From: ahk@chinet.com

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, as it's not
paid in proportion to resources consumed. That's the critical difference
you can't comprehend between excise taxes and user fees. If there were
no subsidy, airport construction bonds could be repaid with fees charged
to tenant airlines, not taxes on their passengers.

If RDU were well financed, then why can't it repay its bonds from
rent it receives from tenants without requiring supplemental taxes on
passengers?

--- SoupGate/W32 v1.03
 * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)