Nude model or groping victim?

[Drew Dowdell]

The airlines are already plenty subsidized thanks. It's just that the Feds do less of the subsidizing and the states and counties do a whole lot more.

That said, why am I'm not allowed to make that choice for myself?

The airlines declared their passengers the enemy years ago (with the possible exception of Southwest, but I don't like that you can't pick your seat ahead of time). They are already in cahoots with the TSA to try and inflate checked baggage charges and otherwise "up sell" you. (i.e. every time I go to check in, I'm invited to spend an extra $15 for expedited security screening).

In the case of the trip to Chicago, I actually save time overall even though I spend more time traveling because I can sleep on the train in an actual bed.

[CSpec]

The airlines are already plenty subsidized thanks. It's just that the Feds do less of the subsidizing and the states and counties do a whole lot more.

CATO

In 2006, Americans paid $93.6 billion in tolls, gas taxes, and other highway user fees. Of this amount, $19.3 billion was diverted to mass transit and other non highway activities. At the same time, various governments—mainly local—spent $44.5 billion in property, sales, or other taxes on highways, roads, and streets. The net subsidy to highways was $25.1 billion, or about half a penny per passenger mile. As most airport costs are paid for out of airport landing fees, subsidies to air travel were even smaller: about 0.1 cent per passenger mile.

Transit carries only 1.5 percent of urban travel and Amtrak carries only 0.2 percent of intercity travel, yet transit and intercity rail require huge subsidies. In 2006, subsidies to Amtrak totaled just over $1 billion, or about 22 cents per passenger mile. This is more than 40 times the subsidies to driving. Subsidies to public transit totaled about 61 cents per passenger mile, or 120 times the subsidies to autos and highways.

[Drew Dowdell]

I like when you don't even bother to try and stay on topic. Anything in there about AIR travel being highly subsidized?

Here's a small, and incomplete list.

TSA

Airport Security (usually separate from the TSA, in Pittsburgh it's paid for by the county)

Air Traffic Control and FAA

Airport construction (paid for by the state or county)

Airport maintenance (paid for by the state or county)

Customs

[CSpec]

I like when you don't read my post: "As most airport costs are paid for out of airport landing fees, subsidies to air travel were even smaller: about 0.1 cent per passenger mile."

[Drew Dowdell]

I'm not entire sure that "cost per passenger mile" is the appropriate measure here, but we'll run with it.

Airports are often huge money sinkholes for local governments. They keep them operating because of prestige and other benefits to the local economy that are difficult to trace directly to the airport's operation.

That said, something stinks in Denmark with the "penny per passenger mile" statistic. I believe it's just a way of masking the true subsidy. TSA costs aren't mentioned.

Additionally, landing fees are regulated by the FAA and have little to do with the actual cost at the airport but are instead used as a way to regulate traffic through the airport.

[CSpec]

Yeah, Bush tried to get NYC airports to have an auction system for landing slots, but corporatist airlines freaked out. Still far less subsidized than the big model toy train set called Amtrak though. Competition is a wonderful thing.

[Drew Dowdell]

Competition and getting the routes of passenger traffic out of Congress's hands is what I tried to propose in my other rail thread.

The auctioning off of time slots was actually a response to Airlines running lots of smaller aircraft instead of fewer big ones. The landing fee was based on the weight of the aircraft, so it ended up cheaper to run a bunch of partially full ERJs once an hour than it was to run partially full 737s once every other hour. This is a big part of what was causing gridlock at the bigger airports.

Anyway, back on topic.

I thought you were all for choice and competition. If I'm going to get felt up by a random stranger, I at least want it to be someone hot with his shirt off at a club. If I choose to ride Amtrak instead due to the actions of the TSA (and it sounds like many people are seeking alternative travel methods), why hold that choice against me if I can make it work for my schedule?

I don't want backscatter OR a hernia exam. I choose NEITHER.

[SAmadei]

Student strips down to Speedo at airport.

"I looked on the TSA website and it didn't say anything about going through in a bathing suit."

Read more/watch here...

[ocnblu]

Well... Free Speech is a beautiful thing.

[ShadowDog]

What is the question? There was no actual question in your scenario.

