Comments on: Taxpayers Shell Out For Near-Empty Flights

"Essential" Air Service Pays Airlines Millions To Fly To Cities You Probably Haven't Heard Of

[cowboy9994]

Mark Longshore says fly Delta

Just more brilliant thinking from the Dems glorious leader Jimmy "Terrorists Love Me" Carter.

[lorinkundert]

This is what happens when you let the Government operate outside of it''s Constitutional limits, and that will only get worse.

[b-easy63]

Finally, for many people who live in the Alaskan bush country, abolishing EAS subsidies would be a disaster, since air transport is the only link to the "outside world."

Posted by US_310_Wyom at 02:25 AM : May 03, 2008


They could always MOVE to be closer to the real world--that is what the rest of us unfortunates do--we move to where the jobs are, move to be closer to hospitals or schools or whatever--either move or don''t pretend to rough it--really rough it and be cut off from the outside world. Nobody is making them live in the wilderness now are they? We don''t compensate people with public funds for decisions that are there own personal choice.

[b-easy63]

towns are 3 to 6 hours drive from a major airport. Where I live, in northwestern Wyoming, winter weather can, sometimes, make roads impassable, or very treacherous at the least. Posted by US_310_Wyom at 01:26 AM : May 03, 2008

There are several problems with your post.

1. How many people are you? If you state needs to keep "you" linked, let your state and your state taxes pay for it--NOT the rest of the entire country

2. If bad weather makes the car travel unsafe--you can bet your sweet, isolated azz that the airways are unsafe too. Try that line somewhere else

3. There are not enough of "you" to justify the rest of us footing the bill for this. every little bit hurts or helps. You want this--because it is a benefit and convenience to "you" but the "yous" are not the rest of us and cannot justify why the rest of "US" have to pay so the few of you can have this perk.

I''d like an airplane to take me directly to my door--but it is not going to happen. We have to drive over 45 minutes to the nearest airport and to go anywher significant have to take a commuter flight to a hub--but I drive 45 minutes just to get to the smaller flights and I don''t use no name companies to do this. I PAY. the biggest problems with subsidies is that is encourages a welfare mentality and as your post indicates, a feeling of inevitability and entitlement from those of you who benefit---no matter what the cost is to all of us who will NEVER benefit.

[b727100bear]

attention slim1h2o: clearly, you are not familiar with the realities of airline operations. Having an airplane sit idly on the ground until passengers show up is an enormous expense for the airline, not to mention having a crew sitting doing nothing which could be more productive flying. Airlines are one of the few businesses (yes! businesses which must earn a profit in order to survive) that have been virtually unable to pass their costs (fuel, etc.) along to the consumer as others have - i. e. railroads, trucking firms. Fares need to increase and our country desperately needs to overhaul the Air Traffic System - a system which currently employs 1950''s technology.

[stn_sage]

Due to changing circumstances---huge national debt, crumbling infrastructure, rising homelessness, joblessness, uninsured, foreclosures, food, medical, and insurance costs, among other things,--- the continuation of this program in the future may not be practical.

It''s one of MANY outmoded, inefficient, overly-expensive programs that will probably need to be cut to pay for much more critical needs.

As time goes on, it definitely will be harder to justify!

[slim1h2o]

Posted by NonayaBiness at 04:43 AM : May 03, 2008

They certainly could carpool,,or take a bus. For sure, that would be cheaper, and save valuable fuel.

[slim1h2o]

Posted by NonayaBiness at 04:37 AM : May 03, 2008

I agree,,they should eleminate flight times, or consolidate times, and fly out of airports one time a day. If there is no one to fly, then the plane should sit there till there''s enough people to fly. This service is probably useful, but we could spend less money on it, and still keep it in service.

[nonayabiness]

"How about the $2 million a year to fly a handful of people from Macon, Georgia to Atlanta-just 83 miles away?"

-Utterly ridiculous. I''m glad someone broke this story. Perhaps something will be done about this, like ELIMINATING 83 MILE FLIGHTS? It would take more gas to get the plane off the ground than it would for a handful of people to drive the 83 miles. What a waste!