|
|
Days and days of reserve lead to tangents. I surrender.
|
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1260884)
The agreement is in force now, and the company is publicly disclosing their business plan we can look back and see who was more correct with the information available at that time.
|
I really wish I could post that picture of a dog with its nose a couple inches up another dog's butt without getting into trouble....
|
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1260888)
Send your check to the Delta Pilots Charitable fund.;) If you'd like you can add a zero from the payraise that you got that you don't want...:p ; (your contribution goes to help really sick and disadvantaged kids).
Congrats on finally responding to someone's question without making it a question in return. I don't agree with your logic, but thank you for the response. |
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 1260911)
The problem is that Keynesianism never works. Ever in human history. Its literally never, ever worked. Any little sugar rush high from fake money will more than come out the other end literally with interest.
Its argurable that we're beyond theback side of the curve now, so he can light the burners all he wants and all we can do now is enjoy the ride and invest for the imminent ejection. QE's only help "create demand" the way the dot.com, housing and college bubbles do. Temporarilly, artificially, unsustainably and with earth shattering negative consequences later for a temporary, and usually modest, "gain" today. I see this as a test of RA's true intellect though. He sits on the board of the fake money printers; he knows what goes on behind the curtain (or at least should). There will be major opportunities in the resulting demand destruction and wealth destroying inflation. We'll see if he's smart enough to position us to truly capitalize on that, or if he just goes along with the sheep and acts suprised and begs for a bailout like everyone else. I want to think he's smart about it long term, but all he can seem to focus on is gifting capacity to LCC's and foreign ponzi scheme airlines. Maybe its part of a master plan though, like the magic 10B debt level and all that jazz. We'll see. [quote]Ratings firm Egan-Jones cut its credit rating on the U.S. government to "AA-" from "AA," citing its opinion that quantitative easing from the Federal Reserve would hurt the U.S. economy and the country's credit quality. http://media.cnbc.com/i/CNBC/Section..._skies_200.jpg Getty Images The Fed on Thursday said it would pump $40 billion into the U.S. economy each month until it saw a sustained upturn in the weak jobs market. (Read more: Fed's 'QE Infinity' — Four Things That Could Go Wrong)In its downgrade, the firm said that issuing more currency and depressing interest rates through purchasing mortgage-backed securities does little to raise the U.S.'s real gross domestic product, but reduces the value of the dollar. In turn, this increases the cost of commodities, which will pressure the profitability of businesses and increase the costs of consumers thereby reducing consumer purchasing power, the firm said. In April, Egan-Jones cuts the U.S. credit rating to "AA" from "AA+" with a negative watch, citing a lack of progress in cutting the mounting federal debt. Moody's Investors Service [MCO 43.82 http://media.cnbc.com/i/CNBC/CNBC_Im...tchlist_up.gif 0.07 (+0.16%) http://media.cnbc.com/i/CNBC/CNBC_Im...ltime_icon.gif] currently rates the United States Aaa, Fitch rates the country AAA, and Standard & Poor's rates the country AA-plus. All three of those ratings have a negative outlook.[quote] |
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1260888)
Send your check to the Delta Pilots Charitable fund.;) If you'd like you can add a zero from the payraise that you got that you don't want...:p ; (your contribution goes to help really sick and disadvantaged kids).
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1260421)
But then this update from SEA came out and it brings up the question about what if things flowed not from the elected members up but instead flowed from the MEC down?
Then what recourse do pilots have?
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1260876)
Currently their recourse is to contact their reps. If they don't like the answers then they can recall the reps. The reps work directly for the line pilot.
Currently the MEC Chair works directly for the reps; he is their executive officer, meaning he executes the will of the body of the MEC. If he doesn't represent their views, then they can recall him. Going back to paragraph one, if a pilot doesn't think the MEC Chair is doind a good job, his LEC rep is the one accountable for that. The method you espouse (direct election of the MEC chair) serverely restricts the influence of the LEC rep and strengthens the MEC Chair position. It can also substantially undermine smaller bases, as an MEC Chair elected by a substantial "popular vote" majority doesn't have to answer to representatives with fewer popular vote totals. Our current method requires a senatorial majority (affirmitive) to elect, and roll call can only be used to recall. ATL and DTW together are a roll call majority, but only 6 of 19 votes on the MEC. I can think of several times where "diplomatic" solutions had to be reached (consensus solutions) rather than a power politic solution because of the senatorial check and balance. btw, it's not that hard for reps to recall the MEC Chair or for pilots to recall their reps. MM was recalled at NWA (2006 I believe) and CG resigned in lieu of recall at Delta in 2001. C44 Captain reps resigned in lieu of recall in 2000 and in 2006. This MEC meeting was the first after the split vote on the TA. There was a simmering anger from some members of the MEC, MEC committee personnel, and MEC administration over my vote of no, and the fact I wrote and expressed my view to this council. So is this anger from others going to morph into deciding to ignore what I have to say? Finding solutions to complex problems amongst almost 12,000 pilots requires input from everyone. If there is going to be retribution in the form of isolating a representative because you did not like their vote on an issue, what guarantee does the minority have that they will be heard in the future when they may be advocating the majority solution. How is this in the best interest of all of us? |
Originally Posted by 76drvr
(Post 1260997)
Slow, most pilots appreciated the benefits of our improved scope. I'm glad to see the mainline growth it will soon be providing.
Are you still under the belief that GK would sign off on an expensive deal for them contingent on the Delta pilots agreeing to the first TA offered to them? If they rejected it then no dice? http://www.dmagazine.com/~/media/0_A...ashx?db=master Of course you do seem to believe we'd order Q400s in mass. That kind of deserves another... http://www.dmagazine.com/~/media/0_A...ashx?db=master |
Hermoine sideboob.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/...69_634x883.jpg and apparently some more sideboob... this looks legal to me, delete it if I'm wrong. ;) But I do see full coverage. http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/...28_634x950.jpg |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1261018)
Hey 80, if supporting the Delta Pilots Charitable Fund is something you want to do, have at it, but you didn't lose your bet....
Because again, what does recalling your rep have to do with recalling the MEC Chair if your Rep is not the problem? For instance, what if you're in C54 and you agree with your Vice Chair's stance on the TA and are faced with him saying this happened: 5 dollars remains in my hand. :) |
Interesting exchange between ftb and Slowplay.
It seems plausible to me that a situation can exist where the administration is allowed to circumvent the MEC, although not without a complicit MEC. More likely, I can imagine a sort of instutionalized setting, where the administration and the MEC work together to steer new reps into some sort of action or policy to keep the status quo going indefinitely. In that case, if having elected MEC Chairmen is the solution, and we elect both the Chairman and the LEC Reps, and a conflict exists where the elected LEC reps want to remove an elected MEC Chairman... who should have the upper hand? If the charge is that powerful MEC Chairmen are coercing the MEC, how does giving them more legitimacy through an election help? That being said, I personally feel like the MEC Chairman is too far away, and our ability to influence the process too limited. We get agreements that the MEC almost can't turn down, then we're given the option to rubber-stamp, assuming we're given an opportunity at all (I'm looking forward to the FTDT negotiations proving me wrong via MEMRAT and input). I tend to think we need a much lower, automatic MEMRAT trigger. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:04 AM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands