Isn’t the real answer here to simply shut down flying altogether? No terrorist threat then!
To avoid bag check fees, travelers are routinely opting to carry on their bags, but the TSA says that the cost is just getting shifted to tax payers, to the tune of $260 million a year. That’s because the more bags that don’t get checked, the more bags the TSA has to inspect by hand at security checkpoints. Now the TSA is looking to get a cut of some of the checked baggage fees the airlines collect.
“My question is, do the taxpayers have to pick up this fee?” said Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano during testimony in Senate Appropriations subcommittee on homeland security. “Or should we be looking at the airlines for some of the profits that they make from these fees to offset the cost the taxpayer?”
The TSA has also been pushing for an increase in the airport security fee travelers currently pay. Currently passengers pay up to a $5 fee each for a one-way ticket
And you know, if they get a piece of the bag check fees, the airlines will just push the cost to travelers in the form of higher fares. The solution is clear: fly naked and bring nothing except for your patriotism.
The TSA should charge the users of the full cost of their services otherwise the non-flying taxpayers do make up the difference. This fee is part of the cost of flying.
then let the free market rule.
Easy Peasy.
Another Progressive Scam intent on making mode of transportation they do not like less palatable.
True progress will happen (same as with trains in 19th century and cars in 20th century) when needles obstructions are removed from flying and it made common and free at any distance. Example: trains in early 19th century were banned from going faster than 10mph (though they could do more easily) because of “safety” issues. By the end of 19th century trains were unobstructed and expanding as they should have. Bringing along explosion of economic progress. Same with cars. Early on it was mandatory that person with a flag runs in front of each and every car… We wouldn’t have modern auto-transport system with that and similar (again “safety” based) BS restrictions. They were lifted and now cars are our transportation and our freedom.
This must happen with air traffic too. It can happen, we just need sane non-ideology driven people in charge. Soon we will.
No problem…high speed trains are acoming to California! Eminent domain will take care of those homes that no one can sell in this shit economy too!
Another government jobs program created during the Cheney administration.
We should all agree this needs to be shut down IMMEDIATELY and replaced with an Israeli style system of heavy profiling.
THEN,.. shrink the enormous GOP supported government jobs program – the Military.
#2–gee dismal==you forgot to mention the HUGE FEDERAL SUPPORT for these new investments in technology.
Ha, ha. A dolt in full feather.
#1. “TSA should charge the users of the full cost of their services”
I agree, but when I get the special treatment, I expect, no demand, a “happy ending” for my money.
#1 – Then open up security to anyone, not just the state. Things might break down into 3 categories:
1) Those of us who can, will be able to purchase a “voucher.” Not a piece of paper, but someone who will be willing to vouch for our integrity. Note that this is already available in select cities.
1a) People with enough money can just sign up with NetJets
2) Those of us who can’t justify paying for the privilege might be able to have some other means test to allow them to fly, such as allowing the government to snoop on our email and monitor our phone calls. This might also be in conjunction with (1) to lower the rate paid to the voucher.
3) The rest of the world will continue to be poked, prodded and x-rayed to prove they have nothing to hide.
But remember that not only the flying public is being saved by the boys on the front lines of the TSA. Countless thousands have been saved or created by not having an airplane flown into their homes, offices, and public spaces by brown-skinned people holding grudges over our invasive government.
Eliminate TSA
Repair Deficit
Problem Solved
# 1 bobbo, “The TSA should charge the users of the full cost of their services”
I must respectfully disagree. The TSA is protecting the USA – not me. I am receiving nothing as an individual for their “service.” Maybe if McCullough gets his wish and they start providing happy endings but even then, shouldn’t I be allowed to submit my laundry bill?
Prior to the TSA, airlines paid security to check us out. After the TSA, those same fees were shifted to the coffers of the Gubmint.
