Message from Mr. Fuller

denverpilot said:
No, Fuller knows Obama administers it. The Bill doesn't stipulate beyond "FAA" what gets cut. You can cut fluff or you can cut core services.

Because government is incentivized to grow always, both sides will cut core services first and claim politically it was the other side's fault to gain low-information voters who have no clue how out of balance the spending to income ratio is.
Click to expand...

Find "FAA" or "Federal Aviation Administration" anywhere in the bill. Go ahead.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s365enr/pdf/BILLS-112s365enr.pdf

What it actually does say is, in pertinent part:

a) ENFORCEMENT.—
‘‘(1) SEQUESTRATION.—Within 15 calendar days after Congress adjourns to end a session there shall be a sequestration to eliminate a budget-year breach, if any, within any category.


‘‘(2) ELIMINATING A BREACH.—Each non-exempt account within a category shall be reduced by a dollar amount calculated by multiplying the enacted level of sequestrable budgetary resources in that account at that time by the uniform percentage necessary to eliminate a breach within that category."

Each agency has anywhere from a few dozen to literally thousands of these accounts with monies appropriated to each.

So...you're wrong and repeating yourself in the past few weeks hasn't made yourself any more right.

To the extent the administration had a hand in designing the law before and during passage, it should be held to account by those who would complain. But blaming the agencies for the fact that the law took most discretion away from reallocating funding to avoid the sequester is wrong.
 
Last edited:
N801BH said:
You are starting to get it...:yes:.
Click to expand...

Nope, I don't get it. You're going to tell me that unions have out-lived their purpose, that they only constitute less than 10% of the workforce today, yet they (somehow) are still the primary cause of all of the worlds economic woes.

You will then go on to explain why Southwest Airlines, the most highly unionized airline in the entire industry, is having such a tough time of it. :dunno:
 
Silvaire said:
..

and why would contractors not be cut before core employees? Are you saying you would gut the company prior to letting any outside contract work go? That doesn't even make sense.

Oh I get it - the "union" bug-a-boo. Can't have working folk garner any power over their own fate now can we.
Click to expand...

As many companies do they switched to staffing service contract employees. The contract towers are a third of the cost.
 
Silvaire said:
Nope, I don't get it. You're going to tell me that unions have out-lived their purpose, that they only constitute less than 10% of the workforce today, yet they (somehow) are still the primary cause of all of the worlds economic woes.

You will then go on to explain why Southwest Airlines, the most highly unionized airline in the entire industry, is having such a tough time of it. :dunno:
Click to expand...

Cute answer..........................

Care to comment on the GM bail out....:dunno:
 
I thought the sequestration cuts are supposed to be to be temporary until the jerks we voted into congress gets off their collective fat butts and pass a budget. If so why did I read in my local paper in article about how my local port is suing the FAA that the FAA is removing computers and radar installations from the affected towers.
 
Henning said:
As many companies do they switched to staffing service contract employees. The contract towers are a third of the cost.
Click to expand...

Yes but that is a deliberate strategy in which the intent is to gut the core company and convert it into nothing more than a services management entity. I don't think the FAA is pursuing that strategy.
 
N801BH said:
Cute answer..........................

Care to comment on the GM bail out....:dunno:
Click to expand...

Dude, how do we not bale GM out? We put all our eggs in the Military Industrial Complexes basket despite Eisenhower's warning against it, and we have to play the game by the economic rules that set. So what we have is a situation where every GM plant has a set of standby wartime production tooling to get it building whatever that plant project is dedicated to. If we let GM fail, we lose those billions, if not trillions dollars invested or have to take ownership of the plants to protect it, and that's what we did. These bale outs are structured with a payback and interest with equities securing. Same with all the big banks and the TARP deal, the government now owns about 80% of the banks they baled out.

It worked out well when Carter baled out Chrysler, it was basically traded out in M1A1 tanks. Kinda paid for em up front.
 
N801BH said:
:mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2:...
Click to expand...

