Think for a moment about the following.
Pilots make mistakes and some violate safety rules just because they believe they are “special” 
Now here’s the “solution” to the problem.
Special agents code name “ignoramus” find the FAA list of pilot database and send emails to random pilots, some might be dead and others with Master Pilot Awards.
Let’s throw a number of Gold Seal Instructors DPE ect in the mix.
Revoke all certificates and declare victory by claiming, you “ignoramus” fixed everything related to flight safely.
No time for due process 
Ain’t that great 
Bob,
I wanted to understand what’s really driving the debt issue, so I took time to look into it.
According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Tax Policy Center, and the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, one major factor is the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA). While the law was promoted as a way to boost the economy, it is projected to add approximately $1.9 trillion to the deficit over a decade.
Here’s how the law contributes to the debt:
Corporate Tax Cuts: The TCJA reduced the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, leading to significant revenue losses. Companies like Apple, Microsoft, and Amazon benefited substantially.
Pass-Through Deduction: The law introduced a 20% deduction for pass-through entities, intended to support small businesses. However, nearly two-thirds of the benefits went to the top 1% of earners, as reported by the Tax Policy Center. Wealthy property owners, including those with substantial real estate holdings, gained significant tax breaks since much of their real estate operations are structured as pass-through entities.
Estate Tax Exemption: The TCJA doubled the estate tax exemption to $11.18 million per individual, allowing wealthy families to transfer more wealth tax-free. This change significantly reduced potential revenue from estate taxes.
Investors and Shareholders: Many corporations used their tax savings for stock buybacks, boosting share prices. Since the wealthiest 10% of Americans own about 90% of the stock market, they benefited the most.
Meanwhile, working families saw modest, short-term tax cuts that are set to expire in 2025. According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, making those cuts permanent could add another $4.5 trillion to the deficit over the next decade.
A Practical Solution
Experts at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Tax Policy Center recommend the following steps to restore revenue without harming working families:
- Raise the corporate tax rate to 28% — a middle ground between the old 35% rate and the current 21%. This adjustment would still encourage business growth while recovering much of the lost revenue.
- Close loopholes that allow wealthy real estate investors and pass-through business owners to minimize taxes. Tightening these rules would target those who gained the most from the 2017 law.
- Extend the tax cuts for lower and middle-income earners while scaling back those for higher earners. This approach would protect working families while reducing the cost of extending the cuts.
The Result
Implementing these changes could restore hundreds of billions in lost revenue, slow the growth of the debt, and shift the tax burden back toward those who benefited the most from the 2017 law.
The debt problem wasn’t caused by FAA technicians. It stems from tax cuts that provided lasting gains to corporations and the wealthy. Addressing it requires smarter tax policy, not cuts that jeopardize public safety.
1 Like
You might want to do more research! The CBO doesn’t use dynamic scoring, meaning they didn’t account for the increased revenue to the government that the tax cuts create because the economy grew. Revenue is way up after the tax cuts. I know that’s a difficult concept for liberals but higher tax rates don’t necessarily lead to more revenue, in fact it normally leads to a decline because the economy slows and the evil rich move assets to avoid the tax.
Raising the corporate tax is a stupid idea if you want manufacturing jobs in this country. BTW, another concept difficult for liberals to understand is the FACT that corporations don’t pay taxes, the consumer who buys their product do. Tax is just a line item on the P and L and is included in the price you pay.
Do you even understand what a pass through is? You’re talking about small businesses, S Corporations, and they account for the majority of the jobs in this country.
You want the economy in the toilet, implement the changes you are promoting. Just curious which leftist Soros organization did you get those talking points from? You seem to have wealth envy, so I have to ask, how many poor people have given you a job?
Bottom line, we have a spending problem, not a tax problem.
1 Like
Damage from DOGE, LOL! Cutting waste and fraud is now a bad thing. Who knew!