However, being molested by rent-a-cops isn't security, rather its the ideal job for pedophiles, perverts, and rapists.

The question is the obvious. Have less security to fly with the bigger chance of an incident to occur? Or have more security to fly with a measure that is less intrusive than a high school public shower?

Because if the first happens and someone dies because something made its way on board, people will bitch. If more security is performed to prevent what was just mentioned, people will bitch. Hence, "What is the answer?"

[Croc]

<img style="visibility:hidden;width:0px;height:0px;" border=0 width=0 height=0 src="http://counters.gigya.com/wildfire/IMP/CXNID=2000002.0NXC/bT*xJmx*PTEyOTA4NDE5NjAwNDYmcHQ9MTI5MDg*MjA2MTc3NSZwPTEyNTg*MTEmZD1BQkNOZXdzX1NGUF9Mb2NrZV9FbWJlZCZn/PTImbz*1YTFhYjljZWI5Zjk*NjljOTM2MDcxZTY2ZmIyOGM5OSZvZj*w.gif" /><object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,124,0" width="344" height="278" id="ABCESNWID"><param name="movie" value="http://abcnews.go.com/assets/player/walt2.6/flash/SFP_Walt_2_65.swf" /><param name="quality" value="high" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="allowNetworking" value="all" /><param name="flashvars" value="configUrl=http://abcnews.go.com/video/sfp/embedPlayerConfig&configId=406732&clipId=12236779&showId=12236779&gig_lt=1290841960046&gig_pt=1290842061775&gig_g=2" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><embed src="http://abcnews.go.com/assets/player/walt2.6/flash/SFP_Walt_2_65.swf" quality="high" allowScriptAccess="always" allowNetworking="all" allowfullscreen="true" pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="344" height="278" flashvars="configUrl=http://abcnews.go.com/video/sfp/embedPlayerConfig&configId=406732&clipId=12236779&showId=12236779&gig_lt=1290841960046&gig_pt=1290842061775&gig_g=2" name="ABCESNWID"></embed></object>

[A Horse With No Name]

<img style="visibility:hidden;width:0px;height:0px;" border=0 width=0 height=0 src="http://counters.gigya.com/wildfire/IMP/CXNID=2000002.0NXC/bT*xJmx*PTEyOTA4NDE5NjAwNDYmcHQ9MTI5MDg*MjA2MTc3NSZwPTEyNTg*MTEmZD1BQkNOZXdzX1NGUF9Mb2NrZV9FbWJlZCZn/PTImbz*1YTFhYjljZWI5Zjk*NjljOTM2MDcxZTY2ZmIyOGM5OSZvZj*w.gif" /><object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=9,0,124,0" width="344" height="278" id="ABCESNWID"><param name="movie" value="http://abcnews.go.com/assets/player/walt2.6/flash/SFP_Walt_2_65.swf" /><param name="quality" value="high" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="allowNetworking" value="all" /><param name="flashvars" value="configUrl=http://abcnews.go.com/video/sfp/embedPlayerConfig&configId=406732&clipId=12236779&showId=12236779&gig_lt=1290841960046&gig_pt=1290842061775&gig_g=2" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><embed src="http://abcnews.go.com/assets/player/walt2.6/flash/SFP_Walt_2_65.swf" quality="high" allowScriptAccess="always" allowNetworking="all" allowfullscreen="true" pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="344" height="278" flashvars="configUrl=http://abcnews.go.com/video/sfp/embedPlayerConfig&configId=406732&clipId=12236779&showId=12236779&gig_lt=1290841960046&gig_pt=1290842061775&gig_g=2" name="ABCESNWID"></embed></object>

I'm glad to see people getting creative with their protests.

[Drew Dowdell]

Well there goes my Train idea.

Pelham 123: Ms. Napolitano says that terrorists will keep trying, so ever stricter security standards will be necessary. She said that screening passengers using trains and subways and buses and car pool lanes will be phased in so we can all feel safe.

Isn't it kind of sad that fairly soon, an American would be more free to move around the EU than around the U.S.?

[A Horse With No Name]

Well there goes my Train idea.