Why you so mad Ben? Did the managers lose their pensions? Were any CEO's facing mortgage foreclosure after the bailout. You seem to be of the opinion that it is the laborers who assemble the automobiles and do the work involved in production that are the cause of the troubles. Even in the worst of times, the late 60's and early 70's, you will blame UAW union work rules for the demise of the US auto industry completely ignoring the fact that on showroom floors, next to the Datsun 510, BMW 2002 and Toyota Corona sat the Ford Pinto, AMC Gremlin and Chevy Vega.

Your hatred of the idea of working people collectively bargaining to get a better deal has blinded you to the real picture and an entire page of emoticons is not going to change that.
 
Silvaire said:
Yes but that is a deliberate strategy in which the intent is to gut the core company and convert it into nothing more than a services management entity. I don't think the FAA is pursuing that strategy.
Click to expand...

Ok, that is where it's going though, that is what NextGen is all about. It's coming and you will be assimilated; resistance is futile. I don't know what any of these people are thinking, I just know what I think makes sense. There is a test I will grant and that is can they show the safety record in a high traffic environment. The second question is will the current staff remain in seat and take the cut. I don't know how the controller union medical or other benefits are structured or of their governance, but depending on the current structure the hit to the controller could be small or could be large to make up the savings. Not all unions are structured or administrated the same way and I've never worked for a government union to have an opinion.

All I know is that it's the only direction you can go and save more money for most service without user fees. We can negotiate them now or later after privatization, you know, the business sector.
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
Ok, that is where it's going though, that is what NextGen is all about. It's coming and you will be assimilated; resistance is futile.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree completely Henning. The FAA though, being a very large entity and all, I guess the word I'm looking for would be ensconcement but that's not really a word. What I mean is that what you say is coming will come in a way that doesn't necessarily make the most sense or achieve the intended goal in the most efficient manner.

I think you get my drift.
 
douglas393 said:
I thought the sequestration cuts are supposed to be to be temporary until the jerks we voted into congress gets off their collective fat butts and pass a budget. If so why did I read in my local paper in article about how my local port is suing the FAA that the FAA is removing computers and radar installations from the affected towers.
Click to expand...

They're not temporary. alaskaflyer posted a link to the bill above, it's worth reading....
 
alaskaflyer said:
‘‘(2) ELIMINATING A BREACH.—Each non-exempt account within a category shall be reduced by a dollar amount calculated by multiplying the enacted level of sequestrable budgetary resources in that account at that time by the uniform percentage necessary to eliminate a breach within that category."

Each agency has anywhere from a few dozen to literally thousands of these accounts with monies appropriated to each.
Click to expand...

So how many categories within FAA and what was the required percentage? What granularity level is the level the cuts are happening at?
 
http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/docs/faa_ fy_ 2012_budget_estimate.pdf

Note this is the President's submission, not the $ of what was implemented.

As stated in the bill (law actually) and as is my understanding from my own agency, the granularity is fairly fine. And the FAA or DOT has stated that the FY cut percentage is about five percent to make the caps. That is consistent with other agencies including mine.
 
Last edited:
I pretty much fly for fun, VFR only. Don't normally fly into towered fields. So I do feel bad for those who must for business.
I have decided to as safely as I can:
Avoid talking with towers when fees are incurred. I prefer non towered airports anyway(and own one), get a little more PIC time flying around airspace.
Probably won't be flying in 2020 when ADS-B is required, if I am still flying, I just might turn off my transponder conveniently, I really don't like big brother watching me, broadcasting out a signal of who I am, where I'm going, where to send the bill ,fee, or fine . I suppose the idiots in government think it cheaper to scramble so fighters than it is not to charge $100 per call to ATC.

I will buy a traffic avoidance unit to know where other planes with transponders are.
I will apologize in advance about bumping into one of you,sorry.
Looks like GA aviation is going to go back into the dark ages, see and avoid is what we're heading for.
 
el con said:
I pretty much fly for fun, VFR only. Don't normally fly into towered fields. So I do feel bad for those who must for business.
I have decided to as safely as I can:
Avoid talking with towers when fees are incurred. I prefer non towered airports anyway(and own one), get a little more PIC time flying around airspace.
Probably won't be flying in 2020 when ADS-B is required, if I am still flying, I just might turn off my transponder conveniently, I really don't like big brother watching me, broadcasting out a signal of who I am, where I'm going, where to send the bill ,fee, or fine . I suppose the idiots in government think it cheaper to scramble so fighters than it is not to charge $100 per call to ATC.