Hmmm, Musk has lost $150 BILLION due to his work with DOGE. Also, do some research, the majority of revenue at Tesla does NOT come from government contracts. How do I know, I’m a shareholder and have been for 6 years back when Elon was the darling of the left.
Bob, I read your response and while I appreciate your passion your argument relies more on partisan rhetoric than facts. If we’re going to talk seriously about the national debt let’s set the record straight.
First off, you said the CBO doesn’t use dynamic scoring, and that’s only half true. While the CBO usually sticks to static scoring, the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) , which Republicans themselves leaned on to defend the TCJA , did use dynamic scoring. According to the JCT, their numbers showed that economic growth from the TCJA would recover about 30% of the lost revenue. But that still leaves roughly $1.5 trillion in added debt over a decade. So no, the TCJA didn’t magically pay for itself , not even close. (jct.gov) (jct.gov)
Now let’s talk about spending cuts and the idea that firing federal employees under the DOGE program* is the answer. Even if you fired every single federal civilian employee , all 2 million of them , you wouldn’t come close to offsetting the TCJA’s debt impact. In fact, to recover the $1.5 trillion in added debt, you’d have to fire roughly 12.5 million employees , over six times the total federal workforce. Cutting federal jobs isn’t a solution to the TCJA’s impact, it’s a distraction.
Your claim that corporations don’t pay taxes, consumers do is oversimplified. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, while businesses do push some costs onto consumers, the burden actually gets spread out between consumers, employees, and shareholders. After the TCJA, a lot of companies didn’t rush to boost wages or create jobs , instead, they poured billions into stock buybacks, which mostly padded the pockets of wealthy investors. If the TCJA was supposed to spark growth and opportunity, why did so much of the benefit go straight to shareholders instead of into wages or job expansion? The numbers show that the TCJA’s biggest winners were stockholders, and most of those are in the top 10% of earners. (cbpp.org) (cbpp.org)
You also asked if I understand what a pass-through entity is. I do, and I know that businesses like S Corporations, LLCs, and sole proprietorships are a huge part of the economy. According to the Tax Policy Center, the TCJA’s 20% pass-through deduction ended up giving a big break to wealthy investors, not just small businesses. Nearly 60% of the deduction’s benefits went to the top 1%. Wealthy landlords, big real estate investors, and hedge fund managers cashed in while a lot of smaller businesses didn’t see much of a boost. If you want to help Main Street, we need tax policies that actually target small businesses, not handouts that mostly benefit the richest Americans. (cbpp.org) (cbpp.org)
Your claim that raising the corporate tax rate would kill manufacturing jobs is overblown. According to the Tax Foundation, before the TCJA, the real corporate tax rate , what companies actually paid after deductions , was about 20%, not the sky-high 35% that gets tossed around. Bumping the current 21% rate up to 28%, like some have proposed, wouldn’t wreck American industry. It would just restore some balance to a system that’s been tilted in favor of corporations and wealthy investors since 2017. If a company can’t survive without an artificially low tax rate, the problem isn’t taxes , it’s bad management. (taxfoundation.org) (taxfoundation.org)
Lastly your insistence that we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem, is only half the truth. Yes spending is out of control, particularly with entitlement costs like Social Security, Medicare, and debt interest climbing rapidly. But dismissing the revenue shortfall caused by the TCJA ignores reality. The deficit exploded because Congress cut taxes without controlling spending. Pretending that tax cuts are cost-free is fiscally irresponsible. You can’t plug a hole in the budget by ignoring the side that’s leaking revenue.
As for your personal attacks the remarks about liberals Soros organizations and wealth envy they’re irrelevant. Throwing insults doesn’t strengthen your argument it weakens it. I’m not here to push some political narrative, I’m here to address the facts. The reality is that the TCJA was marketed as a win for working Americans yet most of its lasting benefits flowed to corporations and the wealthy. Working families got modest short-term cuts that are set to expire this year while corporations continue to enjoy permanent tax breaks. That’s not sound fiscal policy, it’s a giveaway disguised as reform.
