Obama to impose $100-per-flight Skydiving Tax

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Well bullshit- you are shortening the cost issue and healthcare into nothing more than two points and only two points.

No, you have said that it is a shame that people in the US go broke due to an accident.

If you REALLY felt that way, you would prevent them from getting hurt if they were not insured. You do not do that however.

Quote

I have more concern about people falling down the stairs and going bankrupt than I am about the higher risk activities

And you just said it right there.... It might just have something to do with you being part owner of DZ.

Quote

Using your logic, any activity that results in an injury would therefore have to be deemed high risk and therefore banned

Not my logic. But the fact is that some people CURRENTLY think that skydiving is too dangerous and should be banned.

Quote

Now try to stay on topic FaA taxes - did you write your congressman today? Cause I did again?

I am on topic, you are fine with CERTAIN taxes going up... But only certain taxes and the reason had better match YOUR desires. It is normal, but at least be honest about it.

BTW, my Congressperson is so liberal that she SUPPORTS taxing those bastard rich more. Her exact words were, "Those who can afford these expensive toys can afford to pay more to use them, 100 dollars is nothing to them"

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

No, you have said that it is a shame that people in the US go broke due to an accident.

Yes, and that is not the only argument for Universal healthcare. Universal health care is not my, nor Skydive City's issue to resolve. It is a nationwide issue so for you to assume that I should be taking singular action to resolve it is invalid and nonsensical.

Quote

I am on topic, you are fine with CERTAIN taxes going up... But only certain taxes and the reason had better match YOUR desires. It is normal, but at least be honest about it.

Yes, i am fine with certain taxes going up and for the government to provide certain services and not others. That is called the "political process" and I am allowed to have an opinion, and to participate in the process to see it through, just like you are.

I am allowed to judge whether or not the FAA is within its budget and needs more money. And I am allowed to judge whether or not I think the healthcare system in this country is adequate. JUST LIKE YOU ARE.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Yes, and that is not the only argument for Universal healthcare. Universal health care is not my, nor Skydive City's issue to resolve. It is a nationwide issue so for you to assume that I should be taking singular action to resolve it is invalid and nonsensical.

It goes to show you want OTHERS to do it.... But you can't be bothered to stand up for your own convictions.

You have the ability to help fix the issue in your own business, but choose not to take action.

Whatever happened to think globally and act locally? I guess you do not recycle since your part would be insignificant?

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Yes, and that is not the only argument for Universal healthcare. Universal health care is not my, nor Skydive City's issue to resolve. It is a nationwide issue so for you to assume that I should be taking singular action to resolve it is invalid and nonsensical.

It goes to show you want OTHERS to do it.... But you can't be bothered to stand up for your own convictions.

You have the ability to help fix the issue in your own business, but choose not to take action.

Whatever happened to think globally and act locally? I guess you do not recycle since your part would be insignificant?

I am so glad to see I am not the only one you pull this fine "debating style" with

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

You have the ability to help fix the issue in your own business..

No I don't. I cannot provide healthCARE for ANYONE at Skydive City. I can only provide health INSURANCE.

Health INSURANCE is **NOT** healthCARE. It never was and it never will be. However the country as a whole, has the ability to provide healthCARE to all of its citizens.

Again, your argument is invalid. If I were to provide everyone who skydives at Skydive City AND my staff and your mother with health insurance, I would actually be going 100% against what I believe in. I would simply be propping up the system that exists today, which I consider to be flawed and worthless.

You say you have read my posts but apparently you have not. I have stated clearly this case so many times in the past that I have lost count.

And once again - you attempt to (unsuccessfully) to back me into a corner somehow.

Quote

but choose not to take action

I have and I did. I have a belief structure and I regularly lobby my government representatives to make the changes to align the country with that belief structure.

Quote

Whatever happened to think globally and act locally

read above. I am thinking globally - "Universal Health Care". I am acting both globally and locally.

[kallend 2,027]

Clicky.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

I am so glad to see I am not the only one you pull this fine "debating style" with

You mean using facts and your own logic and comments against you?

Yes, I do that.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

No I don't. I cannot provide healthCARE for ANYONE at Skydive City. I can only provide health INSURANCE.

No, you could provide healthcare.... You could not allow people to jump.

You could ALSO make sure that only people with insurance jump... you know, since injuries and accidents often bankrupt people without it.

But you CHOOSE to do neither. And I am not saying you don't have that right, but you are saying one thing and then doing NOTHING to prevent the issue you claim exists.

Quote

You say you have read my posts but apparently you have not.

Oh I have... You have claimed that people without insurance often go broke when injured, yet you allow those people to get onto your aircraft.

