. Eventually, a small commuter airline agreed to take over the routes that United was flying (the smaller airline would be flying out of a different airport) so that subsidy eventually went away. Eugene did a similar stunt with Delta for a while, and while Eugene does not have a 'direct' subsidy to Delta anymore, in exchange for "giving up the subsidy", Eugene agreed to pour a mere $200K (instead of the $400K subsidy) into advertising Delta's flights from Eugene to Salt Lake City.

    In Houston we have two major airports, one is international with the major airline being Continental. The other airport will be turning into an international airport within the next 3 years. The smaller airport's major carrier is SouthWest, which recently purchased AirTran which does international flights, thus the pressure to turn Hobby Airport (the 2nd and smaller airport) into an international airport). We've had airlines switch airports (it's cheaper to use Hobby than Bush International) and/or drop coming to Houston all together (although being the 4th largest city in the US, there is a lot of commerce and travel that takes place here).

    Again, yes, I'm a free enterprise guy. If the airline can't make it here then it's a business decision to leave. As seen in Eugene Oregon if there is enough of a demand and it can be met with a profit, eventually someone will come along and fill the demand. It's stupid to use taxpayer money just keep a certain prestige because you have carrier "X" flying in and out of your airport.

  3. Accurate Avatar

    To Scott –
    As for your buses and trains comment. It becomes a matter of time and convience plus prestige. Both buses and trains take longer to go from point A to point B, so the question that a business person asks is what is the cost of the time worth.

    Trains REALLY annoy me as people tout them as a great alternative to planes but they are not. About the ONLY place that they beat planes and buses (or even cars) is that they move more using less fuel. BUT – if the tracks get screwed up (a train wreck or whatever makes the tracks unusable) the train is stuck; you ain't going ANYWHERE. With planes, if your original destination can't take your plane you go to another destination nearby and work on it from there. If the freeway gets bogged down, your bus or car can find other roads to get to the destination. In fact, typically when the train has problems we DO shuttle folks around on those cursed buses. But it's prestige, not common sense that run trains. A business person coming in on a plane or train is 'cool' but coming in on a bus? Not 'cool' – I love trains for moving freight, they are out of thier element when it comes to moving people.

  4. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    If the business executives who utilize the low-fare airlines want to subsidize JetBlue, let them — *with their own money.* The idea of asking for public dollars (assuming that's what they have in mind), raised by taxing Richmond-region residents generally, including those who don't fly and would receive no benefit from retaining JetBlue, is odious.

  5. "they (trains) move more using less fuel"

    My bet is that this will become increasingly important, to the point that it beats out timing and prestige. There is a reason that railroad stocks are doing relatively well right now.

    The one thing that beats trains on energy efficiency is by boat. Look for a push for more barge traffic also, though I am not sure if fuel prices will get so bad that we will start re-digging canals (Anyone remember "Canal Johnny" skit from old Saturday Night Live?)

  6. Anonymous Avatar

    Sounds like the Richmond NUR needs Citizen Media to help voters and buyers understand their own best interests.

    On the issue of transport effeciency:

    Long ago Prof. Risse pointed out that transport is a waste. It gets people and goods from where they are to where the want / need to be.

    Regional Resilency will reduce demand for all transport. And that is a good thing.

    Observer

  7. well.. Peter really got to the NUB of some of the ideology behind the national kerfuffle and it boils down to this:

    businesses – that produce jobs an employ people are entitled to special tax treatment – even subsidies that individuals who are not contributing anything and mostly taking – are not "entitled" to.

    Of course, figuring out how much of special consideration for a given economic "benefit" is more the stuff of "belief" than hard calculations.

    So.. we subsidize the ports, we subsidize stadiums, even highways because we say they "contribute" though we are often not precise and just as often .. not wanting to be precise.

    In the case of the Richmond Airport.. I ask this question.

    how much would you cost on a per-capita basis to keep Jet Blue here and would that amount to worth it to most who would pay it?

    Surely there must be some way to do this.

  8. Groveton Avatar

    I don't know the specifics of the Richmond / Jet Blue debate. However, I think most of the people providing comments are missing a big point… Only 54% of wage earners pay taxes. Think about that.

    Start with the population of the United States.

    Subtract people under 18 and retirees.

    Subtract most college and graduate school students.

    Subtract the unfortunate people who would like to work but can't find a job.

    Subtract the people who have decided not to work (stay at home moms and dads for example).

    That leaves wager earners.

    Now, subtract 46% of that group.

    That leaves wage earning taxpayers.

    But … it's worse than that. The top 1% of wage earners pay 40+% of US income taxes. The top 5% pay 60+% and the top 10% pay 71%.

    Let's say those statistics also hold for local taxes in Richmond. The Richmond NUR has 1.2M people. 1% of 1.2M is 12,000. 12,000 Richmonders pay 40% of the taxes. 120,000 pay 71% of the taxes.

    Let's start with the practical …

    The top 1% of wage earners don't consume 40% of the costs. They are "net surplus citizens". Attracting and retaining people in that category is a big part of local and state government strategy. Otherwise, the 99% of people who pay 60% of the taxes will have to pay almost 100% of the taxes. In other words, if that 1% moves somewhere else taxes for the remaining 99% go up 67%.

    Regular airline service is a big deal to many of the 1%. And it is definitely enough of an issue to relocate. Especially when you only have to move about 75 miles north to be with easy driving distance of Dulles Airport.

    Now on to the philosophical…

    "The idea of asking for public dollars (assuming that's what they have in mind), raised by taxing Richmond-region residents generally, including those who don't fly and would receive no benefit from retaining JetBlue, is odious.".

    So, why is it not odious for 1% of the population to pay 40% of society's costs?

    People can piss and and moan about the wealth distribution in America all day long. There is some validity in that pissing and moaning (although not nearly as much as most people want to believe).

    However, until the wealth distribution materially changes, localities and states will compete to attract the 1% who pay 40% of the taxes (or the 5% who pay 60% or the 10% who pay 71%).

    Part of that competition is not pricing yourself out of the air travel market. Volkswagen NA could have located where ever they wanted. They located in Fairfax County. Why? Because it's so close to Washington, DC? No. Because it's close to Dulles Airport. There were certainly other reasons as well but being close to a major international gateway airport is a big deal.