The debt crisis isn’t just about spending or taxes, it’s about both. The TCJA was sold as a win for working Americans yet most of its lasting benefits flowed to corporations and the wealthy while adding $1.5 trillion to the debt. Cutting federal employees won’t come close to fixing that. If we’re serious about solving the debt crisis we need smarter tax reforms that restore balance along with targeted spending controls. Ignoring one side of the equation while clinging to political talking points is exactly how we ended up here. If you want to debate solutions, I’m ready but if you’re just looking to score partisan points that’s not a conversation worth having.
1 Like
This websites commenting section is probably in its worst shape in 15 years in terms of halfway decent and respectful discussions.
Remember, that political clowns will be exchanged for new (probably worse) political clowns, within less than half a decade.
One would hope that something, closely resembling the past time of General Aviation and its cameraderie and group-flair, will survive for when this time comes.
Reading some of these comments makes me wonder how any average Pan-Cake Fly-In may look like, these days. Namecalling, clique style rampage commenting, insulting conduct, highly toxic and intentionally offensive communication. Do you beat each other up in person, as well?
Shameful, for a community that once stood united against arbitrary, capricious and shortsighted rulemaking. We used to have courts, which would settle the questions of legality - in particular when having far-reaching, hasty and erratic leadership pains. The court of public opinion is really just what it has always been… mildly entertaining.
Maybe some of you are too old to care about whats happening when this freakshow ends - some of us do care.
3 Likes
My understanding is that the epidemic is orchestrated to bully the public into submission.
Reading the posts gives me an insight regarding the commenters background, the nasty are ignorant with little or no aviation background.
Very obvious, some are real bad actors.
They’re here as a wave 
and then they disappear 
with their beers 
The platform is not sophisticated enough to stop them so I ignore them as they deserve it.
The deeper we dive into aviation subjects the less we will be disturbed by the rats.
I certainly don’t know all the issues related to the layoffs of FAA employees BUT, I do know that when I need to get an answer to an aviation related question, no body’s home at my local Flight Standard District Office FSDO and if I leave a message I usually get a call back in about a week. Something needs to get fixed!
‘Maybe some of you are too old to care about whats happening when this freakshow ends - some of us do care.’
I care very much at seventy-five. But electing a profoundly craven, grandiose narcissist with a smashed ethical and moral compass, twice, who manipulates the weak and gullible with delusions and lies in order to form the necessary cult following, purposefully to climb on their backs for personal gain - I just can’t see how this freakshow will end. This now seems to be who we are.
But if it ever does in my lifetime, I’m all in.
1 Like
Why not just RIF them? That’s the legal way to have a “Reduction in Force”. Sending thousands of employees letters saying they are fired for “performance” issues when they all are doing the job does not follow law. Use the right law for the job and it works! I’ve seen it work! Probationary employees are fired for true performance issues all the time. They don’t have MPSB protections, so their only recourse is in the courts, and they usually lose because the government can show that there are indeed performance issues. In this case they can’t. In a RIF, folks are laid off, the law is followed, and bye-bye employee. Could have been a long way down the road already towards getting people RIF’ed if the law was just followed.
1 Like
Hard agree - efficiency cuts is not the same as arbitrary cuts.
Currently, it looks like DOGE and their methods will actually cost US taxpayer more in legal fees and reinstatement, notwithstanding lack of actual efficiency.
It looks more like a takeover than any attempt to be efficient (see sniping at Verizon in lieu of Starlink for details).
2 Likes
Well, I take your point but what would most European cities look like if you applied the same logic?
I’m a CFI, ATP, Airline Captain and Line Check Pilot what do you want to talk about?
1 Like
I confess I’m in a quandary about how much politics to let into these discussions. My gut says let it roll and let people vent. There is a difference in the discussion since the election. Although there is plenty of personal venom directed at the main players, the arguments are largely focused on the policies themselves and their impacts on aviation. I think there’s some value in that.
