Posted on 02/02/2009 7:41:24 AM PST by PhiloBedo
This may seem like an outrageous statement, especially right after the public hubbub that caused Citigroup — the beneficiary of billions in government bailout money — to cancel the delivery of a new $42 million jet. But consider this: The General Aviation Manufacturers Association estimates that more than one million people are employed manufacturing, maintaining, flying and managing business aircraft. In addition to keeping legions at work in top-paying jobs, business aircraft facilitate and expand commerce for their users and contribute $150 billion to the American economy annually. With that in mind, it’s astounding to see members of Congress, the very people doling out hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to failed companies, disparaging and even actively trying to curtail this industry, which is already reeling from the economic and credit crises. The business jet is merely a tool —
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
This is akin to the outsourcing argument and the model is still wrong.
Corporate jets are a luxury item not a necessity.
Corporate jets may be a good thing, but only for companies that are profitable and are not relying on taxpayer bailouts to keep them afloat.
More BS (Business Socialist, of Bull S...) blather.
After taxpayers have subsidized your company....you do not go out and buy a personal jet. Fly commercial
Heck...they should tele-conference more....maybe they wouldn’t be broke if they used some modern technology
Outsourcing typically refers to sending jobs overseas.
It is more akin to the internet argument.....can a business be competitive without using the internet?
pathetic attempt at justifying a luxury item.
If they didn’t want scrutiny over how many fancy jets they buy, they shouldn’t have gotten in bed with the federal government.
If they are such a necessity, the CEO’s should buy them with their bonuses.
Wonder how many will do that?
Well said. I couldn’t agree more.
Agreed.
I have an even better idea.
Invest in video conferencing infrastructure.
I would call corporate jets a "convenience" but not a necessity. But with all of BS going on with commercial air travel, flying corporate saves hours (literally) each trip. For me, they turned a 1/2 day plus (assuming no delays) trip to NYC into a short commute of a little over an hour. Since LaGuardia can always be counted on to get backed up, I really preferred to fly corporate out of Teterboro.
Further, the corporate jets that I've always flown, have nearly always been full. Unless there was a last-minute schedule change, or cancellation - they try to keep every seat occupied. Can't say that for commercial.
Finally, more often than not, particularly on flights to major cities (NY, Boston) the extra seats were occupied by sick children and their families, headed for treatment, or back home from it. The program is called "Corporate Angels" and I think that it's one of the best corporate charities that you've never heard of.
First they came for the CEO’s jet and I laughed.
Then they came for my neighbor’s SUV and I was quiet.
When they came for my 2 cylinder econo-spec it was too late.
I am unclear as to how many asked for government money and how often the government insisted on them taking it. As I recall, Wells Fargo didn't want a "bailout" but Bernake told all the bankers, "You will take this deal or you won't get out of this room!"
I don’t recall Citigroup claiming the money was forced on them,.
I don’t either but Warren Buffet and some Arabs put lots of money in Citibank, too. Did they really need money from the government?
That's the point I hop on a horse and ride off into the swamp with my guns and my dogs.
the cream no longer rises ..
Is this akin to the mile-high club?? ;-P
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.