On the other hand, if they maintain the current regs that one carry-on and a computer bag fly for free and that the tourists with their newspaper-wrapped sombreros and six bags of snow-globes and kewpie dolls, then I’m all for it.
#9–Animby==NOW who wants to argue for the exercise of it? Its true the TSA is protecting the USA but that protection comes secondary, or as a result of, primarily protecting the fliers. If no one wanted or did fly, there would be no inspection of fliers.
The logic is inescapable: fliers should pay the entire/whole cost of protecting aviation from getting blown out of the skies/run into buildings.
Not to shows just another in the very long list of average/poor/middle/rich americans paying the bills for what the SUPER RICH primary receive the benefit from.
Why should people who don’t fly pay for the safety of those who do? Why should people who don’t drive pay for the Highway Patrol? Why should people who don’t fish pay for game wardens? And it goes on and on. Those accessing the services should pay for the maintenance of those services. From that general rule we can introduce exceptions and collateral rules for the benefit of society, but this instant example is about perfect for socking it to the air traveler.
The airlines created this problem by inventing baggage fees. If TSA adds an additional fee because of carry-ons, I end up paying double if I check my bag?
I don’t fly and I don’t care.
WOW,,
between the trains and planes, being “PROTECTED” (yes they started doing the trains)
WHO thinks we are being forced to DRIVE CARS??
Would it seem better if they charged fines for actually finding contraband?
#10 Love that Bob –
Now you sound like the old farts who proclaim, :I have no children, why should I pay school taxes?” “I haven;t committed a crime, why should I pay for prisons?” etc.
The TSA exists to protect the system, not the passengers. Why? Because the system is important to the USA. Go to their web page and see the mission statement: “The Transportation Security Administration protects the Nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce.”( http://tsa.gov/who_we_are/mission.shtm ) Of course, there are several other jokes on tha page, too. Most concerning integrity, honesty and respect.
Maybe sargasso in #14 has the idea right: anyone caught with anything that might endanger the aircraft would be made to pay an on the spot fine and maybe forced to ride in the worst seats (next to a 300lb gaseous old man who survives on a diet of onions and salami and in front of a woman who can’t breathe unless she has the seat reclined all the way, all the time and bathes only in Eau du Airline Toilette..
And if the TSA ever manages to actually apprehend a terrorist they can seize his or her assets and make him work in the luggage throwing section for the rest of his natural life.
But that’s unlikely to ever happen since it seems they can’t even catch their own people slipping guns through the scanners…
Bobby – the TSA is a joke. Napolitano is a joke. They are classic examples of closing the gate after the livestock has fled. I see no reason why I should pay to be pranked. Or groped (without the happy ending).
I’m beginning to be fed up with anything airline & airport security related. They should all get shafted on live TV for our viewing pleasure.
No the real answer is to eliminate security all together and just tell people to sign a waver that they cannot sue anyone if they die. Its that or bring back the more practical screening which is profiling.
Pay people less, charge them more, make higher profit, expect money to come out of thin air, repeat until system collapses.
How about risk based airline selection? Pay for the security you want. Going to Detroit, whelp, odds are that you are going to die from a shooting on the street not an airline takeover. Trip to Key West, someone might want to be going to Cuba, so let’s pay a bit more.
I haven’t been to an airport, let alone flown anywhere, since 1971, so the only way I can tell who actually DOES fly is by watching CNN. From that, it would appear that fully 50% of the US population is employed in jobs whose sole purpose is to constantly fly to other cities and show colorful pie charts to other guys in neckties. (The other 50% seem to be constantly flying their increasingly annoying children to some fantasy vacation destination where they can watch the minimum-wage locals dress like elves and cartoon characters for their amusement.)
If this is true, then (a) plane crashes should be a cause of rejoicing for Darwinians everywhere, and (b) the irony of piling bogus charges upon them before they take off is so shudderingly delicious that I….
OH! MMMM! OH, YEAH! UH!!…..
Oh. Excuse me.