From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   conklin  wrote:   
   >   
   >"Adam H. Kerman"  wrote in message   
   >news:llgi4d$971$2@news.albasani.net...   
   >> conklin  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>"Adam H. Kerman"  wrote in message   
   >>>news:llflst$8kd$2@news.albasani.net...   
   >>>> Sancho Panza  wrote:   
   >>>>>On 5/14/2014 10:49 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >>>>>>conklin  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>"Adam H. Kerman"  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>conklin  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>On Tuesday, May 13, 2014 11:23:45 AM UTC-4, conklin wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>As far as evidence you simply make it up, like RDU going bankrupt.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>No one ever said RDU was going bankrupt.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>What people did say was that RDU required significant subsidies to   
   >>>>>>>>>>function.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>Relevant portions of their financial statements--showing the   
   >>>>>>>>>>subsidies--were quoted.  Curiously, you never responded to those   
   >>>>>>>>>>specific   
   >>>>>>>>>>quotes.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>More nonsense.  Ticket tax money is not a "subsidy."  It is a user   
   >>>>>>>>>fee   
   >>>>>>>>>paid by users.  And so is the PCF.  And so forth.  And, by the way,   
   >>>>>>>>>daily operations pay for the bonds, not the taxpayer.  You don't   
   >>>>>>>>>know   
   >>>>>>>>>how to read a financial statement.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>>>George, you don't get to re-define an excise tax as a user fee,   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>>Sorry you don't understand English.  It is a fee paid by users for use   
   >>>>>>>in   
   >>>>>>>air travel.  It is not a subsidy.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>No, that would be airfare. If the airport isn't subsidized, I still   
   >>>>>>want   
   >>>>>>to know why the airport gets to collect an excise tax on passengers in   
   >>>>>>addition to rent paid to it by airlines. Why isn't rent sufficient to   
   >>>>>>operate the airport and retire its construction bonds?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>Because that is how the agency running the airport chooses to finance   
   >>>>>its capital and operating budgets.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> If the airport cannot retire its debt nor operate on revenues it   
   >>>> receives   
   >>>> from rent from airlines, it's being subsidized   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>This idiot does not know the difference between landside and airside.  It   
   >>>is   
   >>>hopeless to talk to such people.   
   >>   
   >> An airport authority can still collect rent from landside tenants to use   
   >> for operations and to retire debt. That's not subsidy.   
   >>   
   >> Still want to hear from George as to why special taxes on passengers are   
   >> required if the airport isn't being subsidized.   
   >   
   >Taxes on passengers are not "subsidies."   
      
   Yes, George, they are.   
      
   >Are you a climate denier too?:   
   >   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)