    Think about it …

    Boston (Logan)
    Long Island (JFK)
    Philadelphia (sort of)
    Fairfax / Loudoun County (Dulles)
    Charlotte (sort of)
    Atlanta (Hartsfield)
    Miami
    Chicago (O'Hare, +1.5 hours to Europe)

  9. re: " Only 54% of wage earners pay taxes."

    how many ways can we say WRONG WRONG WRONG!

    I'm quite sure you did not mean to include FICA taxes nor property taxes or sales taxes or the dozens of other taxes that virtually everyone pays.

    So go back and correct that egregious error – and go from there again.

    So, let's start over – with the real truth – not the right-wing mangled version.

  10. Tell em to go to wwwpickabusdotcom. (not a real link)

    You have all kinds of express WiFi bus service companies available out of Richmond with rates starting as low as a buck one way if you book early.

    Rail is ok if you are doing an overnight to say Chicago. Longer than that is kind of tedious.

  11. The carrier ended the flights in November because of low ridership. You heard that right — if Richmonders want cheap air service, the public will have to come up with millions of dollars to bankroll a private air carrier.

    ===================================

    I think Scott would find that a full airplane is more energy efficient than a Bus that is a quarter full, on a per passenger mile basis. Even if that is not the case, energy efficiency isn't the whole story here because the speeds are vastly different.

    And it is probably not a good idea to argue against subsidies for airplanes, using trains as an example. I'll even concede that the THEORETICAL efficiency of busses and trains is higher, but in practice,it just isn't the case.

    Anyway, energy efficency isn't the only measure of what is best: you would have to come up witha composite index of speed, fuel use, maintenance costs, operating costs, labor costs, and infrastructure costs to have any valid comparison.

    Subsidy terms such as Jet blue proposes are not unusual. I believe that Colgan air flies routes that are subsidized, or that at one time were subsidized. I had heard that when IBM had a plant in Manassas, IBM bought seats on Colgan flights to upstate new york (Armonk), whether they used the seats or not. It was better and more for them to subsidize Colgan than to have to run their own plane or charter on demand.

    At one time, dozens of cities had air service only becasue it was subsidized by the feds. That program shrank some during airline regulation, but I believe it is still in use on some routes.

    So the problem Richmond has to face is the same as IBM: whether it is better to take a small loss in providing a subsidy, or take a larger loss through lack of service or more expensive service.

    IBM eventually sold the Manassas plant and their Problem with air fare went away. Or Maybe IBM went away BECAUSE of the problem with air transport.

    One thing is for sure, the airline won't operate at a loss. They will pull out even if it means the city suffers a larger loss.

    At one time I had a conversation with the economic development director in Winchester. He described potential business owners who flew in to Dulles, and then DROVE to Winchester to see a business sight. Their mind was made up before they ever arrived.

    As a rule, subsidies are abad idea, but not all subsidies are always bad.

  12. it's worse than that. The top 1% of wage earners pay 40+% of US income taxes. The top 5% pay 60+

    =================================

    Yeah,and the other side of that is this: If I earn $110k I earn more than 95% of the taxpayers.

    But the 4% above me earn 95% of the income. And they probably control 99% of the capital.

    If the top 5% are only paying 60% of taxes, then theyare getting a huge bargain as it is.

  13. So.. we subsidize the ports, we subsidize stadiums, even highways because we say they "contribute" though we are often not precise and just as often .. not wanting to be precise.

    =============================

    Heh Heh Heh. that sounds like me.

    So Everyone in the city is going to be subsidizing the flights. Give Everyone in the city a chit, which is good for 1% of a flight, or some number, such taht it averages out to the cost of the subsidy.

    People who never fly will unload thaer chits, cheap. People who fly will buy the cheap chits which they can use to discount their cost of a ticket.

    When the price of a thousand chits euals the price of the ticket you know the subsidy is no longer needed, and until then you ave a strong price signal as to what the city thinks the subsidy is worth.

  14. "At one time I had a conversation with the economic development director in Winchester….."

    Sad but true.

    Then they always ask the inevitable, "Why couldn't I expand my company someplace west of Dulles like Western Loudoun County or Clarke County?"

    We all know the answer to that one.

  15. Rbv:

    I don't understand your comment.

    Winchester is west of Dulles. It has a nice airport with a brand new terminal, courtesy of the fed (us). But no commercial air service. Nice big highway.

    Winchester used to make money off apples.

    ???

  16. Well, let's make sure we're thinking the same thing.

    You said, "Their mind was made up before they ever arrived."

    Are you saying they chose Winchester as a result of the drive or they chose someplace else because of the drive?

  17. They chose someplace else. Presumably, someplace with air serviceh

  18. Anonymous Avatar

    I think Groveton's point on taxes is quite significant. Every American adult should pay some minimal level of federal income tax. They would gain a different perspective of government if they were helping to pay for it.

    Peter's original points are also significant in my view. We need to stop subsidizing businesses with tax dollars. We're spending billions on the Silver Line, which is projected to serve only 17% of all trips to and from Tysons Corner by 2030 and that is optimistic. Had the route been left in the median of the Dulles Toll Road as was originally planned, we would already have rail operating to Dulles for a lot less money.

    TMT

  19. Groveton Avatar

    FICA – the Federal Insurance Contributions Act payment? I thought liberals felt this was a an insurance premium, not a tax.

    Which one is it LarryG? Is it a payment for services to be rendered in the future or is it a tax?

    By any reasonable measure a tax is only a tax when you pay more than you get back. A person filing a state income tax return may have had witholding taxes taken out of his or her paycheck during the year. However, if $100 was withheld and $110 is the refund – there was no tax.

    LarryG – are you finally admitting that FICA is nothing more than a tax on us all? Are you finally agrring with me that FICA is no different than income taxes because the benefits are mere promises made by politicians?

  20. Groveton Avatar

    "If the top 5% are only paying 60% of taxes, then theyare getting a huge bargain as it is.".

    How does this square with the endless prattle I read on this blog about "user pays"? Are the top 5% really using 60% of the government's services or is "user pays" really a different way of saying "somebody othen than me pays"?

