Pay for infant seat or not?

In article , abacus says...


"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article , PTRAVEL says...


"paul williams" wrote in message
e.com...
"PTravel" wrote in message
...
"paul williams" wrote in message
om...
OK. No abuse please - I think we had enough of that in the other
thread.

snip lots of vitriole



That you stay off airplanes if normal human noises bother you so much is
also
advice, not abuse.

Your definition of 'courtesy' would prevent orphans from being transported
for
adoption, dispossess infants of their parents while they are on overseas
jobs
and assignments, and disabled grandparents from ever seeing their infant
grandchildren. Let alone many other situations (and, no, noise is not an
assault or similar in intrusiveness to encroachment on seating space, and
there's no cosmic perogative for you to cherry-pick which of others' needs
and
concerns you think 'justify' you hearing their noises).

Lambasting each and every parent who comes here with practical questions
on
infant travel with your irritations and impossible admonishments to never
take
infants on long airplane trips does not help the situation, and does not
put
people in a receptive mood to take measures for your comfort even if they
might
have been initially motivated to do so.

Banty

I love where this argument has led. Pure artistry. And no spelling errors
(as far as I can see). A bit unsporting for us spelling nazis though.

abacus.

"Unsporting"??!? How unfair. I had kindly provided an omitted verb in my
second paragraph fo your and others' enjoyment.

Banty (always the courteous one... :-)

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 07:19:16 -0700 Alan Street
wrote:

:In article , Binyamin
:Dissen wrote:

:€ :€ hmmm. I was hoping for advice from fellow parents really rather than
:€ :€ people who object to children traveliing in the first place.

:€ :€ I take your points onboard but the bottom line is my child WILL be
:€ :€ travelling... I'm just trying to find the best way to do this.

:€ :The best way is to buy a seat for your child.

:€ Subject to various values of "best".

:€ If one has money falling out of their pockets? Certainly.

:€ If one is on a budget, where the money has better uses and thus it is worth
:€ suffering some amount of hours of discomfort (and Paul's dirty looks) to save
:€ it? No.

:€ Each family has to consider their own circumstances.

:€ But, all in all, it is just a flying bus.

:Would that be a tyical bus in the US or the UK, or a typical non-aircon
:bus in Thailand or Mexico? Holding a child on your lap for 8 hours
:isn't a good idea for you, your child or the people around you, and if
:it's a full flight (likely), then he's going to be doing just that.

Granted that it most likely will not be comfortable.

Just like driving a small car, working a double shift, etc.

To those with money falling out of their pockets, it is not an issue.

For those living on a budget who want to visit Grandma, it very well may be.

:As for circumstances and funds, there's always limits. Are you implying
:that regardles of funds, if someone needs to get somewhere, the ends
:always justifies the means? Are you trying to say that anyone, any time
:has the "right" to travel somewhere, by hook or by crook if necessary?

If the bus is willing to sell them a ticket, why not?

You want a private bus? Pay for it.

:If he can't afford a ticket for his son, then he shouldn't go, just as
:he shouldn't go if can't afford a ticket for himself.

The airline is selling transport for the child.

Nothing is being stolen.

Any more red herrings in your jar?

--
Binyamin Dissen
http://www.dissensoftware.com

Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.

I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 07:19:16 -0700 Alan Street
wrote:

:In article , Binyamin
:Dissen wrote:

:€ :€ hmmm. I was hoping for advice from fellow parents really rather than
:€ :€ people who object to children traveliing in the first place.

:€ :€ I take your points onboard but the bottom line is my child WILL be
:€ :€ travelling... I'm just trying to find the best way to do this.

:€ :The best way is to buy a seat for your child.

:€ Subject to various values of "best".

:€ If one has money falling out of their pockets? Certainly.

:€ If one is on a budget, where the money has better uses and thus it is worth
:€ suffering some amount of hours of discomfort (and Paul's dirty looks) to save
:€ it? No.

:€ Each family has to consider their own circumstances.

:€ But, all in all, it is just a flying bus.

:Would that be a tyical bus in the US or the UK, or a typical non-aircon
:bus in Thailand or Mexico? Holding a child on your lap for 8 hours
:isn't a good idea for you, your child or the people around you, and if
:it's a full flight (likely), then he's going to be doing just that.

Granted that it most likely will not be comfortable.

Just like driving a small car, working a double shift, etc.

To those with money falling out of their pockets, it is not an issue.

For those living on a budget who want to visit Grandma, it very well may be.

