FAA must be embarrassed by their stupidity

It has now been at least 5 years since I flew commercial (I lose count)
If I cannot go by PA-23 150, or car, or our boat, we don't go.
I cannot say I will never again go by commercial air (never is a long time and I don't have that long left) but I will sure try to find a way around it.

Old n grumpy
 
Little tidbit I learned recently,

Flight standards met their required cuts without furloughs...


But because they are "one FAA" they had to take unpaid time off. Our guys are getting sent home every other Friday for the rest of the year.
 
Warrior said:
I believe that the President is going out of his way to try to elect a Democrat Congress
Click to expand...

Of course he is. That's the whole point behind political parties.

I understand your dissapointment in Obama, but did you really expect him to be any different than any other recent president?
 
LDJones said:
Which begs the question: if sequestration is calling for 4-5% reduction, why is 20% being cut from delivery of their core services??
Click to expand...
I kind of answered this in one of the eaarly threads on sequestration.

Because the sequestration took effect over-halfway through the fiscal year and the agencies spent the first half expecting that sequester would be averted, the 4% reduction of the yearly budget has to come out of the remaining months. The dancing around that alot of agencies like the FAA did hoping that the sequester would be reversed just further amplified the effect of that 4%. So 4% over 4-5 months is much deeper than 4% spread out over 12 months. On top of that, because of the way the sequester was designed, some parts of the agency budgets (military pay and many 'pet' R&D projects for example) are protected from the cuts/reductions, so that 4% reduction in growth is made to be much more painful than it would seem on the surface.

Depending on your point of view Sequestration was either designed by an absolute retard, or someone who's goal was to make it appear as painful and disruptive as it could possibly be, but that particular debate is better left for the SZ.
 
Skylane81E said:
Little tidbit I learned recently,

Flight standards met their required cuts without furloughs...


But because they are "one FAA" they had to take unpaid time off. Our guys are getting sent home every other Friday for the rest of the year.
Click to expand...

Yep! Seeing the same thing with my counterparts within the EPA. No furloughs, but time off without pay.

Gary
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Of course he is. That's the whole point behind political parties.

I understand your dissapointment in Obama, but did you really expect him to be any different than any other recent president?
Click to expand...


George Bush seemed to be very successful in electing a Democrat Congress in 2008.
 
What I don't get is that its so obvious what they're doing (all of them, across the entire government).

Why isn't anyone doing anything about it? Seriously, if I were an elected official, I'd be standing on the floor of whatever office I'm in demanding that this be done appropriately, by cutting the fat before cutting the meat.

Does no one have any control over the government's actions? Surely we don't have the head of the FAA making these decisions, right? Seems to me that someone above the department should be making the decision.
 
SkyHog said:
What I don't get is that its so obvious what they're doing (all of them, across the entire government).

Why isn't anyone doing anything about it? Seriously, if I were an elected official, I'd be standing on the floor of whatever office I'm in demanding that this be done appropriately, by cutting the fat before cutting the meat.

Does no one have any control over the government's actions? Surely we don't have the head of the FAA making these decisions, right? Seems to me that someone above the department should be making the decision.
Click to expand...
The problem is all the pet projects and special interests - everyone in both the individual agencies and every politician has 'em and no one wants their personal interest to be cut or reduced. The politicians don't give a damn about what the voters want generally speaking. They care about what their contributors want, because those people are the ones who buy them the votes they need.
 
Fearless Tower said:
The problem is all the pet projects and special interests - everyone in both the individual agencies and every politician has 'em and no one wants their personal interest to be cut or reduced. The politicians don't give a damn about what the voters want generally speaking. They care about what their contributors want, because those people are the ones who buy them the votes they need.
Click to expand...

And it's a LONG time until the next election, politically speaking.:mad2::mad2:
Voters have a 15-30 day memory, so what you do in 2013 doesn't affect the 2014 elections, 18 months away! :dunno:
 
Fearless Tower said:
The problem is all the pet projects and special interests - everyone in both the individual agencies and every politician has 'em and no one wants their personal interest to be cut or reduced. The politicians don't give a damn about what the voters want generally speaking. They care about what their contributors want, because those people are the ones who buy them the votes they need.
Click to expand...