  21. FICA is a mandatory TAX which is used to provide insurance for those that pay the tax.

    And YES, you can get more back than you paid into it – the SAME WAY you can get more back from any insurance company than you paid in premiums.

    but if you read up on FICA, SS, and Medicare – you will see quite clearly that they are characterized as INSURANCE that you MUST PAY FOR via a tax.

    In other words, the Federal govt can make you buy insurance..

  22. Groveton Avatar

    TMT:

    Ed Risse has been right all along. America's future is de-population of rural and small town areas and denser population of areas today called city and suburb.

    The jobs in rural and small town America just aren't these. RBV's point about Winchester is a good one. So is Hydra's. Winchester has changed from a small town built around apple orchards to a small manufacturing center. Then, the manufacturing left. But a lot of the people stayed. First, they tried to attract new manufacturing. But that didn't work. Now what? I'd say more people are going to move looking for jobs in places like Fairfax County. Fairfax's density will rise and we'll be damn glad that we have an extensive mass transit rail system.

    Let's say the US will hit 400M people in 50 years. Where will they live? What will a population density map of the US look like?

    Then, tell me why mass transit in a NUR is such a bad idea.

  23. there is no inconsistency here with "user pays".

    If you buy insurance – you pay for it.

    that's user pays.

    You're confusing insurance with other things.

    " In the United States, Social Security refers to the federal Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) program"

    " The Supreme Court has established that no one has any legal right to Social Security benefits. The Court decided, in Flemming v. Nestor (1960), that "entitlement to Social Security benefits is not a contractual right"."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States)

    part of the problem we have is people are uninformed, illiterate about the definition and legal purpose of Social Security and Medicare.

    They are, in effect, mandatory insurance that pay benefits but neither is a fund that you own rights to.

  24. Groveton Avatar

    FICA is a magical beast. Is it like my 401(k) where I put in money in the hope of getting back money later? If so, FICA is not a tax. Or, is it like the sales tax I pay when I have lunch at Chipoltle's? If so, it is a tax.

    You decide LarryG.

  25. Groveton Avatar

    "there is no inconsistency here with "user pays".".

    The inconsistency is with hydra's point that 1% of the wage earners paying 60% of the taxes is a deal for the 1% because they control a lot of the wealth.

    That is the opposite of user pays.

  26. well no.. Groveton's point did not specify income taxes – he specified ALL taxes and that's not true.

    Everyone pays taxes, significant taxes on the purchase of goods and services as well as FICA taxes.

    We have a progressive tax system.

    Whatever the people at the bottom pay, with a progressive system, it will ripple up the ladder.

    If you lower the effective tax rate across the board – like we did with the Bush Tax cuts- it also results in the people at the lower levels receiving the same tax cuts which in some cases puts them at zero or even lower – they get rebates.

    Now… I don't have a problem with a debate on the merits of the progressive tax rate but I think if that is what we are saying, in effect, we ought to say so.

    but the psuedo wet dreams that the right is experiencing right now is going to come a cropper when they realize that everyone to the left of their political views comprise 70% of the nation and their fantasies will continue to be the stuff of dreams.

    The key word here is "govern".

    you have to "govern".

    the right will never get to "rule" and put in place their ideas as-is.

    and if you don't want to govern, then your time on task is not going to be fun.

  27. re: rural-to-urban. I'm in agreement with all on this although I will tell you that the apples I buy at WalMart are from Winchester and environs which means they still have that industry.

    I'll also point out that the area from Harrisonburg to Winchester grow enormous flocks of chickens and turkey for the Washington/Richmond market.

    There's also a lot of cattle farming in those areas.

    Rural is not going to go away.

    but it won't support growth.

    The kids will have to move to urban to make a living but without a good education – they'll end up doing fairly menial work.

    Education is the key to the future of rural kids.

  28. Yet, Richmond's current predicament is very much a result of dereg and now some out there expect the public to pay subsidies to airlines. The logic here is so skewed it is painful to contemplate.

    ==================================
    I think the Deregulation plan and the subsidiy program are different. I beleieve, but I'm not certain that there are still a number of subsidized flights to cities like Augusta, Maine. Political plum, maybe, but its hard to imagine a state capital with no air service.

    Funding for the subsidy program has been severely cut, since deregulation, but it still exists.

    •In Jamestown, N.Y., and Bradford, Pa., both 77 miles from Buffalo Niagara International Airport, Colgan Air gets $2.4 million a year for 38 weekly round trips between the two cities and Pittsburgh International Airport.

    "Colgan's 34-seat planes carried an average of four passengers per flight in 2006 — an 89% vacancy rate."

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-12-30-cheap-flights_N.htm

    Nor is that all, Airports such as Augusta are owned by the state, and mail contracts often serve as a kind of off the books subsidy to airlines.

  29. ….mandatory insurance….

    there is nothing magical about the age 65.

    no one has said that it would be "unconstitutional" to push that age to 68 or 70 – right?

    so why would it be "unconstitutional" to push Medicare to 60 or even 55 as long as enough FICA tax was collected to pay for it?

    that would be "user pays" right?

  30. There are still apples in winchester, but the industry is a shadow of its former self. also, just because the aples are shipped from wunchester, doesn't mean they come from there.

  31. the apples come from Winchester and environs.. they are the smaller, non red-delicious versions.

    If you take a little tour of the area west of Winchester – you'll see quite a bit of the land in agrarian production.

    check out a GOGGLE satellite view and you'l see that it's fields in use – not forest.

    I don't know that it's a shadow of it's former self as much as it cannot sustain much growth.

    There just are not that many jobs and the ones they have are more mechanized – like many jobs around the world.

  32. with regard to subsidies – I do't see a problem with offering it to citizens via referenda and have it sunset so it has to be renewed every few years.

    If people don't mind paying an extra 5 bucks a year in taxes to keep Jet Blue in the area – then why not?

    I think the idea that the city fathers can make that decision is more problematical unless we have some serious rules about what can and cannot be subsidize and by how much.

  33. Sh-t, I am still waiting for the Richmond leadership to stand up to the local Renaissance corporate cabal and rescind the City meals tax increase that was put in for CenterStage.

