Originally Posted by
Sink r8
So your thesis is that 2, or 3 of the ME3 are violating agreements, but since they ALSO enjoy a geographic advantage, that the US legacies don't seem to "understand"... it's OK to let the process meander through the WTO (which I think doesn't address this sort of case), but not OK to have state-to-state negotiations that address the actual grievances, because at the end of the day, the US carriers are still not focusing on the legitimate part of the advantage?
Just like it wouldn't be right to ask for a math teacher that's mollesting you kid to be removed, because the teacher is also teaching math to the kid?
Exactly. Their whole "a subsidy anywhere, anytime, in any amount, direct or indirect, completely excuses any and all subsidies in any amount form or duration for all eternity."
Not to mention their paultry little "dividend" they pay their government is a joke compared to the taxes and fees US airlines and their employees pay for all the "you didn't build that" infrastructure we use.
I wonder if you added up just the US Bank of Boeing welfare check they get from us how just that compares to their little token joke of a "dividend". Not to mention their regional defense provided mostly by us. Full retail for the 5th fleet alone would likely exceed that.