Starbucks says Niccol can live in his home in Newport Beach, California and commute to Starbucks’ head office 1,000 miles away on a corporate jet
Starbucks says Niccol can live in his home in Newport Beach, California and commute to Starbucks’ head office 1,000 miles away on a corporate jet
“Private” doesn’t mean “small”. It means “privately owned”, which means by a rich person.
Even if we are talking about specifically jets that are owned privately, they could have legit use cases. It’s the abuse that is the issue. I agree with the whole “eat the rich” sentiment, but that’s a separate issue. In the system where rich people exist, the problem is abuse.
I vote for we start destroying the private jets without reservation and if we encounter a legitimate use case we’ll deal with it at that time.
Many could be refitted for worthy uses like fighting wildfires and transporting patients
But that won’t solve anything. That’s like treating diabetes by drinking diet soda.
That worked for me, that and sugar free Gatorade. Took me down from 8.3 to 4.5 without insuline. That being said, I’m an anomaly in that I don’t eat much processed food or bread. Just a really bad pop addiction.
Yeah, maybe it was a bad example, because in some very specific scenario, it can work. My point was that treating a symptom won’t cure the underlying disease. Just like as long as there are rich people, trying to take away their planes won’t work.
Legit use cases… Make A Wish comes to mind, but maybe that’d be a corporate jet or not a traditionally-private jet.
Any exemptions for sports teams or anything? VIPs whose lives are at risk through no real fault of their own…
What you’re describing are use cases for charter flights - renting an aircraft for a specific, temporary purpose, usually from a company specialising in such flights - they own or lease the aircraft and employ the flight crew and maintenance staff.