    Since no one ever seems to really want to talk about transportation (though yes, a quarter-filled bus is still more energy efficient than the typical filled airline flight), lets talk tax code and government policy.

    Here's my quid pro quo (website to be up soon):

    Flat income tax (with 30k and below exempted) in exchange for (following the example of THE REST OF THE WORLD with) universal single payer health care.

    Let's get the paper-pushing lawyers, health insurance, accountants, and IRS agents out of work and put more doctors, engineers, and PRODUCTIVE people to work.

    In addition to that quid pro quo, end these idiotic foreign wars and occupations, bring the troops and drones home, and instead get the NSA, CIA and Interpol to earn their money by hunting terrorists undercover (that is, if they can give up sham diplomacy and coups in Honduras).

    Pass a Constitutional Amendment that excludes corporations from the same First Amendment rights as citizens. That should yank some of their lobbyists from the D.C. trough and improve the national media.

    In addition to those ideas, use Nader's suggestion of a penny tax on every security trade to pay down the national debt (and bring the banksters to heel by tracking their plays).

    Raise the Social Security age gradually since people live longer now and explain to the oldster millionaires that SS will no longer be available for their caddy fees- its not a pension program- its a welfare program for those that truly need it.

    Have I exploded all of Hydra's heads yet?

  34. How does this square with the endless prattle I read on this blog about "user pays"? Are the top 5% really using 60% of the government's services or is "user pays" really a different way of saying "somebody othen than me pays"?

    =================================

    This is the kind of question we need to resolve, and such questions can be answered, but we must first agree on the procedures to be used to search for the answers. then you apply the porcedures and an answer comes out – whether you agree with the answer or not, you agreed to the method for the search.

    Some people would argue that a big chunk of our spending is for the military. Wealthy people have a lot more to protect, and so the protection they get is worth a lot more than the protection a street person gets.

    Even if you assume the statistical value of life is the same for both of them.

    The airline subsidy article points out As Groveton has, that those subsidies mainly benefit the wealthy and powerful, for whom time is money. Imagine how much less Groveton would make if he had to take the train and boat everywhere he goes.

    Again, wealthy people would have much higher tax rates, except they also have access to many of the best tax breaks. Even the home mortgage deduction is not taken by many homeowners, because they don't make enough to bother itemizing. If you count tax breaks as a government service, then wealthy people use a lot of government services.

    All that aside, the prattle we hear here about user pays is mostly just as you say, code for having someone else pay. Again, we have to figure out what the argument is. If we cut road traffic to 10% of what it is today, we would still need roads, and they would still need to be paid for.

    Part of the value of a road is the opportunity to use it, even if you seldom make use of it. If you don;t beleive it, take a ride on the Cankamangus higway or Rising to the Sun highway. You will pay for them all of your life, but if youever have the opportunity to drive them, even once, it will be worth every penny.

    Before we can figure out who pays for what, we first need to agree on who is getting what, and what it is worth to them.

    Consider gated communities. These are places where wealthy people have agreeed to pay more taxes to their own private government, for services and amenities the regualr government does not provide.

    I would still maintain you cannot rationally support subsdized rail and blast subsidized air in the same sentence. There has to be some measure of what a trp is worth, and then we can better compare the amount of subisidy, otherwise we are shouting down a hollow tube.

    At the end of the day, you have to get money where it is, or where it is created. Mostly that means transactions, and earning income is one kind of transaction. tere are lots of other transactons we do not tax: we tax if you uy meat for dinner, but we don't tax if you hire a hunter.

    Sometimes we tax non-transactions, which makes no sense to me. We tax if you own a car or a house, but we don't tax if you own $30k or $300k in cash. That is a huge tax break for the wealthy, if we are going to tax property as well as transactions.

    Overall, it's not clear to me that if you cold design a system that was "fair" that wealthy people wouldn't wind up taxed even more.

    Consider that if you taxed poor people exactlythe same as rich people, you would tax a lot of them right off the income map. Then you would have to turn around and give them assistance (which would be a taxable transaction, same as social security income is). The result would be that ALL tax rates would ratchet up and prooo people would still "pay" less on a net basis because much of their income would be in reverse taxes.

    What is our option? "Either you pay the taxes you owe, or we put you out of your misery?" make inability to pay taxes and still live a capital crime?

  35. "Consider that if you taxed poor people exactly the same as rich people, you would tax a lot of them right off the income map."

    Go back to my quid pro quo-

    If you exclude the first 30k of income of a flat tax, you protect the truly poor. More taxes wold be more efficiently collected with the flat percentage tax on everyone else.

    Universal single payer would end a lot of misery for a lot of people in part because they would not go broke trying to pay for health care. Right now, paying for health care creates an incredible amount of bankruptcies in America.

  36. "I would still maintain you cannot rationally support subsdized rail and blast subsidized air in the same sentence."

    And I maintain you are wrong, simply because of the relative energy efficiency of passenger rail vs. airline.

  37. How does this square with the endless prattle I read on this blog about "user pays"? Are the top 5% really using 60% of the government's services …

    =================================

    I notice you didn't argue against the idea that the taxes paid are still small compare to the money they make.

    Grovetons % of taxes argument is an example of innumeracy.

    And so is my counter example, done so deliberately to show how silly the argument is.

    If the economy absent taxes were a static pie, we would have to first figure out how big a slice we need to take out for government, and then divvy up whats left, with the most ambitious and better prepared getting the biggest slices.

    A better analogy would be a long triangular funnel with a bunch of spouts. At the narrow end the spouts are small and less goes through, At the fat end the spouts are large and a lot goes through.

    Rich people populate the fat end.

    The width of the funnel across the top represents opportunity, and the fat end has a lot more of it. The width and the height of the funnel have to get bigger as the economy grows, but so do the spouts, otherwise the system overflows.

    The trick is to adjust the size of the spouts (taxes), so that the water level in the funnel neither rises to fast or too slow AND so that the water doesn't rapidly rush to one end or the other.

    In doing that, a little bit of change in the diameter of the big spouts makes a lot more difference than the same percent change in the smaller spouts.

    EMR will note that in this analogy the water has to come from somewhere. Part of that is the contribution from natural capital, as EMR calls it.

