<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>brip blap - Latest Comments in flying on the cheap (for the airlines, not for you)</title><link>http://bripblap.disqus.com/</link><description>life, money and everything in between</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2007 20:44:14 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: flying on the cheap (for the airlines, not for you)</title><link>http://www.bripblap.com/2007/flying-on-the-cheap/#comment-1545438</link><description>@Laura - Laura, thanks for the comment - you're right, you definitely can nickel-and-dime-and-dollar on the cruises.  Depends on your approach, I guess.  My in-laws get on the cruise and won't pay a dime extra - they don't get alcohol, drink whatever's offered free, don't do but maybe one excursion, etc.  They avoid every expense they can.  I tend to go the other direction and mentally estimate an extra 30% to my base cost.   But I guess the difference I would make is that the base transportation/food is all included.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">bripblap</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2007 20:44:14 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: flying on the cheap (for the airlines, not for you)</title><link>http://www.bripblap.com/2007/flying-on-the-cheap/#comment-1545437</link><description>Oh, my gosh, have you ever been on a cruise?  It's all-inclusive unless you want: soda, alcohol, food at some of the shops, shore excursions, tips are extra but required, etc.  They'll do anything to nickel-and-dime you!</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Laura</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2007 13:54:34 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: flying on the cheap (for the airlines, not for you)</title><link>http://www.bripblap.com/2007/flying-on-the-cheap/#comment-1545435</link><description>DC, LaGuardia and Detroit are in a neverending battle for Worst Airport Ever.   My personal worst is LaGuardia, since it's the place where I got stuck in an airplane for four hours in the middle of July a few years ago.  It was a tiny jet and it was sweltering hot - and they wouldn't let us off the plane (not a surprising story, I bet).  Ever since then good old two-runway LaGuardia has been my least favorite airport.  But DC is a close second.  The security setup there is as painful as any place I've seen outside of the remote third world.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">bripblap</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 22:31:05 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: flying on the cheap (for the airlines, not for you)</title><link>http://www.bripblap.com/2007/flying-on-the-cheap/#comment-1545434</link><description>I also flew NW recently and boy, their planes are SO old! It made all sorts of ricketty noises, I thought it was about to fall apart. &lt;br&gt;The airport services have not improved, the security lines are a killer. Just that alone will make you think twice about air travel. Anybody flew out of Washington, DC recently? Yeah. Liked the line there???? The worst airport is in the country's capital. What a shame.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">bubelah</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:05:47 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: flying on the cheap (for the airlines, not for you)</title><link>http://www.bripblap.com/2007/flying-on-the-cheap/#comment-1545433</link><description>The $212 was for the beers to "calm my nerves".&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;You know, I would really be amazed if anyone commented that they liked flying better than other means of transportations.  It's become a painful experience almost every single time I fly, and when I fly a lot (3 round trips in the last 5 weeks) something is almost guaranteed to go wrong.  I would take trains more often but they are so expensive coming out of NY that it's hard to justify.  Driving is dangerous and costs a fortune with gas hovering in the $2.70+ range, not to mention northeastern states' toll roads.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Traveling is just tough any way you look at it, but if there are enough stories about people being stuck on the tarmac for 20 hours like in LAX or with Jet Blue back around Valentine's Day, you'll see more and more people either (1) opt out of flying or (2) demand better service even if it costs more.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">bripblap</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 21:57:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: flying on the cheap (for the airlines, not for you)</title><link>http://www.bripblap.com/2007/flying-on-the-cheap/#comment-1545432</link><description>I hate the airport and would rather take the train if I could.  It's a really a shame rail travel is not more prevalent in the U.S.   The eastern seaboard would be perfect for TGV style trains....</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dong</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:06:45 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: flying on the cheap (for the airlines, not for you)</title><link>http://www.bripblap.com/2007/flying-on-the-cheap/#comment-1545431</link><description>I dislike flying.  With the strict security, it takes such a long time....If I can drive there in under 12 hours, I usually choose to drive.  However, I was forced to fly recently...and I found the entire thing ridiculous!  I chose to starve instead of paying $1 for a bag of pretzels!  :)  Spite takes me a long way....</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">SavingDiva</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:42:18 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: flying on the cheap (for the airlines, not for you)</title><link>http://www.bripblap.com/2007/flying-on-the-cheap/#comment-1545430</link><description>$212 for a free flight?  How much time did you spend in the bathroom?  &lt;br&gt;:)</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">FourPillars</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 23:30:22 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>