Demand will outweigh the supply - when it comes to pilots in the future. (There will be a pilot shortage, it's inevitable.) This will change nothing. Safety will be compromised and pay (as an industrial average) will still decrease. Get while the getting is good ladies and gents. Flying a bus is all we do...

The only thing that will change this is changing the FAR's. You **cannot** put a 250 hour pilot in an airliner...

Deregulation has been successful in offering consumers choice.

This was one such purpose of deregulation. Deregulation wasn't designed to provide airline employees glory days.

Like I said, deregulation has been a success!

JJ

So why don't we deregulate the rest of public transportation? Taxi's for example?

The public has a choice in what taxt to take, but no taxi company has to reduce their rates to cut throat prices and drive down their costs as they're fares are set and protected.. As is the case with Electric and Gas..

Just think for only 4 cab rides in Manhattan you can afford to fly from NY to Florida!

And to say that de-reg has been a success. Keeping prices low has been accomplished. The problem is that the prices that are STILL in the marketplace cannot sustain the industry. Thus All the Old big boys are gone, the current legacies have largely been through BK or they would be gone too.

If the weak were truly allowed to die, then maybe it could work in it's current form. That hasn't happened and probably never will. A de-regged industry doesn't work and probably never will.

Already been done across the pond. Could it spread?

AHHH! South of the border too, TACA, Lan Chile etc..... Middle East QATAR, Royal Jordanian, etc...Asia Cathay, Chinesse companies etc.... its a reality.

The deregulated industry would work if the government would let the weak companies die. You just said that, and then you say that the industry will probably never work deregulated. You were right the first time. As a country, we will be stronger and enjoy a better standard of living if the government does allow the weak companies to fail and go away. Stronger, more innovative companies will fill the voids. Possibly an entire paradigm shift in travel would occur. Maybe the inefficient manner that routes are done right now would change if the market were allowed to work. The market has an amazing way of eventually working out the best practices when allowed to perform.

In this free market, a company like Southwest is able to be very profitable while paying one of the leading wages in the industry while having some of the lowest fares available. There is evidence that a company that wants a very specific labor pool will pay enough to attract that labor. The market at work.

What happened to America? Do you have to be a socialist/communist/marxist to be a pilot these days?

Well, and that's just it, these free market defenders forget about how many times CAL, UAL and others have been "bailed" out buy the same free market congress.... you can't play both sides of the equation.

Either de-regulate and let them fail when they're broke, or RE-REGULATE <<--- this one!

Regulation is a tool available to governments in the face of market failure.
Despite difficulties experienced by airline employees and in our case, pilots, there hasn't been a "market failure".

If the market appeared to approach failure, you can be sure the government would regulate.

In the face of difficulty, change is appealing. However, regulation would be very intricate and would have far reaching implications. Exactly what those are is difficult to foresee.

Many economists believe that economies are "self correcting". History shows that they are. We are living in frustratingly slow times but, ride it out. Things will turn around!

JJ

We end up argueing over words but don't define what the word means. We say that the airline industry is "de-regulated." But it never really was. The regulations were changed, but it certainly isn't "de-regulated." If it were, then you would see (as Milky mentioned) about the right amount of airlines and pilot positions. It would be, as Smith spoke of, the "invisible hand." Some-how it just works... "France gets fed." It is called capitalism. But what we are arguing about is not capitalism; "free market capitilists" did not bail out CAL and friends. Just because you are a buisnessman doesn't make you capatilist. In fact, is is usually the big buisnesses that prefer governement intervention to keep out the small guy. They are modern day Whigs.

Regulation or "de" regulation are just different flavors of corpratism; corporate and government partnership.

If we keep going down that road then we will get more of the same....