    I assume that the water that goes through the spouts is spent and recycled, which is Larry's suggestion that tax money spent is not wasted.

    We expend our labor and captal to increase the height and diameter of the rim, which generates more "pressure" in the economy and more taxes through the spouts. Rich people populating the fat end produce relatively more rim than people at the narrow end. however the height at the narrow end is just as important as the height at the fat end.

    Our global neighbors are building their own funnels and conflict erupts when one funnel impinges or overshadows another.

    Now, if you buy that analogy, then the mathematics of controlling the system are a little more complicated than the top five percent pay 60% of taxes and earn 90% of income.

  38. And I maintain you are wrong, simply because of the relative energy efficiency of passenger rail vs. airline.

    ==================================

    Energy efficiency is only one part of cost, and it is cost that represents the total use of resources of all kinds.

    As far as pasengers go, trains are POTENTIALLY more efficient than cars, but if you consider the Metro system, it wastes huge amounts of energy by moving empty seats around all day. Cars waste space because they sit parked all day, so you trade one for the other.

    In actual practice then, trains are not so efficient, and their costs per passenger mile (the true reflection of resources used) reflects this. On a passenger mile basis trains rarely do much better than airplanes, even if they use less fuel, and the fare comparison for train and plane to Boston reflects that.

    Trains claim to move a ton of freight 400 miles on one gallon of fuel. On that basis, it ought to be 100 times cheaper to ship by rail than by truck, but the price difference is no where near that.

    I like trains and travel on them about once a year. But the benefits of trains are wildly overstated and mis-stated. for example, Metro has a bunch of track inspectors that work at naight, and they probably live in the suburbs and drive to work at METRO. From a system viewpoint that is a hidden energy cost of METRO. It does not show up in Metros ENERGY bill, but it des show up in total METRO costs, because those guys have to be paid enough to cover all the resources they consume in supporting METRO.

    What your argument does is claim a value for fuel, that isn't reflected in the price. To you that is an unpriced externality. We may not know or agree on the cost of that externalityis, or the cost of government subsidies, but whatever they are TC=PC+EC+GC still holds true.

  39. If you exclude the first 30k of income of a flat tax, you protect the truly poor. More taxes wold be more efficiently collected with the flat percentage tax on everyone else.

    =================================

    I think that is pretty much what I said. You exclude the first $30K so you don;t tax them off the map. And the ones at the very bottom still need reverse tax payments.

    Here is the problem. As soon as you agree not to tax the first 30k, it is no longer a flat tax, is it?

    We are no longer arguing WHETHER the rich should pay more, we agree on that. Now we are arguing over how to figure out how much more.

    As I said, we have no procedures in place that will ever allow that agreement to happen. In fact, we can see from observing congress that we have procedures to guarantee it won't happen.

  40. Time is money, especially for high value freight. I cold buy flowers from Columbia and ship them by train, but they wouldn't be worth much when they got here.

    If I have a truck full of high dollar parts, I could lose as much in interest waiting to be loaded on the train than I would save by shipping by train. AND every train trip pretty much requires two trucks. From a systems viewm you have to measure the same shipments, door to door.

    Then you discover the value added for trains isn't all that much, except for niche markets.

  41. Groveton Avatar

    Scott:

    "Flat income tax (with 30k and below exempted) in exchange for (following the example of THE REST OF THE WORLD with) universal single payer health care.".

    Tell me the flat tax percentage but conceptually … good by me.

    "In addition to that quid pro quo, end these idiotic foreign wars and occupations, bring the troops and drones home, and instead get the NSA, CIA and Interpol to earn their money by hunting terrorists undercover (that is, if they can give up sham diplomacy and coups in Honduras).".

    Good by me.

    "Pass a Constitutional Amendment that excludes corporations from the same First Amendment rights as citizens. That should yank some of their lobbyists from the D.C. trough and improve the national media.

    In addition to those ideas, use Nader's suggestion of a penny tax on every security trade to pay down the national debt (and bring the banksters to heel by tracking their plays).

    Raise the Social Security age gradually since people live longer now and explain to the oldster millionaires that SS will no longer be available for their caddy fees- its not a pension program- its a welfare program for those that truly need it.".

    Good, good and good.

    Excellent thinking.

    Can't wait to see your web site.

    One bit of advice – use Word Press, not Google.

  42. Groveton Avatar

    "Grovetons % of taxes argument is an example of innumeracy.".

    Only in your mind.

    In my mind, it is an exercise in reality.

    The very, very few top wage earners pay very, very much of the total tax bill.

    Those wage earners are mobile.

    If Richmond doesn't have adequate airline service or if Fairfax County doesn't alleviate it's traffic congestion problems – those few tax payers who pay so much of the tax bill will leave.

    Then, those who remain will have to shoulder a higher tax burden or live with curtailed services.

    Hydra's math and Jim's indignation seems to forget two important points:

    Localities don't tax people who leave the locality.

    90% of the wage earners pay 29% of the income taxes. If the 10% who pay 71% leave, there will be a problem.

    Sorry boys, all taxpayers are not created equal. And the business case for subsidizing Lockheed Martin's move to Virginia was crystal clear. Crystal clear in numbers Hydra – simple, understandable numbers.

  43. I'm good with Scott's ideas also… surprised that Groveton would bit on the single payer idea.

    I've always felt that FICA is essentially a forced savings program to make sure that taxpayers don't end up paying for those who won't set aside money for their retirement and health care when they retire.

    …and it needs to be actuarially in balance….and the pay-outs needs to match the contributions – no subsidies from the general fund.

    ..just adjust and index it to keep it in perpetual balance and solvent.

    Many conservatives like the flat tax and I'm not opposed to it but my understanding is that if it is truly flat that it will have to be much higher – that some say.

    I'd like to see the flat tax combined with a consumption tax and basic necessities exempted from either.

    I'd like to see corporate campaign money either outlawed or require full disclosure – no anonymously funded media ads.

    SS/Medicare/similar – all salary subjected to FICA, index the retirement age to life expectancy and means test – non-essential medical equipment and services.

    I still would sign on to either of the current balanced budget plans or a hybrid or any mix/match replacement – as long as it achieves the same goal – a balanced budget and enough extra to pay down the debt in a decade or so.

