|
|
| Re: NY congressman Higgins writes Amtrak's Moorman in support of reopening Buffalo Central Terminal (1430714) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: NY congressman Higgins writes Amtrak's Moorman in support of reopening Buffalo Central Terminal |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Mon Mar 20 21:25:43 2017, in response to Re: NY congressman Higgins writes Amtrak's Moorman in support of reopening Buffalo Central Terminal, posted by Joe V on Mon Mar 20 17:35:47 2017. You don't what you are talking about. Seriously, you might want to try putting on your thinking brain— you're embarrassing yourself.AIRLINES DO NOT OWN AIRPORTS. Yes. We've already covered that. Therefore they do not pay property taxes for them, PERIOD. I just explained that to you in my last post. You might want to learn reading comprehension. Tenants do NOT pay property taxes. Try deducting property taxes on your apartment, if you have an apartment, and see how fast the auditors come after you. True, but completely irrelevant to anything either of us has said. Your entire argument relies on the idea that railroads are subject to property tax while airlines are not, which is unfair to the railroads. However, both are taxed at the same rate— the only reason railroads pay more taxes is because they own more property. However, the reason they own more property is because they need more land; a railroad can't run without miles and miles of tracks but an airline only needs airports. Which means that rather than prove passenger rail was the victim of government meddling, you proved it was the victim of the free market. Which means you concede that my initial statement was correct— cars and airplanes pushed the private sector out of passenger rail. That's how free markets work. LANDING FEES DO NOT SUPPORT AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL. They support the airport. The airport is owned by the local government authority. Which, in lieu of property tax, receives rent from airlines. Air Traffic Controllers are paid by US-DOT. No, they're paid for by airlines (albeit indirectly). As for as you nonsense that railroads are "subsidized" because of 19th century land grants, the US Congress disproved that myth SEVENTY-TWO YEAR AGO: Except your quote proves the exact opposite— "In 1945, when Congress relieved railroads of their obligation to provide the government with reduced rates. Releasing someone from a contractual obligation for free is called a subsidy. So in an effort to "prove" railroads aren't subsidised, you provide examples of the subsidies they were given. Nice one. You really much logic, don'tcha? |
|
|
|