Russ
2 Likes
Agreed. At least we now have the option of filtering out those who contribute the most static.
2 Likes
Russ,
Your job requires a very delicate balance regarding civility and free speech.
When I stated the lack of sophistication of this platform in my humble opinion ( I might be wrong on that ) I did not direct my comment to you, knowing you work there and the business has to earn money.
We, meaning all of us Aviation Enthusiasts have many things in common but the general derailment of civility in recent times spilled over here no doubt.
Where is common sense and open mindedness ?
Where is research and facts checking ?
Everything we do before we fly requires ADM and Safety considerations, but because of venom injection in politics we see very little or no correction of course discipline.
My way or get out of my way… 
most of us don’t teach or fly with a cowboy attitude.
We can agree to disagree, while we can learn from each other (open minds win 
)
I for one don’t waste time on ignoramus bullies, period.
I may not agree when you ask to edit a word or a term I use but I respectfully change things for the sake of Democracy !!!
Please keep up your good attitude !!!
Thanks !!!
Captain Bob,
Congratulations on your achievements !!!
You worked hard to do all this, you are very articulate and well read as I saw in a few of your posts before I muted you.
Let me explain why I did that.
I saw a bright individual who knows many things in you, but what became clear to me was the lack of plurality in the material you studied.
I hope I’m wrong, but you “made a splash” because you engaged many good minds here like RAF and others who wrote volumes 
to show you what they know about the subject.
In short my thoughts jumped to what ND Tyson eloquently said:
“One of the great challenges in life is knowing enough about a subject to think you’re right, but not enough about the subject to know you’re wrong.”
That’s not to say I am better than anyone else, simply I try to be open minded so I can learn from others and I learned a lot from my students’ perspectives / mistakes.
Let’s be friends with open minds so we can all prosper in a civilized way.
Thanks and please fly safe !!!
1 Like
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I do try very hard to listen to both sides, and I’m much more of a Libertarian than I am Republican or Democrat. I voted for Reagan twice and Clinton once. What I have determined is I’m extremely concerned about the debt and feel strongly everyone needs to be willing to see their own pet projects and people on the chopping block. We are way past nibbling around the edges, the chain saw has become necessary. Every cut proposed is going to get push back from someone benefiting from it.
It isn’t one parties fault, it’s both that have been using our tax dollars to buy votes and in many cases creating unnecessary projects for their own benefit. I want to leave a free country for my 4 grandchildren, but right now I think they will grow to hate my generation for our mismanagement. So to use an old phrase, it’s time to bash a few baby seals in the head.
As far as responding to RAF, I try not to write a book in comments sections of any site, but to throw out short replies that might get someone to come out of their corner and think. There are absolutely issues that I can agree with both sides on. What I refuse to do is not speak up when it comes to the future my grandchildren will face if we don’t reverse the current fiscal issues and I believe very strongly that additional taxes is not the way. 5.5 Trillion dollars should be more than enough for the legitimate functions of the federal government. More taxes will only give the “debt doesn’t matter” crowd more money to spend and the debt will continue to rise. It’s time to get back to limited Federal Government the way the founders intended. The best government is closest to the people and that isn’t DC. I personally consider airports and the FAA to be a subset of the postal roads enumerated in the Constitution. However, that doesn’t mean it’s untouchable.
Lastly since I’m way over my normal limit for comments, I don’t get mad at anyone for their opinions and could spend all day debating issues important to me because I do read both sides including SCOTUS opinions. My own personal favorite is Scalia’s descent on the ACA. Solutions aren’t easy but jumping into a corner and defending the excess of our federal government isn’t going to solve anything. The federal government does very little well and even those things cost way too much.
Have a good day!
1 Like
Nobody claimed that it would be easy to reform the U.S. Government. The massive shift of power to bureaucrats started in the Wilson administration over 100 years ago. Would you rather go back to Biden, or, actually, his handlers? The “staff” was spending the U.S. into oblivion. Nobody even knew where a lot of the money was going!