by peterb on July 26, 2010
Flying is not what it used to be.
What was once elegant and speedy travel is now, often, frustrating.
Back in the 1960s, an airline ad on TV showed two men sitting down to a steak dinner. One says to the other something like, “I can’t think of too many places where I enjoy a steak.” The camera pans away and it shows the two men in airline seats on a plane.
On July 22, 2010, a USA Today article detailed how manners and etiquette have completely disappeared from air travel. Both fliers and those employed to serve them have gotten downright surly.
Complimentary in-flight meals, never mind steak, have all but disappeared. Airlines are charging fees to check bags. Flights are so chock full that any problem or delay, be it caused by weather or mechanical issues with aircraft, can strand people in airports for hours, if not days. That’s not to mention all the post -9/11 security screenings – and uncertainty about which airport will accept what items in bags.
It’s no wonder fliers’ fur flies!
Meanwhile, airlines have whittled their staffs down to bare bones, or worse. Flight attendants often act as referees as passengers battle for space in the overhead bins – perhaps because they didn’t want to pay to check a bag. The staffs are working harder for less money.
It’s no wonder smiles have disappeared from many “customer service” professionals.
FROM WELL-TO-DO TO MAKING DUE
Back when that steak ad aired, fliers were largely business people and the relatively well-to-do. Most common folk drove to their vacation destinations and family visits. To get a new customer base and to fill planes, airlines reduced some fares. Travel and cruise packages were created that included air fares, so the average vacationer didn’t feel as if he were paying for his air fare.
As the economy grew and business became more global, more business travelers occupied aircraft. The airlines’ heyday evolved.
Now, with recession and no “new” customer base left, airlines’ survival was threatened. Cuts were needed. Consolidation was inevitable. Cuts in maintenance personnel mean more planes with mechanical issues. Cuts in pilots and flight attendants mean fewer and more crowded flights. Airline financial losses mean baggage fees.
The good news? Many airlines that were losing money in the last two years have started to make money again. Airlines may never see their heyday again, but at least their bottom lines are improving.
The flying experience has prompted travelers to drive more – again. If a person goes to a destination that takes two hours by air and they are stuck in an airport for two, three or more hours, a 10-hour drive becomes appealing. At least they know, barring an accident, that they’ll get where they want to go and don’t have to worry about what they can take with them.
It might be interesting to quantify how much business was NOT done because a business person was unable to reach his or her destination in a reasonable time because of flight delays. That could translate to “real” money lost.
With the elegance gone, airliners have become little more than buses with wings. Still, the next time you fly, remember that it’s not just you that is being affected by the air-travel problems. Perhaps fliers and staff should try to comfort each other, rather than curse each other.
Peter
by peterb on July 19, 2010
“Illegal aliens are costing Georgia taxpayers over a billion dollars a year.”
The above quote came from a political ad on behalf of Nathan Deal, a former congressman from Georgia now running for governor of that state. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution analyzed that statement and concluded it was half true. In fact, the newspaper’s analysis said it was virtually impossible to come up with the real costs of illegal immigration.
Most analyses of illegal immigration’s cost use different numbers, depending on the point of view of the analyzer. Applying context or changing the data slightly, can create entirely different impressions, and the numbers can be off by a lot, the paper says. For instance, the newspaper says, if you lump legal and illegal immigrants together, as a group they bring in more taxes than they use up over the long term. That casts doubt on those who believe they are paying taxes to support illegal immigrants.
Another point: Those who advocate sealing the borders and mass deportation of the illegals already here may tally the costs of education by including children born in the U.S. to illegal parents. Is the U.S. obligated to educate them, or not?
The bottom line is that there is no way to get an objective, accurate measure of the costs – or benefits – of illegal immigration. If immigrants of any status are indeed contributing more taxes than they are using, it’s probably safe to presume much of what they are paying is sales taxes. And some analyses include the taxes companies embed in the prices of their goods and services. After all, these folks have to buy things here, right?
VET THE FAIR TAX
Given that, why then would we not want to vet the proposal to create a Fair Tax in this country? In a nutshell, the Fair Tax would eliminate all income, corporate and Social Security and other taxes at the federal level, and replace them with a 23% sales or consumption tax on all purchases of new goods. According to www.fairtax.org, “Americans” would get an annual prebate of taxes paid on necessities, like food staples. The plan would eliminate the taxes embedded in the prices of goods and services so, in theory, the 23% sales tax would not increase prices of goods.
Imagine if the millions of illegal immigrants in this country were paying 23% sales tax on everything they buy here? Because they aren’t “Americans,” they would not get the prebate. How long would it take for them to help the U.S. out of its debt crisis? Ironically, many proponents of the Fair Tax also favor sealing the borders and deporting all illegals.
In bad economic times, innocent people get badly hurt. They become fed up when things don’t improve quickly and look for someone to blame. Illegal immigrants are taking the heat from those vents. The U.S. immigration policy is inconsistent and uneven, and people find their way in, and probably always will, no matter how diligently we, as a nation, enforce the law.
Illegal immigration is a U.S. BUSINESS-DRIVEN issue, not an immigrant-driven issue. The vast majority who come here are desperate for a better life. They work hard and, yes, they send much of their hard-earned money back home to take care of family there. Some bear children here. If we don’t like that, perhaps we can revise the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to require children born here to have at least one biological parent be a U.S. citizen, before they would get citizenship. That would then mean changing the laws about compulsory education to exempt non-citizen children. How easy would that be? Will that chase the parents back to their native land? Do we just deport these kids when they are adults, even though they had nothing to do with their situation, and may hardly speak their “native” language? What if some of them turned into brilliant innovators, even without a formal education?
The next time you rail against illegal immigration, think about these things: would you do the jobs they are now doing for what they are being paid? To them, the pay is much more than they can earn in their native lands. If there are no jobs, most immigrants will not come. Also, if someone is taking care of your yard, or helping to remodel your home, do you care more whether they are legal, or whether they will do a good job for you at a reasonable price?
Peter