[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

The trouble with this brilliant scheme is that most of the major US hub airports are hopelessly overwhelmed with traffic.

To pull off anything as ambitious as a North American air transport system, the federal government would have to construct a dozen new airports far away from major metropolitan areas. Giant hubs connecting to destinations by rail, with strict prohibitions against development for miles around.

This is not unrealistic, and would essentially create a dual air traffic control system: one for passengers and one for cargo.

Destinations South of the US would be towards the Plan Puebla Panama zone in southern Mexico. It is slated to be an enormous transshipment hub for ship, rail and air. It would be central to both North America/South America cargo, but also for Atlantic/Pacific cargo.

Destinations North would be to either coast of Canada. Eastern Canada to Europe and western Canada to SE Asia.

However, such much of their brilliant and subversive scheme makes preposterous economic projections, and is based on the assumption that the reasons that this wasn’t done before was because people used to be stupid and didn’t care about money.

[El Gato]

That's just silly. Mexican Airlines already fly to US cities. Mexicana in particular. They don't really carry all that much traffic, not that large a fraction of the Mexican populace can afford to fly, even at the slight discount that the Mexican airlines offer.

[AGreatPer]

"To pull off anything as ambitious as a North American air transport system, the federal government would have to construct a dozen new airports far away from major metropolitan areas."

Sorry to disagree with you. The basic structure is already in place. There are enough smaller airports that can be restructured to handle this load with excellent access to major destinations.
Just a few names: Richmond, VA; Harrisburg, PA, etc. (you get the idea).