    I'm still shocked by Groveton supports single-payer health care.

  44. re: all taxpayers not created equal…

    corollary : all regions are not created equal.

    Low taxes and no traffic congestion is not want brings companies to NoVa.

    Lockheed Martin is here for one reason and if you took that reason away – you could have no traffic congestion, low taxes and world-class airports and Lockheed would be headed to wherever the Fed Govt and DOD had it's headquarters located.

    Richmond actually has much, much less traffic congestion and a lower cost of housing and many other things going for it but you can bet Lockheed Martin and many other companies have no interest in being in Richmond – with or without Jet Blue.

  45. Right now, paying for health care creates an incredible amount of bankruptcies in America.

    ================================

    Come on, you can do better than that.

    Not having health insurance AND paying for huge, sudden, unexpected or chronic healthcare out of pocket causes lots of bankruptcies.

    Your run of the mill ailments and sprained ankles are not causing bankruptcy, except for the very poor.

    We know that health care costs are rising, irrespective of how they are paid for. The benefits of better health care are also evident in longer life spans (Not a benefit to Social Security, though.) I think we cantake those as givens.

    Now the argument is how much to spread the risk, a middle or upper class bankruptcy has social costs,as we see in the housing crisis, so the question is how much personal and social risk do we want to spread from one case to another.

    Also notice that universl (and mandated) health insurance is not the same as unlimited health care. sooner or later we will have to address the cost health care vs the cost of dying care. we already do this, we just don't admit it.

    Universal and mandated insurance is also not the same as government insurance. If you happen to be a Senator, you know that government insurance is still a lot better.

  46. The very, very few top wage earners pay very, very much of the total tax bill.

    Those wage earners are mobile.

    If Richmond doesn't have adequate airline service or if Fairfax County doesn't alleviate it's traffic congestion problems – those few tax payers who pay so much of the tax bill will leave.

    ==================================

    I agree with this part of your argument with respect to the airlines and the true cost of losing thme.

    I was only referring to the (commonly repeated) part that says The top 1% of wage earners pay 40+% of US income taxes. The top 5% pay 60+% and the top 10% pay 71%

    By itself, I'd regard this as a misuse of statistical information because it is incomplete.

    I'm a lot less concerned that the top 1% pay 40% of taxes if they earn 50% of income.

    I'm also a lot less concerned if they pay 500% more taxes than the bottom 50% but they have 5000% more left over to live on after taxes.

  47. Tell me the flat tax percentage but conceptually … good by me.

    ================================

    Me too, only percentage of what? Income or transactions?

  48. In addition to those ideas, use Nader's suggestion of a penny tax on every security trade to pay down the national debt (and bring the banksters to heel by tracking their plays).

    ================================

    Why stop there, just make it all transactions. people will pay according to their participation in the economy.

  49. And the business case for subsidizing Lockheed Martin's move to Virginia was crystal clear. Crystal clear in numbers Hydra – simple, understandable numbers.

    ==================================

    No argument here. Subsidizing a move is a capital investment that returns a (projected) steam of income. Thats easy to figure out.

    A blank check for continuing operations is harder, and it needs continuing scrutiny to decide when it pays and when it no longer pays.

  50. re: " Subsidizing a move is a capital investment that returns a (projected) steam of income."

    ha ha ha

    WHERE does that "stream of income" come from?

    taxes, my boy.

    no, let me correct that.

    1.4 trillion in spending that we do not have taxes to pay for.

    We're printing money to pay incentives to Lockheed Martin who expects to make money off of government spending…

    and we strut to and fro talking about the "robust" NoVa economic engine.

    ha ha ha…

    NoVa is our tax dollars looking at you….

    If we balance the budget and cut the 1.4 trillion spending more than we have – NoVa will be the first to feel it.

    guaranteed.

  51. All true. but the poor sods that live near Ellis AFB and everyother godforsaken place the military spends will feel it too.

    I didnt see the Pentagon on the BRAC list.

    But there was some bruhaha about the MARC building. someting about not letting people in there until there is transit in place. Of course the lease is already signed…………..

  52. The Pentagon is not on the BRAC list and neither is Belvoir and Quantico nor the Navy Port at Hampton and probably never will be.

    However downsizing of some of the agencies and activities within each is likely if we actually do something about the deficit.

    As Scott said – we need to learn this lesson about getting ourselves involved in foreign military adventures – and the damage they do to our economy since we don't seem to want to pay the taxes needed to fund them but instead just print money and go into debt – all perfectly "patriotic" of course.

    I don't think it is THAT HARD to balance the budget. We'll all get stung a little but our problem is that we have not yet reconciled ourselves to the precarious fiscal position we are in.

    I note the abundant "ho-hum" response to the deficit commission proposals.

  53. Anonymous Avatar

    Here's a tax change I can support. Tax capital gains on the sale of assets held less than six months at a rate of 80%. Put the traders out of business. Cut the capital gains tax on assets held five years or more to zero. Reward people who invest for the long-term.

    I find the idea of stripping corporations, including labor unions, of a First Amendment right intriguing. If this were to proceed, it should be limited to campaign contributions. Everyone should be able to say or write whatever they want.

    Also, ban the bundling of campaign contributions. Groveton, Larry and I must be free to give to the candidates or causes of our choice, but there is no compelling reason to permit us to bundle our contributions.

    End tax-exempt status for foundations. There is no reason why a couple of GS-14s married to each other should be taxed as "rich" while Bill Gates is permitted to engage in tax-free activities through a foundation. I won't even discuss Henry Ford.

    Require 55% or 60% majority to pass a congressional spending bill. There would be a lot less spending and many fewer lobbyists.

    TMT

  54. I generally support TMT's ideas.. I'm more thrilled with some and less thrilled with others but would compromise.

    I'm sure Ray won't like the high tax on short term trading so I'd like to also hear from others on that idea.

    What I'd support on campaigns is any money from any source to any use – but all of it would have to go through a clearing-house escrow who would immediately post it to the internet.

    And before the money could be spent on Media – the Media would have verify the people paying for the AD back with the clearinghouse to prevent "laundering".

    Make violations felony corruption crimes with mandatory jail time.