Welcome to the world of US politics! Been that way for a long time. It really isn't a Democratic verses Republican thing. Money talks - BS walks.

Gary
 
I don't know whether this is behind the paywall or not, but an opinion piece in the WSJ today reads:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...721189074.html?mod=WSJ_article_MoreIn_Opinion

But after Mr. Coburn published his letter on his website, FAA regional employees wrote to blow the whistle on their bosses. As one email put it, "the FAA management has stated in meetings that they need to make the furloughs as hard as possible for the public so that they understand how serious it is."
Click to expand...
 
denverpilot said:
I think the WSJ article describing how silly it is that a 4% FAA budget cut is affecting 40% of domestic airline flights, pretty well shows how well orchestrated the BS flowing from Washington is... FAA purposefully is choosing the worst possible places to pull that 4% from to make the pain to the public as high as it can possibly be. Professional management of a 4% budget cut in any other private company, would be "business as usual" the next day.
Click to expand...

What is the evidence that that is an FAA decision and not higher executive branch authority?
 
Yes...the FAA is really really embarrassed. Truly. Yes sir...super embarrassed.


Oh wait...just in.

No, they are not.
 
roncachamp said:
What is the evidence that that is an FAA decision and not higher executive branch authority?
Click to expand...

There is no question AT ALL this is driven by political appointees, those requiring Senate Confirmation and The White House. The FAA staff has two choices, follow the direction or resign. :(

Cheers
 
SkyHog said:
What I don't get is that its so obvious what they're doing (all of them, across the entire government).

Why isn't anyone doing anything about it? Seriously, if I were an elected official, I'd be standing on the floor of whatever office I'm in demanding that this be done appropriately, by cutting the fat before cutting the meat.

Does no one have any control over the government's actions? Surely we don't have the head of the FAA making these decisions, right? Seems to me that someone above the department should be making the decision.
Click to expand...

Congress tried to give Obama the authority to direct the sequester cuts intelligently. He declined.

Apparently no one is in control. The head of each little fiefdom within the federal government is in charge of directing their cuts to as obvious and painful an area as they see fit.
 
From Wednesday's WSJ:

".....But after Mr. (Senator) Coburn published his letter on his website, FAA regional employees wrote to blow the whistle on their bosses. As one email put it, "the FAA management has stated in meetings that they need to make the furloughs as hard as possible for the public so that they understand how serious it is."
Strategies include encouraging union workers to take the same furlough day to increase congestion. "I am disgusted with everything that I see since the sequester took place," another FAA employee wrote. "Whether in HQ or at the field level it is clear that our management has no intention of managing anything. The only effort that I see is geared towards generating fear and demonstrating failure." Just so."
 
I have to wonder whether this is going to bite the Democrats in the gluteus maximum. My liberal friends have been pretty quiet about the sequester, which is their typical response when they know that some item of current liberal dogma is a crock of manure.

I guess it'll come down to a question of how stupid the average American really is.

-Rich
 
I DO NOT believe the management of the FAA have the brains to be embarrassed by their imbecilic behavior. Probably trying to figure a way to blame Bush.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Congress tried to give Obama the authority to direct the sequester cuts intelligently. He declined.
Click to expand...

Did he threaten to veto the bill if it were included?
 
RJM62 said:
I have to wonder whether this is going to bite the Democrats in the gluteus maximum.
Click to expand...

Which is probably why the Republican-controlled house voted for the sequestration bill that was passed.
 
bbchien said:
From Wednesday's WSJ:

".....But after Mr. (Senator) Coburn published his letter on his website, FAA regional employees wrote to blow the whistle on their bosses. As one email put it, "the FAA management has stated in meetings that they need to make the furloughs as hard as possible for the public so that they understand how serious it is."
Strategies include encouraging union workers to take the same furlough day to increase congestion. "I am disgusted with everything that I see since the sequester took place," another FAA employee wrote. "Whether in HQ or at the field level it is clear that our management has no intention of managing anything. The only effort that I see is geared towards generating fear and demonstrating failure." Just so."
Click to expand...