I will buy a traffic avoidance unit to know where other planes with transponders are.
I will apologize in advance about bumping into one of you,sorry.
Looks like GA aviation is going to go back into the dark ages, see and avoid is what we're heading for.
Click to expand...

I could have written this post. The AOPA isn't helping, ADS-B out doesn't help, I can stay 30NM out of class B, and I'm thinking of removing my xpndr and enc from the plane anyway.
 
N801BH said:
Look at how the GM bail out played out..... Stock holders and bond holders lost it ALL... Every penny.....

Surprisingly...... the union pensions were funded completely.....
Click to expand...

I'm about as anti-union as you can find having managed a UAW shop. I've seen what unions do and it reminds me very much of my time on Wall Street ... just a bunch of crooks at heart doing everything they can (usually) legally do to get ahead. Screw everyone else, just take care of me. That said, what happened to GM is EXACTLY what should happen to exceptionally poorly managed companies.

The owners of the company (shareholders) allowed, for MANY years, poor managers to make disastrous mistakes. The unions asked for the moon and the $&%#head managers approved and allowed ABSURD work rules and pay practices. People with money to invest looked at GM and said, "Hey, that all looks good to me, think I'll loan them some money."

Then when the bottom dropped out, the investors got wiped out (and they should have), the bond holders got severely hurt (and they should have) and contracts were renegotiated (as they should have been).

So, the way I see it,
1) Investors bought shares of an exceptionally poorly managed company.
2) Investors loaned money to and exceptionally poorly managed company.
3) Unions took advantage of ignorant/lazy management and negotiated binding agreements.

The investors got exactly what they deserved. The Union got more than they deserved, but what they negotiated. What, exactly, is wrong with that ... we're the damn fools that allowed the unions all of the absurd power they have. Just look at Caterpillar to see how good management manages a BIG company. Illinois is no less union friendly than Michigan, but CAT crushed the UAW and union workers there now make close to what the market dictates - its a good job, but not a great job.

Don't blame the unions, they just rational (if ridiculously selfish) actors. They got their jobs, they got their insanely generous benefits and they screwed their kids out of good jobs in the future. Blame years of ****-poor management coupled with poorly informed investors.
 
iflyforfun said:
I'm about as anti-union as you can find having managed a UAW shop. I've seen what unions do and it reminds me very much of my time on Wall Street ... just a bunch of crooks at heart doing everything they can (usually) legally do to get ahead. Screw everyone else, just take care of me. That said, what happened to GM is EXACTLY what should happen to exceptionally poorly managed companies.

The owners of the company (shareholders) allowed, for MANY years, poor managers to make disastrous mistakes. The unions asked for the moon and the $&%#head managers approved and allowed ABSURD work rules and pay practices. People with money to invest looked at GM and said, "Hey, that all looks good to me, think I'll loan them some money."

Then when the bottom dropped out, the investors got wiped out (and they should have), the bond holders got severely hurt (and they should have) and contracts were renegotiated (as they should have been).

So, the way I see it,
1) Investors bought shares of an exceptionally poorly managed company.
2) Investors loaned money to and exceptionally poorly managed company.
3) Unions took advantage of ignorant/lazy management and negotiated binding agreements.

The investors got exactly what they deserved. The Union got more than they deserved, but what they negotiated. What, exactly, is wrong with that ... we're the damn fools that allowed the unions all of the absurd power they have. Just look at Caterpillar to see how good management manages a BIG company. Illinois is no less union friendly than Michigan, but CAT crushed the UAW and union workers there now make close to what the market dictates - its a good job, but not a great job.

Don't blame the unions, they just rational (if ridiculously selfish) actors. They got their jobs, they got their insanely generous benefits and they screwed their kids out of good jobs in the future. Blame years of ****-poor management coupled with poorly informed investors.
Click to expand...

Agreed with most of what you said......