    I'd like to ask also if a Presidential line item veto could take place like it does in Va – and only in effect when less than a 2/3 vote sent the bill to the President for Signature.

    Of course, we tried PayGO and we say how long that lasted.

  55. "They chose someplace else. Presumably, someplace with air serviceh"

    That's what I was saying.

    Winchester is too far west of Dulles if air service is a big part of your operation.

    As far as Apples go and the local economy out here….eh, well, there are still orchards but it's like all other types of agriculture….you really couldn't make a living if you had to mortgage the land. The big orchards have been in the same family for 5 or 6 generations.

    Same goes for Turkey's and Chicken's, although people still try to make a go of it with those.

    FYI…a vast, vast, majority of apples out here are grown for juice, apple sauce, vinegar, etc., not for putting in your fruit basket.

    Plus, as I understand it, the biggest threat to local apple growers is Chinese grown apples….they grow so much so cheaply that it forces the price down to the point where American growers can't compete.

  56. RBV is correct on all counts. Winchester is too far from Dulles. Winchester has a nice airport and plenty of industrial sites but no scheduled air service.

    Chinese apples hurt Winchester and Oregon. Winchester did have ethylene storage for apples, but they may have come from other areas.

    If you couldn't make a profit on mortgaged land then you cannot make a profit doing the same thing on family land. You would make more money selling the land and collecting the mortgage that would keep you broke if you had it.

    Not having a mortgage keeps you equally broke if the only activities allowed are uneconomic. Easpecially since the only way to sell it is to someone willing to take on a mortgage and an uneconomic activity.

    Or else the land is sold far, far below the value of surrounding developed land, where the neighbors who imposed the restrictions live.

    Despite emr/aza's vile insinuations about my ulterior motives, the plain fact is that the situation imposed on those third and fourth generation families amounts to slavery or stealing, depending on the final result.

    And this is the thanks we give to those families that preserved the land the longest.

  57. There are already tax consequences for wash sales.

    I'm not a short term trader. However I see no sense in tmts position. Once a company sells stock, that money is invested. To claim that someone who subsequently owns the stocki for a day or a second is not an investor is silly. All he is doing is providing a marker for what that original investment ( which is still in the company (unless it is GM). since he is only providing a marker for now, it makes no difference whether now is a month or a millisecond.

    I see no reason why that transaction should be taxed different from any other transaction. After all, if the Guy is trading every few seconds then he is paying tax every few seconds. He is already paying a high price.

    The argument that he is somehow a speculator is just demonization and has no merit.

    The real speculators are the fat cats that get special access when an offering is made. And they are the ones that put real money into the company. And they resell their investment the same day. Everything after that is just an opinion on whether they were right. If one person buys at 29 and sells at 30 the same day, that's his opinion. But the thousands of others who didn't sell are expressing their opinion that he is a fool.

    Or maybe he just had a sudden change in priorities. What tmt is suggesting is control over others through a tax on freedom.

    We need taxes to run the government and we need a somewhat level playing field for markets to work. Therefore taxes should be ideologically neutral.

    The idea that someone else is costing me money by his activity in using freedom is an idea that should generally be scorned, because any control on him ultimately affects our freedom.

    But money has time value, so the concept of ultimately is important and it has a price by itself.

    That's why a new setback requirement theoretically applies to all but affects landowners unequally. If existing owners think they need additional protection from runoff or whatever, then they should buy it and not impose it.

  58. In terms of distance to Dulles – I'd just like to point out that it's about an hour or so from Dulles and it's well towards 2 hours from Fredericksburg – and that's when traffic is not horrible.

    If you want to fly out of Dulles from Fredericksburg – you need to allow about 4 hours if it is a flight you cannot afford to miss.

    Don't we have the cart before the horse here?

    One reason many companies would not locate in Winchester is simply that the education level of the resident workforce would not support many knowledge-based enterprises.

    Even Fredericksburg – with a plethora of people with heavy duty education levels – can't attract significant companies – in part because getting to the Washington airports is a problem on many days.

  59. "One reason many companies would not locate in Winchester…."

    There are plenty of educated people out here, they just commute to NOVA for work. When it comes to jobs, there is a giant sucking sound and it's coming from the west, NOVA and DC.

    And, it's not just college educated workers making the commute. It's workers from all walks of life…secretaries, retail, plumbers, carpenters, everybody. The people that are in trouble are the ones who don't have the resources/education/skills to get a job in NOVA.

    As far as airports are concerned, Winchester is an hour from Dulles. So is downtown DC (and other parts of NOVA) when you factor in traffic and at times it will take you more than an hour to get from these places out to Dulles.

    Good luck trying to convince a CEO of that. They simply don't believe you until their sitting in traffic.

  60. Anonymous Avatar

    Mass transit is not a bad idea. But building the Silver Line through Tysons Corner is not related to moving people efficiently to and from work.

    The original plan was to build rail from Downtown D.C. to Dulles Airport in the median of the Dulles Toll Road. There would be a station at Tysons Corner. Had the original plan prevailed, the line would likely be running today and for billions less than it will cost to build what is being built.

    Like most things in Fairfax County, Dulles Rail was hijacked by the landowners who saw running rail through Tysons as a way of getting higher density. So the plan changed to one with three stations in Tysons. Later, Gerry Connolly while working for SAIC and as a county supervisor, added a fourth station in front of his employer's property.

    The landowners wisely capped their liability at $425 million. Federal liability was capped at $900 million. The Commonwealth contributed $50 million, and the corrupt CTB pledged to finance the rest through tolls on the Dulles Toll Road. They argued that the reduced traffic volumes on the DTR was a benefit to the drivers worthy of increasing tolls.

    So with Phase I to cost $2.7 billion, DTR drivers will need to pay about $1.325 billion for a rail line that will not provide any meaningful congestion relief. In fact, Fairfax County DOT and VDOT agree that, before 2030, Tysons Corner growth will require an expansion of the Dulles Toll Road, including the construction of additional ramps and the likely need to take property from Wolf Trap National Park and invade a significant number of resource protection areas. Moreover, once Tysons grows to 84 million square feet (which George Mason University projects), the DTR, the Beltway, Route 123 and Route 7 reach the point of failure every day.