Pelham 123: Ms. Napolitano says that terrorists will keep trying, so ever stricter security standards will be necessary. She said that screening passengers using trains and subways and buses and car pool lanes will be phased in so we can all feel safe.

Isn't it kind of sad that fairly soon, an American would be more free to move around the EU than around the U.S.?

Much as I hate to admit it, it is infinitely easier for terrorists to strike a train than a plane...

[ocnblu]

Yeah but, as we've witnessed in horror, a plane blowing up at just the right moment, or flown into a building, puts on a much bigger show for these subhuman a-holes to crow over.

[Drew Dowdell]

There is no amount of mayhem that can be caused by a train or airplane that cannot be duplicated by blowing up key segments of a professional sports stadium, key highway interchanges, tunnels, bridges, or amusement parks... we better put all of them on security lockdown too.

[A Horse With No Name]

I'm pretty much against putting any of it on security lock down.

I think that every time these subhuman asswipes pull an op, they loose a lot of sympathy both inside and outside of the Muslim world.

[Intrepidation]

Full body scanners for toll booths.

[Drew Dowdell]

Bombs, Not Bombers: TSA should concentrate on stopping bombs, not bombers. We need a device that will reliably sniff out sufficient quantities of explosive to bring down an airplane. If someone wants to blow off their foot or castrate themselves while in the air, fine, it won't bring down the plane. The body scan thing is solving the wrong problem, as does restricting liquids and x-raying shoes and asking if you packed your own suitcase. The aim should be to detect high explosive in quantities that are sufficient to cause significant damage. When explosives are found, take the person concealing them out to an open spot on the airport and detonate them – the explosive and the carrier.

[ocnblu]

Not sure if it's urban legend, but I got an email forward that states the Israelis have developed a scanner that detects explosives. The person carrying is calmly taken into an area away from the general public and detonated. Sounds cool!

[CSpec]

Yeah but, as we've witnessed in horror, a plane blowing up at just the right moment, or flown into a building, puts on a much bigger show for these subhuman a-holes to crow over.

Note that cockpit doors now lock. That alone would have stopped 9/11.

[Drew Dowdell]

Not sure if it's urban legend, but I got an email forward that states the Israelis have developed a scanner that detects explosives. The person carrying is calmly taken into an area away from the general public and detonated. Sounds cool!

Actually, it's the good old U.S. of A. that has figured that one out. It turns out that your run of the mill police speed radar gun can be calibrated to detect the wiring used to make the bombs on the suicide bombers. It is still in development and detects a lot of false positives in things like heavy jewelry and bra wires, but they are calibrating it more.

[ocnblu]

Yup, I just read that one. Wicked cool.

[FAPTurbo]

In Canada, about 8 people die a day on the roads, due to accidents and what-have-you. Since America has 10 times the population, let's say 80 people die per day, that's just over three people per hour.

I think the TSA, and US Government needs to rethink its policies a little. I'm not saying terrorism should not be ignored, but some perspective needs to be regained. Expending money on useless body scanners that only inconvenience citizens and infringe on their privacy mean that the terrorists have won... again.

[Camino LS6]

Just the last few posts demonstrate 10 times the logical thinking than 'ol Janet and the TSA crew have ever managed.

That broad is climbing my &#036;h&#33;list quickly.

[A Horse With No Name]

That broad is climbing my &#036;h&#33;list quickly.

+1

[SoCalCTS]

Repeal the Patriot Act and then I'll worry about some fool getting his junk touched.

[Camino LS6]

The Patriot Act was the start of all of this nonsense.

I'm all for repealing it.

[Drew Dowdell]

At the risk of having to unapproved my own post, perhaps we could get some economies of scale by having Catholic priests do the inappropriate touching instead of the TSA.....

[Croc]

At the risk of having to unapproved my own post, perhaps we could get some economies of scale by having Catholic priests do the inappropriate touching instead of the TSA.....

As a former Catholic...

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Z-06]

Went through the holiday traveling last week - with the security level same as my previous travels this year. While idea of TSA is bad, people are really creating mountain out of the mole hill about X-ray scanners and groping.