Sounds like some in the FAA are embarrassed by the stupidity.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Congress tried to give Obama the authority to direct the sequester cuts intelligently. He declined.
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/26/u...ller-furloughs-and-prevent-travel-delays.html

Quote:
Senate Approves Bill to Address Air Traffic Delays

Driven by bipartisan concerns over mounting airport delays, the Senate reached agreement Thursday night to give the secretary of transportation enough flexibility to bring the nation’s air traffic control system back up to full strength.

The legislation, which passed unanimously before the Senate left town for the next week, would allow as much as $253 million to be moved from other parts of the Transportation Department to the Federal Aviation Administration. Advocates said that should be enough to stop further furloughs and keep the air traffic control system operating at a normal pace through Sept. 30, the end of the current fiscal year. Unquote

Lets see if the president follows thru with another of his empty threats.:rolleyes:

Cheers
 
roncachamp said:
I thought that question was answered last November.
Click to expand...

To paraphrase a well known saying, when you reelect the same guy and expect a different result is the definition of insanity.

Cheers
 
X3 Skier said:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/26/u...ller-furloughs-and-prevent-travel-delays.html

Quote:
Senate Approves Bill to Address Air Traffic Delays

Driven by bipartisan concerns over mounting airport delays, the Senate reached agreement Thursday night to give the secretary of transportation enough flexibility to bring the nation’s air traffic control system back up to full strength.

The legislation, which passed unanimously before the Senate left town for the next week, would allow as much as $253 million to be moved from other parts of the Transportation Department to the Federal Aviation Administration. Advocates said that should be enough to stop further furloughs and keep the air traffic control system operating at a normal pace through Sept. 30, the end of the current fiscal year. Unquote

Lets see if the president follows thru with another of his empty threats.:rolleyes:

Cheers
Click to expand...
I'd say rather than embarrassed, Huerta is feeling like he got exactly what he wanted.

I suspect other agencies right now are trying to get their hands on the FAA's playbook.
 
house apparently approved the bill. they'll rob money from the airport improvement fund to keep sleepy towers in podunk nowhere open because a bunch of people whined about flight delays after voting for a smaller budget and not liking that it inconvenienced them when it happened. Hopefully the president vetos it and tells congress to undo the whole sequester or live with it.
 
tonycondon said:
house apparently approved the bill. they'll rob money from the airport improvement fund to keep sleepy towers in podunk nowhere open because a bunch of people whined about flight delays after voting for a smaller budget and not liking that it inconvenienced them when it happened. Hopefully the president vetos it and tells congress to undo the whole sequester or live with it.
Click to expand...

The sequester originated in the White House. To undo it will require specific spending cuts, but the president wants to increase spending.
 
Sequestration: A series of governmental budgetary cuts hand picked and dictated by President Barack Obama unless you agree with the trimming in which case he had nothing to do with it.

You guys are a riot :rofl:
 
roncachamp said:
The sequester originated in the White House. To undo it will require specific spending cuts, but the president wants to increase spending.
Click to expand...

So, the president wants to increase spending so he orders across the board spending cuts. While the Republicans, who want spending cuts, are opposed to cutting spending.

Makes sense to me.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
So, the president wants to increase spending so he orders across the board spending cuts. While the Republicans, who want spending cuts, are opposed to cutting spending.

Makes sense to me.
Click to expand...

The president wants higher spending, that's shown by his recent budget proposal. He also wants higher tax rates and thought the Republicans would cave on that issue in order to avoid the sequester. He was wrong.
 
X3 Skier said:
To paraphrase a well known saying, when you reelect the same guy and expect a different result is the definition of insanity.
Click to expand...

So "People who disagree with me must be insane."

I like it. I think I'll use that! ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top