I will admit that you want EVERYONE to pay for the HC. But I still find it very funny you refuse to even try and provide to your own staff.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Clicky.

I am actually torn about this proposal. Guys like you keep claiming that the "rich" need to pay their fair share and that a little regulation never hurts anyone.

Hate to break it to you.... but a guy like you with a toy car and a private plane.... You are "rich" to many people. And all of us that spend money to jump out of planes for fun have a little bit extra disposable income than most people.

This is a fine example of you being good with additional taxes EXCEPT when it comes to the things YOU like.

[tkhayes 348]

You deny there is a difference between health care and health insurance so there is no point in continuing the discussion

Health insurance companies do not provide health care of any kind

I'm done - arguing with someone who thinks the tax issue and HC issue are simply defined by only 2 choices for any question

I can be against a war but still pay taxes that fund one. I can support universal healthcare without necessarily independently providing it for my staff or anyone else

I can support safe driving without banning drivers from my business who have tickets and YOU do not provide healthcare for your family - you only provide insurance

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

You deny there is a difference between health care and health insurance so there is no point in continuing the discussion

Health insurance companies do not provide health care of any kind

I'm done - arguing with someone who thinks the tax issue and HC issue are simply defined by only 2 choices for any question

I can be against a war but still pay taxes that fund one. I can support universal healthcare without necessarily independently providing it for my staff or anyone else

I can support safe driving without banning drivers from my business who have tickets and YOU do not provide healthcare for your family - you only provide insurance

Sure you CAN. It's called being a hypocrite.

[tkhayes 348]

I've been called worse names by better people than you...

Using Davincis logic then / I would assume then that all of you must be in favor of the aviation tax.... No?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

I've been called worse names by better people than you...

Using Davincis logic then / I would assume then that all of you must be in favor of the aviation tax.... No?

I'm not for raising any taxes, but if we are going to do it, lets spread it around instead of targeting "those who can most afford it."

I really enjoy tweaking those who advocate raising taxes until it affects them and their business. Suddenly it's a different story, isn't it? It suddenly dawns on you that if you tax other's businesses or force them to pay healthcare premiums that it will affect their productivity.

[chutem 0]

https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions/!/petition/take-aviation-user-fees-table/Mtjk9lM3

Back on topic, if you'd like to sign a "we the people" petition against user fees please follow the link.

James

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Clicky.

I am actually torn about this proposal. Guys like you keep claiming that the "rich" need to pay their fair share and that a little regulation never hurts anyone.

Hate to break it to you.... but a guy like you with a toy car and a private plane.... You are "rich" to many people. And all of us that spend money to jump out of planes for fun have a little bit extra disposable income than most people.

This is a fine example of you being good with additional taxes EXCEPT when it comes to the things YOU like.

Really? I think the existing tax on aviation fuel is a far more efficient way of financing the system (as do most people who actually THINK about it) and have no problem paying an appropriate amount in proportion to my usage, even if it means fuel tax rates must be raised.

Experience in Europe has shown that aviation as a whole suffers when user fees are imposed, with no noticeable improvement in aviation safety.

It's not like I'm asking you to pay my fuel taxes, I'm quite happy to pay them myself. Before running off at the keyboard you should do a little research.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[chutem 0]

Quote

Quote

Clicky.

I am actually torn about this proposal. Guys like you keep claiming that the "rich" need to pay their fair share and that a little regulation never hurts anyone.

Hate to break it to you.... but a guy like you with a toy car and a private plane.... You are "rich" to many people. And all of us that spend money to jump out of planes for fun have a little bit extra disposable income than most people.

This is a fine example of you being good with additional taxes EXCEPT when it comes to the things YOU like.

The way the proposal is written a cessna 182 load of 4 jumpers would be charged the same $100 per flight as an Otter load of 21 jumpers. That will impact the small 182 DZ per lift ticket price much more than the turbine DZ. Are you ready to run the small DZ out of business?

James

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Clicky.

I am actually torn about this proposal. Guys like you keep claiming that the "rich" need to pay their fair share and that a little regulation never hurts anyone.

Hate to break it to you.... but a guy like you with a toy car and a private plane.... You are "rich" to many people. And all of us that spend money to jump out of planes for fun have a little bit extra disposable income than most people.

This is a fine example of you being good with additional taxes EXCEPT when it comes to the things YOU like.

The way the proposal is written a cessna 182 load of 4 jumpers would be charged the same $100 per flight as an Otter load of 21 jumpers. That will impact the small 182 DZ per lift ticket price much more than the turbine DZ. Are you ready to run the small DZ out of business?

