Comments on: Fair Fares program comes under attack

By: redbud

redbud — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 02:26:50 +0000

Fair Fares started out as subscriptions by local businesses to support AirTran. Then subscriptions gained the force of contracts. Then LOCAL government subsidies kicked in, maxxed, and went to STATE level so all Kansans could participate in subsidizing an airline that can’t survive on its own here. What? 22 million so far? More than 10X the original price tag? The originating issue was short-notice BUSINESS fares, not plannable personal traveling. It is a BUSINESS subsidy for a portion of the state, paid by all Kansans.

If one feels it OK to subsidize AirTran, then what else is OK to subsidize?

What do we want to subsidize for other portions of Kansas? Fair is fair, right?

By: bth

bth — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 15:28:12 +0000

And with public ownership of airports there is also little private enterprise in air transportation. (How much is Wichita going to spend on the Mid-Continent rebuild?) Perhaps an approach to rail might be to take a similar approach as air: public ownership of the rails themselves and allow private trains to use those rails.

One problem I have with ‘Fair fares’ is that it decides which DESTINATIONS are affordable – not just which departure cities. I have not found my destinations to be those that get subsidies so I (a) pay tax dolars to subsidize SOME routes) and (b) pay high fares to go where I am going. This taxpayer would be better served with ready access to KC and SouthWest.

Are you certain those other cities are on ‘fair fares’ and not on the federal ‘essential service’ subsidies? Those are questionable too. Tokeka and Manhatten are about as close to KCI as Elgin, IL, is to O’Hare. We did fine without air service when I lived there – O’Hare served our needs.

By: ictBest

ictBest — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 05:09:11 +0000

Rail transportation would cost many millions of dollars to run every year. Not including the cost to get it started. It’s not practical at this time.

Fair Fares, which isn’t just about Wichita, but about Topeka, Manhattan and Salina as well. $5 million a year, compared to your plan, which would run in the $50 million per year.

Plus the rail transportation wouldn’t be privately owned. If you’re against socialism, then trains isn’t the answer. Let the private sector build it, if you think it’s a sure winner.

There is no private enterprise in passenger rail trains.

By: bth

bth — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 15:33:43 +0000

Opposition to socialism is not N.E. Kanss bias. It is simply a preference for private enterprise as opposed to socialism.

We would be better served with good rail transportation to KC and OkC – that would then allow us to access airlines serving everywhere – not just the select ‘not-so-fair’ destinations.

By: ictBest

ictBest — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 04:05:27 +0000

Chalk that up to the N.E. Kansas bias against Wichita. I bet the Olathe Legislature doesn’t know that the Fair Fare Programs doesn’t just include Wichita, but extended to Manhattan (without it may have jeopardize the Bio-Research Lab).

So he better know what is up, but I chalk this one to N.E. bias.