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

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

#381

Post by marcosdumay » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 7:14 PM UTC

wayoutthere wrote: post #367

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-mar…

This is funny, because the reason they are not profitable on their own is because they don't need to, since they are subsidized.

Competition makes those companies use any cost-saving they can. If the government takes an option away, they'll just all not use it anymore and settle down on a higher price.

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

#382

Post by dajohnson89 » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 7:17 PM UTC

bilbo0s wrote: post #244

dajohnson89 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's add in the BWI airport too. And while we're at it add Baltimore too. But that's it!

The issue is the rest of the nation though. Yes, it's obviously a winner for the North East. You guys can put as many cities as you like on the link list because you have the geography and the density. Awesome! Good for you. What about everyone else?

move to a higher density area? i moved to the east coast, from the south.

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

#383

Post by makerofspoons » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 7:20 PM UTC

eanzenberg wrote: post #340

earthtolazlo wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think happens if we don’t dramatically reduce our carbon emissions in a very short period of time? I’ll give you a hint: it doesn’t resemble anything like the “advancement of humankind.”

Not much? A few degrees warmer here or there, and a few feet increase in sea level? And that's in ~100 years.

Mass famine, economic collapse, war, and ultimately the collapse of industrial civilization: http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/07/climate-change-earth-...

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

#384

Post by akerro » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 7:20 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…

>that planes will fly in with enough fuel to fly out again

Planes with fuel are too heavy to land, planes have just enough fuel to get to destination. Landing with 40% fuel capacity would break wheels and damage planes, increase stopping distance.

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

#385

Post by dorfsmay » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 7:25 PM UTC

Why are they taxing flights rather than fuel?

There's nothing wrong with "flying"! What's wrong is how they get their airspeed, namely by burning fossil fuel.

Also those prices are insulting. There is no jet fuel tax in the EU. This gimmick tax is less than what people driving cars pay in taxes on their fuel for a tank of gas. Governments want to increase tax on car fuels (hence the yellow jacket movement) but still give airlines a break!

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

#386

Post by wayoutthere » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 7:26 PM UTC

dewey wrote: post #373

wayoutthere wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-mar…

I don't have a source for that but I'd say if the airlines etc wouldn't be so subsidized there would be higher focus on developing better engines, electric planes or other technologies than in the current state where losses will just be covered by the tax payer. They wouldn't just stop operating and the "business world" would most likely not collapse. I've talked to a bunch of people that get flown around by their co…

This is exactly what has happened — the 787 is the result, and is hugely popular with airlines. But the operational life of a big jet is measured in decades, and there are plenty of 50-year-old airframes in regular operation today.

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

#387

Post by _ph_ » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 7:26 PM UTC

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #283

_ph_ wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there is sufficient demmand, it would be obvious to build a tunnel across the Gibraltar strait. This would reasonably connect the north-west of Africa with Spain.

The border between Morocco and Algeria is closed. So, even with that tunnel, travel from Europe to Algeria would only be possible by air or ferry.

One might work at opening border in all the years the tunnel is being built - closed borders should't be considered a irreversable thing. Furthermore, of course there still be flights available. The whole point is to have less flights. So some flights could be shifted to train or boat and for the rest double-checked whether the flight is still needed.

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

#388

Post by jokoon » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 7:27 PM UTC

marnett wrote: post #211

> Want to do something about climate change? Start with yourself I really dislike this line of thinking. I don’t manufacture millions of tons of concrete or millions of single-use plastic shampoo bottles. Our current path is irreversible if drastic shifts in disposable consumerism don’t occur soon.

You're right, but the more people are able to make good choices, the more politicians will be able to put pressure on companies who make money on carbon emissions. Politicians can't do anything unless consumers really show they're able to change.

Climate change is a problem of consumption and how economies are completely dependent on carbon emissions. You just cannot realistically forbid this and this without hurting the economy and its existing carbon-dependent infrastructure. Climate change will be fought on campaigning on consumers so that they call on their good will and shift markets.

I guess the only reliable way to make consumers change their choice is fear mongering about climate change. We need more climate change hard-scifi.

If consumers act like lazy sedentary irresponsible kids, the only way will be to instate hard measures: banning personal cars and adding more organized public transport, switching to reusable glass and steel packaging, reducing bullshit jobs to avoid useless transportation, economies of scale to avoid emissions, a big nuclear energy plan, etc. To be honest all those things should already be startups. They're not complicated. It's a matter of law and how salesmen are pushing consumers to make bad choices.

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

#389

Post by dorfsmay » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 7:27 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?

Wheren't both those examples driven by government regulations?

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

#390

Post by marcosdumay » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 7:29 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #223

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

Aviation accounts for just 2% of global carbon emissions: https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/1/11/1817711... . The plastics industry will burn through 14% of remaining carbon budget: https://www.desmogblog.com/2019/05/15/plastics-industry-clim...

Those are 2 very different measures. You can't compare them.