James

I don't think the small print matters much. Extensive experience has shown that user fees cripple general aviation everywhere they have been imposed.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[chutem 0]

I agree. I'm just trying to point out the potential impact of this poorly worded attack on GA in terms a skydiver will relate to.

James

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

I've been called worse names by better people than you...

Using Davincis logic then / I would assume then that all of you must be in favor of the aviation tax.... No?

I'm not for raising any taxes, but if we are going to do it, lets spread it around instead of targeting "those who can most afford it."

So you approve of spreading it to those who can least afford it?

Perhaps you would like to contribute to my aviation fuel tax.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I've been called worse names by better people than you...

Using Davincis logic then / I would assume then that all of you must be in favor of the aviation tax.... No?

I'm not for raising any taxes, but if we are going to do it, lets spread it around instead of targeting "those who can most afford it."

So you approve of spreading it to those who can least afford it?

Perhaps you would like to contribute to my aviation fuel tax.

I think if we are going to solve our financial problems that every last resident should have some skin in the game instead of all this class warfare bullshit your ilk spreads.

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

lets spread it around instead of targeting "those who can most afford it."

I am all for that too - unless you read somewhere where I am not. Did you write your congressman to express that opinion? I bet you did not.

I did. many times over the past several years. so much for hypocrisy.

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

I think if we are going to solve our financial problems that every last resident should have some skin in the game instead of all this class warfare bullshit your ilk spreads.

I think the class warfare term was generated by the right wing. Most of us on the left have suggested over and over again that taxes have to go up for EVERYONE for the mess to get resolved.

Guys like Boehner and the right sit that and go 'NO', hence the term the 'party of NO'.

The right insists that it is ONLY a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

so again, I assume you wrote you congressman again this morning to express your desire to pay higher taxes to help out?

[tkhayes 348]

no one minds paying an increase in fuel tax (well they do but it is easier to swallow), than a user fee.

A user fee means the jumbo jet pays $100, which is a drop in the bucket, and the Cessna 150 pays $100, which is a huge impact.

Hypothetical example. If they charged a 'doctor fee' to 'use the services off the HHS Dept', well, General Electric would have to pay $100 to use the services for their employees, and YOU as an individual would also conceivably have to pay $100.

It is a scale of impacts. If everyone had to pay $2 more every time they went to the doctor as a fee, it would generate just as much revenue and would have less individual impact.

First, show me that the FAA needs the money. I have yet to see an outline of NextGen, what it is, how it will work and how much it will cost, even an estimate. THe right wing is so hell-bent that everyone should be paying "for their own shit" and all that "personal responsibility" crap, I find it hard to believe that anyone would advocate a tax that supposedly pays for something that cannot be described

Again, if they want to say - "hey - we are simply raining taxes to help pay for the deficit or we are going to fund education or healthcare with it", then I will consider this tax differently, as I have already said.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

I've been called worse names by better people than you...

Using Davincis logic then / I would assume then that all of you must be in favor of the aviation tax.... No?

I'm not for raising any taxes, but if we are going to do it, lets spread it around instead of targeting "those who can most afford it."

So you approve of spreading it to those who can least afford it?

Perhaps you would like to contribute to my aviation fuel tax.

I think if we are going to solve our financial problems that every last resident should have some skin in the game instead of all this class warfare bullshit your ilk spreads.

Been reading the GOP talking points again?

In EVERY country in which user fees have been implemented, general aviation has declined and in some cases has been effectively destroyed.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[marks2065 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Clicky.

I am actually torn about this proposal. Guys like you keep claiming that the "rich" need to pay their fair share and that a little regulation never hurts anyone.

Hate to break it to you.... but a guy like you with a toy car and a private plane.... You are "rich" to many people. And all of us that spend money to jump out of planes for fun have a little bit extra disposable income than most people.

This is a fine example of you being good with additional taxes EXCEPT when it comes to the things YOU like.

Really? I think the existing tax on aviation fuel is a far more efficient way of financing the system (as do most people who actually THINK about it) and have no problem paying an appropriate amount in proportion to my usage, even if it means fuel tax rates must be raised.

Experience in Europe has shown that aviation as a whole suffers when user fees are imposed, with no noticeable improvement in aviation safety.

It's not like I'm asking you to pay my fuel taxes, I'm quite happy to pay them myself. Before running off at the keyboard you should do a little research.

So you are ok with paying your fair share of fuel taxes, so why are you not ok with paying your fair share of income taxes? You are saying that you have no problem paying the same percentage of fuel tax according to the gallons of fuel you use, shouldn't you pay the same percentage of income tax as the rich people compared to the income you make?