:As for circumstances and funds, there's always limits. Are you implying
:that regardles of funds, if someone needs to get somewhere, the ends
:always justifies the means? Are you trying to say that anyone, any time
:has the "right" to travel somewhere, by hook or by crook if necessary?

If the bus is willing to sell them a ticket, why not?

You want a private bus? Pay for it.

:If he can't afford a ticket for his son, then he shouldn't go, just as
:he shouldn't go if can't afford a ticket for himself.

The airline is selling transport for the child.

Nothing is being stolen.

Any more red herrings in your jar?

--
Binyamin Dissen
http://www.dissensoftware.com

Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.

I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.

On 21 Sep 2004 07:36:14 -0700 (PTRAVEL) wrote:

: despite
:the fact that _everyone_ was in agreement that taking a toddler as a
:lapchild on a transoceanic was a particularly poor idea, you still are
:willing to risk it to save a couple of dollars.

Perhaps merely a "couple of dollars" to someone with a bit of money.

You might be surprised to know that there ARE people that live on budgets, and
to them $300 is not merely a "couple of dollars".

--
Binyamin Dissen
http://www.dissensoftware.com

Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.

I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.

On 21 Sep 2004 07:36:14 -0700 (PTRAVEL) wrote:

: despite
:the fact that _everyone_ was in agreement that taking a toddler as a
:lapchild on a transoceanic was a particularly poor idea, you still are
:willing to risk it to save a couple of dollars.

Perhaps merely a "couple of dollars" to someone with a bit of money.

You might be surprised to know that there ARE people that live on budgets, and
to them $300 is not merely a "couple of dollars".

--
Binyamin Dissen
http://www.dissensoftware.com

Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.

I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.

In article , Binyamin
Dissen wrote:

€ On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 07:19:16 -0700 Alan Street
€ wrote:
€
€ :In article , Binyamin
€ :Dissen wrote:
€
€ :€ :€ hmmm. I was hoping for advice from fellow parents really rather than
€ :€ :€ people who object to children traveliing in the first place.
€
€ :€ :€ I take your points onboard but the bottom line is my child WILL be
€ :€ :€ travelling... I'm just trying to find the best way to do this.
€
€ :€ :The best way is to buy a seat for your child.
€
€ :€ Subject to various values of "best".
€
€ :€ If one has money falling out of their pockets? Certainly.
€
€ :€ If one is on a budget, where the money has better uses and thus it is
€ :worth
€ :€ suffering some amount of hours of discomfort (and Paul's dirty looks) to
€ :save
€ :€ it? No.
€
€ :€ Each family has to consider their own circumstances.
€
€ :€ But, all in all, it is just a flying bus.
€
€ :Would that be a tyical bus in the US or the UK, or a typical non-aircon
€ :bus in Thailand or Mexico? Holding a child on your lap for 8 hours
€ :isn't a good idea for you, your child or the people around you, and if
€ :it's a full flight (likely), then he's going to be doing just that.
€
€ Granted that it most likely will not be comfortable.
€
€ Just like driving a small car, working a double shift, etc.

Yeah, lots of one-year olds master those difficulties, too.
€
€ To those with money falling out of their pockets, it is not an issue.

"Money falling out of their pocket" is a relative term. He can afford
to fly himself, which makes him rich by some standards.

€
€ For those living on a budget who want to visit Grandma, it very well may be.
€

Depends on the size of the budget.


€ :As for circumstances and funds, there's always limits. Are you implying
€ :that regardles of funds, if someone needs to get somewhere, the ends
€ :always justifies the means? Are you trying to say that anyone, any time
€ :has the "right" to travel somewhere, by hook or by crook if necessary?
€
€ If the bus is willing to sell them a ticket, why not?

Actually, it has nothing to do with selling a ticket, and everything to
do with how many people are travelling on that one ticket. Two people
in one seat is OK for short time. For 8+ hours, it's a bit much.
€
€ You want a private bus? Pay for it.
€
€ :If he can't afford a ticket for his son, then he shouldn't go, just as
€ :he shouldn't go if can't afford a ticket for himself.
€
€ The airline is selling transport for the child.
€

No, the airline is selling a ticket for a seat. Some allow two people
to occupy that seat if one of them is small enough. Common sense says
that's not a good idea for 8+ hours. Even the OP recognizes this, and
is hoping that someone (you perhaps) will help him rationalize his
decision to roll the dice and hope theres a empty seat in coach on a
transoceanic flight. He doesn't want to or intend to hold his child for
8 hours.

€ Nothing is being stolen.
€
€ Any more red herrings in your jar?

More? There aren't any now (except to those who see things that don't
exist).

