So is everyone bent out of shape over programs like Pan Am and ATP/ RAA or just any flight school period? And how is flying through an FBO any different than a flight school? I've done both and its a little bit cheaper at the FBO, but I was also flying a 172 that was build in the 1950's. I have to say that paying more for better planes is ok with me. I think that most of the hostility directed toward flight schools is aimed at the type of programs where you can get all of your ratings in 2 weeks. If thats the case then I know what you're talking about. I fly at an airport with ATP, RAA, occasionaly Pan Am, and a helicopter school.(43 busiest airport in the country) Then there are the two college programs from ASU and UND. Guess which schools have people needing to give the tower a call more often? They aren't the same programs.
Also how is it the fault of young pilots for driving wages down (Im not trying to be cocky)? I just wonder how that works with union contracts and the like. I think you guys should be more worried about having your jobs outsourced to china or india.

Oh and one more thing. Why don't pilots try to get more pilots involved with their airline in managment. Wouldn't that make things better? If anyone knows how to run an airline its a captain whos been with the company for 30 years not some douche fresh out of business school who doesnt know the difference between a 777 and a CRJ. Plus they would keep the pay rates up for everyone. WHY ISNT THIS A COMMON OCCURENCE?

Thanks to everyone who contributes to these forums. I've only been around for a couple of weeks and have already learned a lot.