    Moreover, MWAA believes its ability to increase tolls will not support the additions to the DTR. It believes that the toll increases necessary to pay the bonds for Dulles Rail cannot be further increased to support expansion of the DTR.

    Fairfax County estimates a 17% transit mode split by 2030.

    "The percentage of 2030 work trips using transit is anticipated to be in the order of 17% in Tysons, for both current and proposed Comprehensive Plan. This is consistent with existing transit share currently observed in other Washington D.C. Metropolitan Area locations: only slightly higher than the 15% around King Street Metro in Alexandria, lower than the 19% in Bethesda and 26% in Rosslyn-Ballston, and much lower than the 51% transit share of K-Street in downtown D.C. (Table 16 of Supplement III; slide 30, “Comparison Source 2000 CTPP with MWCOG Adjustments”)."

    The County continued: "In the context of 2050 “Sketch Planning” overview only, the submission notes a projected peak period transit modal share of 22% for 2030; this percentage was not included with any 2030 analytical model process data."

    Further, the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment, later modified by the Board of Supervisors, assumed and required that the transit share increases to 31% by 2050.

    VDOT's response follows in a separate post.

    TMT

  61. Anonymous Avatar

    VDOT continued:

    "For the reasons explained above, it is our judgment that overall transit shares are higher for D.C. than what can be achieved in future Tysons. Typically, peak period transit shares will be higher than daily shares, and overall transit shares will be higher than those attributable to destination work trips only, due to the anticipated higher percentages for residential (origin) trips. The overall transit share of 31% appears initially high for the overall Tysons, with some users much farther from stations than those for the various office and residential sites mentioned above. However, as Tysons continues to develop into a more urbanized center between 2030 and 2050, conditions will likely continue to evolve toward, but not reach the levels of, a CBD. When one considers the relatively high levels of housing proposed for Tysons (higher transit proportions than for trips destined to Tysons), and the submission’s stated goals that by 2050 75% of development is anticipated to occur within ½ mile of metro facilities, and that the circulator system will extend the reach of the stations for the remaining 25% of development, the target transit share seems more achievable, although possibly in the high end of the possible range.

    "However, it should be noted that there are several conditions which would be necessary for this level: careful management of parking availability/ costs, implementation of “at least two additional high quality transit corridors with TOD development” mentioned, and of high levels of transit within Tysons (including circulators at least partially operating in their own right-of-way), success of the TDM program elements that promote transit usage (such as shuttles and subsidies), convenient and safe access to transit for bicyclists and pedestrians. These in turn require substantial funding and policy commitments, as well as agreement of stakeholders at the local, regional, state and federal levels."

    TMT

  62. TMT – are you quoting VDOT or the Virginia Dept of Rails and Transit?

    just curious.

  63. Anonymous Avatar

    Larry,

    My sources are Fairfax County's Section 527 Traffic Impact Analsysis for Tysons Corner and VDOT's comments in response.

    TMT

  64. TMT – thanks… I guess I would have thought that the DRPT would be the agency to comment on Metro operations.

    I can see VDOT also having a dog in the hunt – certainly on the non-rail modal split…

    Can you check the 527 report and see if it is VDOT-alone and no DRPT involvement?

    thanks.

  65. Anonymous Avatar

    VDOT's March 22, 2010 comments were listed as being from just VDOT. Whether someone a DRPT also looked at Fairfax County's 527 submission is unknown.

    TMT

  66. interesting…..

    we have on the planning boards down this way a proposal for a new VRE station – and developer plans to build around the station and the same issue about modal split is in the ramparts… but so far the county does not believe that VDOT needs to do a 527 study – or I should say – they've laid out a timeline for incorporating UDAs and there i not milestone for the VDOT 527 review.

  67. The economic devilment director in Winchester would love to be able to offer commercial air service. That was my only point.

  68. Right. And the regional airport near Fredericksburg also wont have commercial air service.

    Anyone got 30 million? I've got a business plan.

  69. Oh in Fredericksburg also. The Stafford Regional Airport was build with 95% funding from the Feds as a "reliever" airport that supposedly would make it easier to attract companies because they could fly their corporate planes in and out of Stafford instead of schlepping up to Reagan or Dulles.

    Since that time – the airport has been a BUST and the county had to lower the tax rate on recreational aircraft to attract them to park their planes there for the rental revenues – and it's still in the hole financially.

    The theory was that corporates with their own planes could go wherever they wanted and not "need" a municipal airport – not be limited to locations that had airports, etc, yadda yadda.

  70. It takes time. Stafford airport will eventually be a limited success, ut without commercial service it will never achieve its potential or be the asset to the surrounding area that it might.

    Manassas airport has a thriving commercial jet business, Colgan uses it as a base and maintenance depot, although he no longer carries passengers from there. there are two businesses that restore old aircraft there, one business with its headquarters on the premises, which is convenient for the corporate turboprop. Then there is some "unknown" government businesses that fly a lot.

    I know a number of airports that are essentially industrial parks with an airstrip in the middle, so the Stafford and Winchester model is not a bad one, it is only that commercial air service makes a big difference.

    It is the usual chicken and egg thing. Don't have enough farms growing corn here to support an ethanol plant, so we don't have the ethanol plant that would cause the farms to grow corn.

    If it existed, it would be good for the ethanol producers, the farmers, and ultimately the benefits would apply to everyone else in the area. But there is not enough incentive in the CURRENT market to have either side take the initial risk, which could create a new market.

    If a temproary subsidy can jump start the situation enough to create that new market, it might be worth while.

    Say you have a company flying in there and they need tens seats full to break even. Their avrage load is eight persons, but it has wide variations.

    You can keep him in business by buying three seats from him on every flight, whether you use them or not. That is what IBM did to keep flights from Manassas to Armonk. And sisnce Colgan is still based in Manassas, that was a subsidy that paid dividends far beyond its costs.

    Had to lower the taxes on commercial aircraft, huh? Laffer curve in action?

  71. I meant lower taxes on general aviation aircraft, not commercial.

  72. Manassas aiport has VRE, but I'm not certain they are all that complementary. Air travel is about keeping your schedule, and VRE service is limited.

Leave a Reply


ADVERTISEMENT