… as if I’m not hated already.

I probably travel more than 99% of the people here — “Platinum preferred status” on one majoe airline and that’s not even the airline I like traveling most — but I use a simple solution for extra bags: fly First/Business Class. Granted,it costs more, although as a “preferred” flyer I often pay the same as Coach and get upgraded to First/Business but that only means I’ve already paid for so many flights that I have earned my “preferred” status.

I say the above a bit “tongue-in-check” but I am quite serious. Checked bags are a (very legitimate) way for airlines to raise revenue. An alternative would be to raise the seat prices for everyone regardless of the number of bags they check; especially raising seat prices for Coach class travellers since First/Business class travellers more often than not subsidies the costs for Coach class travellers any way.

And if you’re going to argue that airlines can make “enough” profit without raising prices or charging extra for checked baggage, have we now gotten to the point where even here on RedState we will be haranguing about private enterprises making too much profit?

And as for the very excessive restrictions on what you can carry onboard a commerce flight these days, they have been instituted for safety: not just for the flying passengers but also for others. While I do think it is the height of stupidity that the confiscated items are normally all placed in a bin together, let’s be honest: If President Obama and/or the Democrats in Congress issued and executive order or passed a law that suddenly disallowed those restrictions, within 48-hours there would be three front-page essays and ten member diaries all complaining about how President Obama and the Democrats are undermining are safety.

Bottom line, I probably get as frustrated as the next person when flying but the idea that the Federal government should pass a law prohibiting airlines from charging extra for checked baggage smacks of the big-government nanny state that I thought all of us conservatives abhored.

Indeed, a support a “secondary market” where airlines can barter or trade and sell their slots to one another. I would even include foreign airlines in this “secondary market” system.

You yourself state …

And while I am sure the websites and res agents do tell the customer about the additional charges, it remains, in my opinion a fraudulent practice.

But seriously, how is it a fradulent practice if the consumer is informed and willingly consents to it?

The charges may be something you and other consumers may not like to pay but it definitely is not fraud. As momac says above, if you don’t like Option A, “that ‘nickles and dimes’ you with additional fees (say US Airways),” then go with Option B, who doesn’t (say Southwest Airlines). The choice, although it may not be perfect, is yours, the consumers’, and, thankfully, not the government’s.

Wow! Just think about it.Now we have some posters on RedState arguing that the government should legislate a “one size fits all’ “benefit” for a consumers of a private inducstry.

There are only a finite number of landing stripes. My argument is that a “secondary ‘free’ market” where these landing stripes are traded will result in the most economically efficient allocation. Because of the nature of airlines themselves, exteralities and asymmetric information is minimized, thus minimizing transaction costs and increasing the likely economic efficiency of the outcome.

Note: I started a long response on Coase Theorem and how my idea for a secondary market for landing strips differs from a “cap and trade” policy for pollutants — basically, landing strips are finite in nature a core component of commercial travel while pollution is a side product and externality that is neither finite in nature nor does it production or use by one resource naturally affect its production or use by another resource — but I did not want to threadjack and cannot devote the time this week that would be necessary to support the conversation.

And we are in agreement here.

Although, as someone who is lean, trim and still fairly athletic even as I approach (okay, am “in” but don’t tell my wife I admitted it) middle age, I may support extra fatter people paying more. I don’t think that’s bigoted.

Sorry, I just couldn’t resist.