Anonymous wrote:Heathrow is privately owned. And every frequent traveler absolutely hates Heathrow.

Exactly! Private isn’t always better.

Heathrow is privately owned. And every frequent traveler absolutely hates Heathrow.

90% of all airports in this country are owned privately.

Large, municipal airports are the exception, not the rule.

I wouldn’t rush to privatize airports or the FAA. Companies assess risk differently than Government. They will do a cost benefit analysis on repairs vs payout for loss of life. I don’t want my loved ones lives to be determined by some corporate actuary. The government doesn’t do this, they aim for zero loss.

As infrastructure that generally has no local competition, it doesn't work well with private ownership. And even then, it would have to have a ton of regulations. Like the water system.

(Does the WH really have to turn to DCUM to research stuff this basic?!)

Municipalities and other governmental authorities have bonding authority to fund significant capital expenditures. We don’t need airports to turn profits. We need them run as efficiently as possible, with safety and security as primary concerns.

Anonymous wrote:Government just runs some things better than profiteers. The government runs our roads. Why not sell them off to be run by the lowest bidder?

Never fear. Trump is trying to sell off the Be and GW parkways. Bigly real estate investment opportunities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Private firms used to run airport security for people boarding flights. How’d that work out?

I knew there was one person in the world who would defend the TSA. I can't believe I finally found them!

DP. No one likes TSA. And security screenings are a PITA. But, they are learning to make things more efficient (pre-check and trusted traveler). And in the 16 years since 9/11, I can’t think of a single act of terrorism from a US departing flight. They need to or on customer service. But, they have a much better track record than private screening did.

Inconvenient— yes. Hijacked or blown up? No.

Government just runs some things better than profiteers. The government runs our roads. Why not sell them off to be run by the lowest bidder?

9/11

Certainly this is a troll post? Right? No one can be this dumb.

I’m assuming you are not a Trumpkin, and are genuinely interested. So—

Because we don’t want one company to have a monopoly on air transportation

Because we need to control costs

Because they are incredibly expensive to build and don’t turn a profit unless you want to pay hundreds of dollars more than you do for an airline ticket. There is a strong liklihoood no private company would build them. Especially once you get out of major metropolitan areas. No one wants to own the Greensboro NC airport.

Because the government needs to control every aspect of airports for quality of life and safety reasons. From eminent domain to build to the years it takes to get runways approved, to the even longer it takes to get and change flight paths to security screening to checking airplane maintenance to air traffic control. These things need government oversight. You would rather our air traffic control and security screenings to be as safe as possible, right? Not contracted out to the lowest bidder. And that planes not be inspected by someone who has an economic incentive to overlook defects. We don’t run airports to make a profit. We want them to be efficient. But not at the cost of safety.

Because once private companies get involved, you are almost inevitably talking about foreign investment. And post 9/11, anyone should be able to see that having foreigners own our airports is a huge national security issue.

General welfare clause. There are some things government does that will never turn turn a profit. They cost too much, and if you raised the price enough to cover it, most people would be priced out. Bridges, roads, aquaducts, airports— we build these things because they make our society better and because we want everyone to have the benefits. Not to make a profit.

Etc.. no one wins if you privatize airports. Except the plutocrats who get a piece of the financial action. I guarantee you if Trump signed off selling Dulles, two things would happen. Ticket prices would double. And we would discover a few years down the line that there had been a direct economic benefit to Trump.

Anonymous wrote:Why does the Government own airports? Would they run better if Google, Apple, DC Urban Moms, McDonald's was the owner of the Airports?

No they wouldn't. They might run more efficiently but the focus would be solely on profit. We all know that when profit is stake, corners are cut until something happens.

Besides that, while these companies may "own" the airport, pretty much the same employees will be running it and the same non-employee vendors will be providing services (mechanics, janitorial, etc.).

Anonymous wrote:Private firms used to run airport security for people boarding flights. How’d that work out?

I knew there was one person in the world who would defend the TSA. I can't believe I finally found them!

Private firms used to run airport security for people boarding flights. How’d that work out?

Why does the Government own airports? Would they run better if Google, Apple, DC Urban Moms, McDonald's was the owner of the Airports?