France to tax flights from its airports, airline shares fall • Hacker News Board

Re: France to tax flights from its airports, airline shares fall

#361

Post by Sharlin » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 6:51 PM UTC

hourislate wrote: post #277

dewey wrote: post #167

Finally. It's really frustrating to see how heavily subsidized airlines, plane fuel and airports are and how big of a tax breaks they get when they come to a city. At the same time people are shamed for buying salad in a plastic bag when the big lever is somewhere completely different. Had the same thought yesterday when I saw: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1148317244893597696

>Finally. It's really frustrating to see how heavily subsidized airlines, plane fuel and airports are and how big of a tax breaks they get when they come to a city. I suppose the Airlines will just pass along any new taxes to the traveling consumer. I was always under the impression that airports in France were economic drivers of prosperity considering tourism makes up about 77 billion euro of economic impact to the…

The economic drivers of prosperity, unfortunately, are what got us in this predicament in the first place. In the world we now live there’s no way flights should be cheaper than train tickets, should never have been.

Re: France to tax flights from its airports, airline shares fall

#362

Post by ericd » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 6:53 PM UTC

zjaffee wrote: post #341

ericd wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, I think a carbon tax that puts a price on the damage people do day to day with their behavior is the only thing that’s going to work on a meaningful scale. The needed changes are too painful to make without pushing hard on peoples’ wallets.

Carbon taxes end up being a regressive tax on the poor (not entirely, but marginally), especially given that poorer folks are often forced to commute longer distances and live in less well insulated and modernized homes. An approach that focuses on decreasing the price of clean technology, rather than one that just raises the price of dirtier tech and assumes later rebalancing would be a much more effective approach,…

It doesn't have to just be a tax, the government could make it revenue neutral and use the revenue to provide an offsetting subsidy for cleaner tech.

Re: France to tax flights from its airports, airline shares fall

#363

Post by benj111 » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 6:53 PM UTC

anoncake wrote: post #323

benj111 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A 2-day adventure involving trains, cars, ferries,hotels is much more environmentally (and physically) costly than a $300 flight" Based on what? Sea travel is really quite efficient, so are trains, especially when we're talking about French trains powered by French nuclear. And why are immigrants a reason that its regressive? Low paid eastern Europeans aren't going to be flying around Europe, well paid international…

Yes, it does. Consider immigrants that want to visit their family.

Yes it does what?

I've already answered your 2nd sentence.

Re: France to tax flights from its airports, airline shares fall

#364

Post by sgjohnson » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 6:53 PM UTC

gns24 wrote: post #192

The UK already taxes flights in a similar way. Whilst this does feel like progress, it would be much better to tax the fuel instead of the passengers. Virtually all other fuel is taxed, so it's strange that jet fuel is exempt. The problem with taxing passengers instead of fuel include: - it doesn't encourage improving the efficiency of planes - airlines can't fill their planes with really cheap seats, and empty seats…

> - airlines can't fill their planes with really cheap seats, and empty seats seem like a ridiculous waste

This has never been true. There is no money in Economy. Almost never has been.

Airlines make money off premium cabins and business travellers who book flights a couple of days in advance.

Example LHR to LAX return. https://i.imgur.com/SCjndu8.png

Fare: £50

One flexible First class return on the exact same flight comes with Fare of £15,628 and taxes of £670. This makes one Flexible First Class ticket worth to them more than the entire capacity of Economy cabin.

Personally, I wouldn't pay that with my own cash, but if I have to fly 6+ hours for leisure, I'm paying for non-flex Business/First class seats.

They couldn't care less how empty/full is the economy cabin. At £25 per leg revenue (not profit), I'd actually be surprised if they break even.

On long haul flights, airlines probably[citation needed] operate Economy cabin at a loss.

Re: France to tax flights from its airports, airline shares fall

#365

Post by usrusr » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 6:53 PM UTC

st1ck wrote: post #252

usrusr wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Transit flights" Is that a connecting flight? Seems to be the only exception. Makes sense, economically, in that there is quite fierce competition between CDG and other major European hub airports for filling spare intercontinental capacity and multi-hop connections are far more price sensitive than direct flights. If CDG would lose a majority of regional (but still international) feeder traffic to FRA or AMS, Par…

I wonder, even if AMS takes over CDG as a hub, would it hurt Air France — KLM in any way?

