... and it's names (often partial ones) and not necessarily persons.

That reminded of a taekwondo instructor I had a dozen years ago. He had a standing challenge for any student who can take him down(with bare hands, no weapons of any kind). The reward was 100,000 yen. Once he even allowed 8 students to take him on. 8 against 1. Those students got their rear ends kicked really badly. Keep in mind the instructor was a short fellow, only 5'2" tall.

the TSA provides a song and dance shoe carnival.

Israeli security provides security.

Not sure how much it would cost...but a downpayment on the bill could be made by cutting off the $2billion a year we GIVE to Israel in "foreign aid"...
:rolleyes:

Most of which they are REQUIRED to turn around and respend here in the US to fund our aerospace military industry. But dont you think this might be a little OT from the thread's purpose *smile*

Leaving aside the civil liberties aspects, I think the cost along would sink this idea. Not only would you need more screeners to conduct this analysis and these interviews, you would need better quality ones than we have now. I don't think flyers or the American taxpayer are willing to pay the costs. However deficient you find the TSA, I don't think the El Al model is viable for the U. S.

But did I not read somewhere that American Aircraft Exporters [Unlike Airbus] are not subsidised by the US Government.

This is a purchase of aircraft, unlike direct government aid to launch a program. Consideration is exchanged between the American manufacturer and the government: planes in exchange for money. Airbus is a flat-out grant program to enable the development of a new airplane, based on what I have read. Apples and oranges.

1. DISCs, FSCs, and their legacy.
2. The big "subsidy": US government purchases without limitation on technology transfer and tight retention of IP rights (esp. for all those defence contracts that our aviation/aeronautics/avionics manufactures get).
3. Research & development corporate tax credits.

Not necessarily in that order and not necessarily "my case", but that's what is said.

Offsets, yes to some degree -- but certainly not all of it. Even then, some "offsets" are offset back. ;)

We have direct government "aid"/purchases to launch programs too. The development aid is just considered a contract purchase of some sort or another.

I agree with you totally! That is why I'm doing what I am.

Stolen seats, violation of rights, whatever! I am here to try to make it safer for all, not to infringe on anyones rights.

I will continue to reply to attacks of my profession, because I fell that I am doing the right thing. Although, I cannot speak for others.

I don't know any of you, although I would do anything in my power to protect all of you, in the air or on the ground.

I enjoy being an American and reaping the benefits as much as you do, thus I will do everything I can so it remains the same.

Thanks for the response, 24th ID and for getting this thread back on track.

This is a really poor way of looking at public policy.

My life is worth $100 trillion. Ergo, the government should spend that much to keep me safe. And keep my tax rates the same. :)

The military used to do budgeting like this and it was a disaster. The generals would develop a fantastic, but unaffordable budget. (Then when you said, "OK, well we've only got 1/4th that amount of money, they'd say, "hey, you asked us what we needed, I'm not going to be responsible for cutting anything.") Then it was decided that the better way was to decide how much military we could afford, and ask the generals to develop a plan based on that.

Wow. Do you have any idea how much it would cost to have El Al style security and interviews for every pax getting on a bus or train? 3.1 million pax ride the NYC subway every day. Tens of millions more take other bus or train systems. We're now talking about costs in the high hundreds of billions - just on cash outlays. The cost in terms of lost productivity would be in the trillions.

This would be a good way to destroy civil liberties and bring down the US economy.

Your plan is a bigger threat to the US than terrorism ;)