[Camino LS6]

Went through the holiday traveling last week - with the security level same as my previous travels this year. While idea of TSA is bad, people are really creating mountain out of the mole hill about X-ray scanners and groping.

I think not.

It is ominous in my view.

[Drew Dowdell]

Went through the holiday traveling last week - with the security level same as my previous travels this year. While idea of TSA is bad, people are really creating mountain out of the mole hill about X-ray scanners and groping.

I don't think choosing between being irradiated and having naked pics taken or being fondled is really a choice.

[Z-06]

I think not.

It is ominous in my view.

I am against existence of TSA, but people are making too much of an issue.

As someone who has flown more than 30 times this year, going through security has become a norm yet not even once I was passed through the X-Ray or was patted down. May be may be my frequent flier status gives me the privilege or I am ugly.

[Drew Dowdell]

I am against existence of TSA, but people are making too much of an issue.

As someone who has flown more than 30 times this year, going through security has become a norm yet not even once I was passed through the X-Ray or was patted down. May be may be my frequent flier status gives me the privilege or I am ugly.

Not all airports have implemented these policies yet.

[Z-06]

Not all airports have implemented these policies yet.

All the airports I have been through this year have.

[Drew Dowdell]

Well then you're just ugly

[Camino LS6]

People accepting it as the norm is the most ominous part of all.

[Z-06]

People accepting it as the norm is the most ominous part of all.

I am not accepting it as a norm. Yes it is bad, and yes there are better ways to solve the problem. I wonder how much contribution does DHS, TSA, et. al add to our growing deficit.

The most important thing needed is change of ideology, and acceptance that nothing is perfect and safe, then only we will win the war against terrorism.

At this point I like others who do not like the concept, have no other modes of transportation to go to see my girl, or travel out of country, so acceptance is only the route. I would like to revolt, but I do not have guts to be a martyr.

[Drew Dowdell]

I agree with Camino on this. I find it as intrusive as it is ineffective. It's a restriction on our freedom to move around the country that wasn't there before. Not everyone gets screened today but that doesn't mean they won't increase the level of screening in the future.

[Drew Dowdell]

I am not accepting it as a norm. Yes it is bad, and yes there are better ways to solve the problem. I wonder how much contribution does DHS, TSA, et. al add to our growing deficit.

The most important thing needed is change of ideology, and acceptance that nothing is perfect and safe, then only we will win the war against terrorism.

At this point I like others who do not like the concept have no other modes of transportation to go to see my girl, or travel out of country, so acceptance is only the route. I would like to revolt, but I do not have guts to be a martyr.

you might have to be a little more careful than the rest of us, but those of us who can protest, should

[Z-06]

you might have to be a little more careful than the rest of us, but those of us who can protest, should

More than careful just apathetic to the system. The only time I got body scanned and patted was in Paris, Amsterdam, and Mumbai - not in US.

[Drew Dowdell]

I'm still bitter about that bottle of shampoo from last year. Not because of the shampoo, but because of the absurdity of the situation. I wasn't allowed to take the bottle with me on my carry on because it was in a black plastic liquid proof bag and not a clear plastic liquid proof bag.... and the TSA woman kept insisting I go back and check my luggage (which would have cost $27.) over a free bottle of shampoo from a hotel. That's what led me to believe that the TSA and Airlines are in cahoots over the checked baggage fees.

[Intrepidation]

Thet're also dumb as rocks.

And pedophiles.

And molesters.

[ocnblu]

Dude, I'll say it again... your avatar... TSA?

[Intrepidation]

[FAPTurbo]

It's even more infuriating that he not only didn't get to go on his trip, but is facing a 10K fine AND a civil suit. The TSA well and truly are grabasses.

[Intrepidation]

It's not like he threatened to punch the TSAssole, he just didn't want to get molested.

Dude, I'll say it again... your avatar... TSA?

The official face of the TSA agent as he molests you.

[CSpec]

Strong words from The Economist: "American life after 9/11 has been marked by flailing, unfocused violence abroad combined with a timorous, paranoid crouch at home. Our desperate flag-waving and chest-beating only makes more vivid that this has been an age of fearful truculence and squandered liberty upon which we will some day look back with shame."

[Drew Dowdell]

+1111