Originally Posted by
FliesWay2Much
I agree. There are way too many variables for any meaningful conclusions about anything. As a result, the statistics can be manipulated anyway you want them to turn out. A few general thoughts before trying out some specifics:
- On a macro level, many of us made decisions about reducing or completely stopping flying a LONG time ago.
- Many of us significantly increased our drive/fly perimeter. From Washington DC, I have driven to places such as Huntsville, Ottawa, Atlanta, and New Orleans on business trips. Until the TSA came out of the swamp, I would have flown to all those destinations without hesitation.
- The Pre Check extortion has simply stopped the bleeding.
- I personally do not believe that aviation accidents over the past 15 years have made a bit of difference.
OK, here is my short list of the variables I would like to see held constant, one at a time:
- If security was the same as it was on Sept 10, 2001, would the number of passengers be more or less than they are now?
- How much does the reduction in aircraft size and services affect a person's decision to fly or not to fly?
- Have government and corporate travel budgets increased or decreased over the past 15 years?
- If the budgets described above are fixed and only adjusted for inflation, are companies and agencies able to afford more or less trips per year?
- How does the cost of gasoline affect a person's decision to fly?
- What is the effect from companies who reduced or eliminated their corporate travel and invested in video-teleconferencing or permanently assigning staff to a remote location?
- What is the effect from companies who expanded or went offshore and now must travel?
- If technology improvements were not considered, how would the numbers change?
- If companies that outsourced were held constant, how would this affect the numbers?
- How has the availability of airline seats per person in the population increased or decreased?
Not at all true that there are "way too many variables," the study by Blalock et al included an entirely credible, structured and methodical effort to control for all relevant variables, and their methodology was presented in detail in a peer reviewed journal. No other experts have challenged the study or its conclusions. If you in fact believe you have identified a specific flaw or flaw in the study, then please submit a paper yourself detailing your analysis to the Journal for publication and let the academic community debate which of you has a more robust analytical approach.