In article , Binyamin
Dissen wrote:

€ On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 07:19:16 -0700 Alan Street
€ wrote:
€
€ :In article , Binyamin
€ :Dissen wrote:
€
€ :€ :€ hmmm. I was hoping for advice from fellow parents really rather than
€ :€ :€ people who object to children traveliing in the first place.
€
€ :€ :€ I take your points onboard but the bottom line is my child WILL be
€ :€ :€ travelling... I'm just trying to find the best way to do this.
€
€ :€ :The best way is to buy a seat for your child.
€
€ :€ Subject to various values of "best".
€
€ :€ If one has money falling out of their pockets? Certainly.
€
€ :€ If one is on a budget, where the money has better uses and thus it is
€ :worth
€ :€ suffering some amount of hours of discomfort (and Paul's dirty looks) to
€ :save
€ :€ it? No.
€
€ :€ Each family has to consider their own circumstances.
€
€ :€ But, all in all, it is just a flying bus.
€
€ :Would that be a tyical bus in the US or the UK, or a typical non-aircon
€ :bus in Thailand or Mexico? Holding a child on your lap for 8 hours
€ :isn't a good idea for you, your child or the people around you, and if
€ :it's a full flight (likely), then he's going to be doing just that.
€
€ Granted that it most likely will not be comfortable.
€
€ Just like driving a small car, working a double shift, etc.

Yeah, lots of one-year olds master those difficulties, too.
€
€ To those with money falling out of their pockets, it is not an issue.

"Money falling out of their pocket" is a relative term. He can afford
to fly himself, which makes him rich by some standards.

€
€ For those living on a budget who want to visit Grandma, it very well may be.
€

Depends on the size of the budget.


€ :As for circumstances and funds, there's always limits. Are you implying
€ :that regardles of funds, if someone needs to get somewhere, the ends
€ :always justifies the means? Are you trying to say that anyone, any time
€ :has the "right" to travel somewhere, by hook or by crook if necessary?
€
€ If the bus is willing to sell them a ticket, why not?

Actually, it has nothing to do with selling a ticket, and everything to
do with how many people are travelling on that one ticket. Two people
in one seat is OK for short time. For 8+ hours, it's a bit much.
€
€ You want a private bus? Pay for it.
€
€ :If he can't afford a ticket for his son, then he shouldn't go, just as
€ :he shouldn't go if can't afford a ticket for himself.
€
€ The airline is selling transport for the child.
€

No, the airline is selling a ticket for a seat. Some allow two people
to occupy that seat if one of them is small enough. Common sense says
that's not a good idea for 8+ hours. Even the OP recognizes this, and
is hoping that someone (you perhaps) will help him rationalize his
decision to roll the dice and hope theres a empty seat in coach on a
transoceanic flight. He doesn't want to or intend to hold his child for
8 hours.

€ Nothing is being stolen.
€
€ Any more red herrings in your jar?

More? There aren't any now (except to those who see things that don't
exist).

Binyamin Dissen wrote:

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 05:50:36 -0700 Alan Street
wrote:

:In article , paul
:williams wrote:

:€ Do you really regard it abuse when people disagree with your positions?

:€ Question : How full generally are transatlantic flights and internal
:€ US flights in November ?

:€ Reason is my little boy will be one year old and I haven't decided
:€ whether its worth paying for a seat for him or whether there'll be
:€ plenty of spare seats on the flight.

:€ If you must take your infant, pay for the seat. If you don't, and
:€ there's
:€ no room, you, your son and everyone around you will be miserable.

:€ But better, still, is to not take an infant on a long haul.

:€ Like I said - how about we keep this argument to the other thread...

:€ You asked for feedback and I provided it. Interestingly, everyone,
:€ including parents who travel with infants, said the same thing (about
:€ buying
:€ a seat). And, as everyone has agreed, the reason that this topic is
:€ sensitive at all is because of the marked lack of courtesy and
:€ consideration
:€ on the part of some (but not all) parents. Flying 8 hours with a toddler
:€ is
:€ as much a courtesy and consideration issue as it is a ticketing issue.

:€ This is advice, not abuse. Sorry if it's not palatble to you.

:€ hmmm. I was hoping for advice from fellow parents really rather than
:€ people who object to children traveliing in the first place.

:€ I take your points onboard but the bottom line is my child WILL be
:€ travelling... I'm just trying to find the best way to do this.

:The best way is to buy a seat for your child.

Subject to various values of "best".

If one has money falling out of their pockets? Certainly.

If one is on a budget, where the money has better uses and thus it is worth
suffering some amount of hours of discomfort (and Paul's dirty looks) to save
it? No.