GM should have had to go bankrupt and restructure ALL contracts.. Instead the taxpayers gave them 50 BILLION + dollars and most of that was to keep the union workers pension plan well funded.... That is just WRONG...:yes::mad2::mad:.. IMHO YMMV..:rolleyes:
 
iflyforfun said:
Don't blame the unions, they just rational (if ridiculously selfish) actors. They got their jobs, they got their insanely generous benefits and they screwed their kids out of good jobs in the future. Blame years of ****-poor management coupled with poorly informed investors.
Click to expand...

The short-sighted union leadership share the blame. When unions become parasites, they kill companies and industries.
 
I'm not going to make this long and ugly, but I disagree with what happened at GM. The investors placed money in GM under the rules of the day, hoping they would get a good return, but willing to face the risk that any investor faces under the same set of rules that had been in place for more than a 100 years.

When the feces hit the rotating air device, suddenly one and only one person in the country reached into the GM debacle and decided to change the rules that had stood the economy for decades. The change was done not for equity reasons but for purely political capital. Some pigs were made more equal(after the fact) than other pigs, and the ones that played by the nominal rules that WERE in place were bled out. Trying to keep this out of spin, but I think you get the point.
 
docmirror said:
I'm not going to make this long and ugly, but I disagree with what happened at GM. The investors placed money in GM under the rules of the day, hoping they would get a good return, but willing to face the risk that any investor faces under the same set of rules that had been in place for more than a 100 years.

When the feces hit the rotating air device, suddenly one and only one person in the country reached into the GM debacle and decided to change the rules that had stood the economy for decades. The change was done not for equity reasons but for purely political capital. Some pigs were made more equal(after the fact) than other pigs, and the ones that played by the nominal rules that WERE in place were bled out. Trying to keep this out of spin, but I think you get the point.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with the equity shareholders in GM being wiped out entirely.

However, the secured bondholders should have received 100% of their bonds paid before one cent was paid to unsecured creditors, including the unions.

There is a specific and well-defined pecking order, secured creditors sit very near the top of that order, and equity shareholders sit at the very bottom.
 
JeffDG said:
I have no problem with the equity shareholders in GM being wiped out entirely.

However, the secured bondholders should have received 100% of their bonds paid before one cent was paid to unsecured creditors, including the unions.

There is a specific and well-defined pecking order, secured creditors sit very near the top of that order, and equity shareholders sit at the very bottom.
Click to expand...

So are the bond holders whole?
 
GM went the way it went to further political ambition and suck off the union hobbits, guaranteeing their devotion and far more important, LOTS OF MONEY to a specific campaign purse.
 
alaskaflyer said:
So are the bond holders whole?
Click to expand...

Google "Steve Rattner" (the rat) and all your questions will be answered. Again, trying to keep this out of spin, but you know where the story goes. The bond holders weren't even lubricated before-hand.
 
JeffDG said:
I have no problem with the equity shareholders in GM being wiped out entirely.

However, the secured bondholders should have received 100% of their bonds paid before one cent was paid to unsecured creditors, including the unions.

There is a specific and well-defined pecking order, secured creditors sit very near the top of that order, and equity shareholders sit at the very bottom.
Click to expand...

The problem I have with the GM deal is this.
I personally know a person fairly high up in management. They were told before the feces hit the fan that they should unload all their stock and do it quick. Many did and didn't lose all they had invested.
The non management employee, the average investor out on the street did not have this insider info and lost big time.
The suppliers lost big time as they went belly up, lost out because of secures lenders and such, lost billions.
Now the Gubment steps in with our money and bails them out for all of our own good. The new GM without debt now comes back pays, back the Gubment and then declares record profits and declares all top management needs bonuses. Doesn't anyone see the insider trading issue here? And they put Martha Stewart in prison for an example?
I will do my best not to buy another GM product.
 
RUN from any "public private partnership". That is a "buzsword" for "you will get rushed", by act of congress.

It's hard to get excited about "send more money" when N4GA is at redbird once per week. What is my interest in sending Craig there?
 
Last edited:
bartmc said:
You must be upper level management. Let me fix my post for you.

  • Send money to AOPA PAC
  • they need it to pay politicians.
Click to expand...

As for craig fuller, AOPA hired him to beg for money with one hand and bribe politicians with the other. I can't imagine how it didn't work out...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top