Oh, wasn't even aware of that group. But it only makes the threat of a traffic shift out France bigger: while a standalone Air France would be forced to defend the status of their home hub against the odds, the group would not really mind an internal shift.

According to Wikipedia (en. and de.), the French state has been divesting from air France quite a bit while the Netherlands, who had very little at the time of the merger, are about to match their government stake to parity (but both will remain at <30% combined). I'd assume that French leadership is quite aware of the risk of Air France KLM effectively becoming KLM Air France if they push too hard.

Re: France to tax flights from its airports, airline shares fall

#366

Post by esotericn » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 6:56 PM UTC

Some of the posts here amuse me because they're based on the idea that everything that exists now somehow must exist forever.

The train, or electric car, or boat, or other less polluting option from A to B, may well take a lot longer.

That might make certain things impractical. Like, say, me wombling down to Heathrow and taking a weekend in Krakow.

That may well just be the way it has to be. It may be temporary due to technological advancement; it may not.

Just as it may be the case that, in fact, there is no suitable alternative to say, plastic wrap on food. And maybe we'll have to change our diet.

I make no claim that any of the above is true; but if it is; such is life. We will have to adapt.

Re: France to tax flights from its airports, airline shares fall

#367

Post by wayoutthere » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 6:57 PM UTC

dewey wrote: post #167

Finally. It's really frustrating to see how heavily subsidized airlines, plane fuel and airports are and how big of a tax breaks they get when they come to a city. At the same time people are shamed for buying salad in a plastic bag when the big lever is somewhere completely different. Had the same thought yesterday when I saw: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1148317244893597696

The whole passenger air travel industry (airlines, aircraft manufacturers, airports, etc) is subsidized because they’re not profitable on their own. But a robust and affordable air travel network is a capability the business world needs to operate our economy.

Boeing and Airbus are two of the most heavily subsidized companies in the world, and the airlines themselves aren’t far behind. They’re both high-risk, low-margin businesses.

Re: France to tax flights from its airports, airline shares fall

#368

Post by SolaceQuantum » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 6:58 PM UTC

perfunctory wrote: post #350

avip wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another point I find relevant is all your examples involved a non-trivial (possibly overwhelming for this crowd) use of violence (which I think you somewhat understated as civil disobedience ). So... do we have the stamina to ramp up our "protest" into something mildly violent?

civil disobedience is by definition non-violent. Unless by non-trivial violence you mean the violence against the protesters (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_Riders )

Desegregation & civil rights was by no means non-violent. Gay Rights was by no means non-violent- in fact, one of the penultimate moments of the gay movements was the stonewall riots, a series of violent acts against the police that are still ceberated to this day within the community. (Not that I'm arguing they are unjustified in their behavior- but there's nothing peaceful about throwing a brick- and most importantly, that brick thrown has practically been enshrined into LGBTQ mythology.)

Arguing that violence is never the answer and pointing to movements that had violent elements that then are regarded as successfully rising up against oppressive systems is nonsensical.

Re: France to tax flights from its airports, airline shares fall

#369

Post by Sharlin » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 6:59 PM UTC

hourislate wrote: post #354

zulln wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I suppose the Airlines will just pass along any new taxes to the traveling consumer. Well, yeah, but what is the problem with that? The price increase thus decreasing the demand of flights, achieving the goal.

> Well, yeah, but what is the problem with that? Because Airlines seem to be the intended target and not the tourist. I would imagine they would have instituted an airport fee if the tourist was the target. >The price increase thus decreasing the demand of flights, achieving the goal. This could cause a drop in tourist dollars but maybe that's the goal. It seems Europe in general is wary of tourists. Spain has gone s…

That’s silly, bordering on ridiculous. The goal is to reduce emissions. That will obviously have economical consequences. Hell, that’s the whole reason we are in this mess, because doing the right thing costs more than the alternative!

Re: France to tax flights from its airports, airline shares fall

#370

Post by aeternus » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 7:01 PM UTC

WA wrote: post #347

ivl wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consumers drive the business decisions. Set incentives to make the consumers choose the more environmentally conscious choice, via a carbon / plastic / waste tax to cover the externalities.

If consumer drove business decisions, we‘d still have no seat belts and the ozone layer would not exist anymore because of CFC. In some ways, consumers can make a difference, but only to serve as a trigger for political decisions (if we get lucky). Also in your example, what comes first – the consumer’s choice or the carbon tax?

The tax should come first. Price incentives are strong, they will drive consumer behavior which will drive business behavior.