Unless this mfer is buying suits at Goodwill and is so deep in poverty that he needs to visit soup kitchens and food pantries, he can go ahead and cry a river. Tell him to build a bridge so he can get over it, I’m sure he’s got the cash.

Then why not say that instead of pretending to be interested in the nuances of the issue?

Yes but alternatives like mogas may require physical changes to aircraft in order to make planes that can only use avgas compatible with mogas. Mogas is also not strictly a comparable alternative as it also comes with its own downsides.

From the California Legislature’s document site:

This bill would enact the Right to Repair Act. The bill would require, except as specified and regardless of whether any express warranty is made, the manufacturer of an above-described electronic or appliance product, in the above-described circumstances, and in those same circumstances but sold to others outside of direct retail sales, to make available, on fair and reasonable terms, to product owners, service and repair facilities, and service dealers, the means, as described, to effect the diagnosis, maintenance, or repair of the product, as provided. The bill would also require a service and repair facility or service dealer that is not an authorized repair provider, as defined, of a manufacturer to provide a written notice of that fact to any customer seeking repair of an electronic or appliance product before the repair facility or service dealer repairs the product, and to disclose if it uses replacement parts that are used or from a supplier that is not the manufacturer.

SB 244 has been around since the start of this year, at least officially.

If anyone is interested in seeing how legislation changes over time, I implore you to look at this service; I would go as far as to say that educational instruction would be aided by directing students here.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB244

There is a lot of content in here but becoming accustomed to reading the text of legislation allows you to be more independent from mass media.

The EU uses the same avgas

TEL is used in avgas so the engines don’t blow up, it literally is a safety issue.

Where the money comes in is when companies need to ground planes, swap out engines, and move to fuel that hasn’t been around for very long (which was only discovered after a massive R&D campaign).

I’d wager that the larger portion of aircraft owned belong to institutions like universities and other sources of flight education as well as companies which own fleets of these things.

Some commercial air travel still occurs using these planes also.

You’d be surprised at the kind of people that own private aircraft, they’re not always the kind of “throw money at my problems” people that’ll just lobby the government (they probably don’t even have the money to do anything), bigger interests would likely focus on switching to a new, proprietary, and expensive fuel as a political issue.

From the FAA:

There are approximately 167,000 aircraft in the United States and a total of 230,000 worldwide that rely on 100 low lead avgas for safe operation. It is the only remaining transportation fuel in the United States that contains the addition of TEL.

TEL meaning Tetraethyl Lead, it is used as a fuel additive in avgas to increase octane ratings (required for safe operation of engines).

Now, the post says “propeller” aircraft but this isn’t exactly true.

Turbine-driven propeller aircraft (Turboprops) don’t use avgas.

The unleaded fuel they’re talking about is probably G100UL and that’s only been around for like a couple years.

Nobody wants to use leaded fuel (unless someone inhaled too much of the emissions) and it’s on the way out whether our representatives want it to or not.

Speaking with FedScoop, the officials expressed concern that USDS, led by Mina Hsiang, and GSA, led by Robin Carnahan, in the past year have focused on small, niche projects while deprioritizing big ticket items like redesigning government websites, setting tech policy standards and improving agency branding. One such niche project, cited by two officials, was a public benefits studio run by GSA’s Technology Transformation Services team, which is a pilot text notification system.

It sounds like too much progress is being made for the sake of progress.

We should be hearing about budget concerns rather than these agencies focusing on non-priotity issues.

I don’t want to start saying that these agencies are bloated or are set up in a way to benefit political partners without any work being done but it seems that way.

Perhaps it would be better to get people with real passion into the rosters rather than people interested in entertaining the public.

Yeah but people used to actually have paying jobs through SL, this is closer to Steam’s systems IMO (Steam also appeals more to children than SL).

This is not a defense either, only adding something else to keep in mind.