Each family has to consider their own circumstances.

But, all in all, it is just a flying bus. Don't pay much attention to those
with their noses in the air.


I invented the flying bus line -- but I also believe that any child past
about 6 mos is too big to fly in someone's lap on an intercontinental
flight. It can't be done without imposing on others -- and certainly
once the infant is a toddler, it should not be done. Flights today are
usually full -- carriers have cut flights to make this so -- so for long
haul flights in particular, seats should be purchased for the child.
Period. Someone else's desire to save a buck should not trump the next
passenger's right not to have grubby hands or small feet in their space
or their hair pulled by the toddler in Dad's lap right behind them.

the airlines should get rid of the lap child policy -- or lower the age
to a year or younger.

Binyamin Dissen wrote:

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 05:50:36 -0700 Alan Street
wrote:

:In article , paul
:williams wrote:

:€ Do you really regard it abuse when people disagree with your positions?

:€ Question : How full generally are transatlantic flights and internal
:€ US flights in November ?

:€ Reason is my little boy will be one year old and I haven't decided
:€ whether its worth paying for a seat for him or whether there'll be
:€ plenty of spare seats on the flight.

:€ If you must take your infant, pay for the seat. If you don't, and
:€ there's
:€ no room, you, your son and everyone around you will be miserable.

:€ But better, still, is to not take an infant on a long haul.

:€ Like I said - how about we keep this argument to the other thread...

:€ You asked for feedback and I provided it. Interestingly, everyone,
:€ including parents who travel with infants, said the same thing (about
:€ buying
:€ a seat). And, as everyone has agreed, the reason that this topic is
:€ sensitive at all is because of the marked lack of courtesy and
:€ consideration
:€ on the part of some (but not all) parents. Flying 8 hours with a toddler
:€ is
:€ as much a courtesy and consideration issue as it is a ticketing issue.

:€ This is advice, not abuse. Sorry if it's not palatble to you.

:€ hmmm. I was hoping for advice from fellow parents really rather than
:€ people who object to children traveliing in the first place.

:€ I take your points onboard but the bottom line is my child WILL be
:€ travelling... I'm just trying to find the best way to do this.

:The best way is to buy a seat for your child.

Subject to various values of "best".

If one has money falling out of their pockets? Certainly.

If one is on a budget, where the money has better uses and thus it is worth
suffering some amount of hours of discomfort (and Paul's dirty looks) to save
it? No.

Each family has to consider their own circumstances.

But, all in all, it is just a flying bus. Don't pay much attention to those
with their noses in the air.


I invented the flying bus line -- but I also believe that any child past
about 6 mos is too big to fly in someone's lap on an intercontinental
flight. It can't be done without imposing on others -- and certainly
once the infant is a toddler, it should not be done. Flights today are
usually full -- carriers have cut flights to make this so -- so for long
haul flights in particular, seats should be purchased for the child.
Period. Someone else's desire to save a buck should not trump the next
passenger's right not to have grubby hands or small feet in their space
or their hair pulled by the toddler in Dad's lap right behind them.

the airlines should get rid of the lap child policy -- or lower the age
to a year or younger.

"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article , abacus
says...


"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article , PTRAVEL says...


"paul williams" wrote in message
le.com...
"PTravel" wrote in message
...
"paul williams" wrote in message
om...
OK. No abuse please - I think we had enough of that in the other
thread.

snip lots of vitriole



That you stay off airplanes if normal human noises bother you so much is
also
advice, not abuse.

Your definition of 'courtesy' would prevent orphans from being
transported
for
adoption, dispossess infants of their parents while they are on overseas
jobs
and assignments, and disabled grandparents from ever seeing their infant
grandchildren. Let alone many other situations (and, no, noise is not
an
assault or similar in intrusiveness to encroachment on seating space,
and
there's no cosmic perogative for you to cherry-pick which of others'
needs
and
concerns you think 'justify' you hearing their noises).

Lambasting each and every parent who comes here with practical questions
on
infant travel with your irritations and impossible admonishments to
never
take
infants on long airplane trips does not help the situation, and does not
put
people in a receptive mood to take measures for your comfort even if
they
might
have been initially motivated to do so.

Banty

I love where this argument has led. Pure artistry. And no spelling errors
(as far as I can see). A bit unsporting for us spelling nazis though.

abacus.

"Unsporting"??!? How unfair. I had kindly provided an omitted verb in
my
second paragraph fo your and others' enjoyment.

Banty (always the courteous one... :-)


Aaah, much better. Ommission of a verb is not a spelling error. You'll be
wanting the grammar nazis.

abacus.