Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > Southwest
DOWNFALL: The Case Against Boeing >

DOWNFALL: The Case Against Boeing

Search

Notices

DOWNFALL: The Case Against Boeing

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-20-2022 | 09:11 AM
  #41  
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 4,208
Likes: 6
Default

Originally Posted by OOfff
what if that’s actually the case here?
Government is never the good guy.

And Boeing isn't really a free-market company. They do a lot of economic rent-seeking, and get lots of handouts and subsidies from the government.
Reply
Old 02-20-2022 | 09:38 AM
  #42  
Banned
 
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 8,831
Likes: 499
Default

Originally Posted by SonicFlyer
Government is never the good guy.

And Boeing isn't really a free-market company. They do a lot of economic rent-seeking, and get lots of handouts and subsidies from the government.
so, your mind was already made up before the film is released
Reply
Old 02-20-2022 | 09:46 AM
  #43  
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2021
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by OOfff
what if that’s actually the case here?
Except that’s not the whole story. Multiple times it was mentioned Boeing had lobbyists and paid off politicians from both sides of the aisle pushing their agenda before, during, and after the crash(s).

In a real free market, Boeing would be done, you got caught cutting corners, hiding and firing anyone with safety concerns. Game over, thanks for playing. But they’re protected by the state via bought out politicians/regulators.

List any of the most successful companies in the country, they all have lobbyists.

Last edited by KirillTheThrill; 02-20-2022 at 10:25 AM.
Reply
Old 02-20-2022 | 10:47 AM
  #44  
Banned
 
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 8,831
Likes: 499
Default

Originally Posted by KirillTheThrill
Except that’s not the whole story. Multiple times it was mentioned Boeing had lobbyists and paid off politicians from both sides of the aisle pushing their agenda before, during, and after the crash(s).

In a real free market, Boeing would be done, you got caught cutting corners, hiding and firing anyone with safety concerns. Game over, thanks for playing. But they’re protected by the state via bought out politicians/regulators.

List any of the most successful companies in the country, they all have lobbyists.
Of course that’s not the whole story, I’m talking only about sonic flyer’s knee-jerk reaction to watching half of a trailer for a film that isn’t out yet
Reply
Old 02-20-2022 | 11:01 AM
  #45  
TiredSoul's Avatar
All is fine at .79
 
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 4,486
Likes: 42
From: Paahlot
Default

Originally Posted by KirillTheThrill
Except that’s not the whole story. Multiple times it was mentioned Boeing had lobbyists and paid off politicians from both sides of the aisle pushing their agenda before, during, and after the crash(s).

In a real free market, Boeing would be done, you got caught cutting corners, hiding and firing anyone with safety concerns. Game over, thanks for playing. But they’re protected by the state via bought out politicians/regulators.

List any of the most successful companies in the country, they all have lobbyists.
I’m sad to say I have to agree with this.
In addition as the “Regulator” the FAA has a lot of culpability here.
Reply
Old 02-20-2022 | 11:03 AM
  #46  
2StgTurbine's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,840
Likes: 93
Default

Originally Posted by KirillTheThrill
In a real free market, Boeing would be done, you got caught cutting corners, hiding and firing anyone with safety concerns. Game over, thanks for playing.
Well, that's the real issue. The far-right will always say "But in a real free market, X wouldn't happen." So what's a real free market? No FAA oversight? How would Boeing get caught cutting corners if the federal government wasn't defining those corners? In a real free market, there wouldn't be an FAA to enforce or establish commercial airline standards. Anyone could start making a jet and sell it to anyone who felt like operating an airline. That company would have to establish a reputation of building quality safe aircraft to succeed. Except, in reality, their customers (the airlines) want an efficient airplane that is safe enough. As economic pressures build, the "safe enough" standard slips.

I think the 737MAX issue would have happened in free market anyway. Boeing was designing an airplane that was cheap for airlines to operate. It was in both Boeing's interest and the airlines for the 737MAX not to need additional training. Everyone was happy to look the other way. And the final argument for a real free market is that the public would punish these bad actors by not giving them business. The world is way too complicated for the general public to keep track of these issues. No one cares about the MAX anymore. At most, people might say, "Is this the plane that had the problem?" By that point, they bought their ticket and boarded the plane.
Reply
Old 02-20-2022 | 11:24 AM
  #47  
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2021
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Default

Come on buddy, all for having a good debate, but to start off calling me “far-right” like a little puppet who just got done watching a 1 hour segment of Rachel Maddow unloading on all her insecurities isn’t the way.

We need to have regulations, but we have far surpassed the idea of a mostly free market with regulations.

I would argue we’re worse than a true “free market economy (zero regulation)”. Boeing’s CEO walked away from his incompetence with a golden parachute worth $62 million.
Reply
Old 02-20-2022 | 11:32 AM
  #48  
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 4,208
Likes: 6
Default

Originally Posted by OOfff
so, your mind was already made up before the film is released
No but I try not to pollute my mind with propaganda if I can avoid it.

But that's also why I'm throwing the idea out there in these threads, because if I am wrong and it isn't some sort of anti-free market propaganda, and is fairly accurate and neutral, then yes of course I'll watch it. So far I haven't seen a convincing argument that it is watchable.

Now that also being said, most film trailers these days suck and are not an accurate portrayal of the film. Just like junk mail's letter markings are not indicative of what's inside; it's designed to get the mail opened. Trailers are meant to get people to watch the film whether the trailer is an accurate reflection of the film or not.

So if someone can say with a straight face that this documentary is accurate and isn't a bunch of lefty propaganda then yeah I'll watch it.
Reply
Old 02-20-2022 | 11:33 AM
  #49  
2StgTurbine's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,840
Likes: 93
Default

Originally Posted by KirillTheThrill
We need to have regulations, but we have far surpassed the idea of a mostly free market with regulations.
I wasn't directly referring to you. There are some pilots who think the industry would be in a better place if there was no FAA.

But to your point, how would the free market prevent this problem? To me, the 737MAX issue is a case of poor regulation and oversight. What's the free market solution?
Reply
Old 02-20-2022 | 11:34 AM
  #50  
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 4,208
Likes: 6
Default

Originally Posted by 2StgTurbine
Well, that's the real issue. The far-right will always say "But in a real free market, X wouldn't happen." So what's a real free market? No FAA oversight? How would Boeing get caught cutting corners if the federal government wasn't defining those corners? In a real free market, there wouldn't be an FAA to enforce or establish commercial airline standards. Anyone could start making a jet and sell it to anyone who felt like operating an airline. That company would have to establish a reputation of building quality safe aircraft to succeed. Except, in reality, their customers (the airlines) want an efficient airplane that is safe enough. As economic pressures build, the "safe enough" standard slips.

I think the 737MAX issue would have happened in free market anyway. Boeing was designing an airplane that was cheap for airlines to operate. It was in both Boeing's interest and the airlines for the 737MAX not to need additional training. Everyone was happy to look the other way. And the final argument for a real free market is that the public would punish these bad actors by not giving them business. The world is way too complicated for the general public to keep track of these issues. No one cares about the MAX anymore. At most, people might say, "Is this the plane that had the problem?" By that point, they bought their ticket and boarded the plane.
The fundamental reason Boeing was trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip with the MAX was because a clean sheet design was prohibitively expensive. Why? Because of over regulation. If it didn't cost so much in regulations to bring a new airframe to market, then the MAX wouldn't have had to augment it's flight characteristics with a computer to compensate for bad aerodynamics.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
flyallnite
Delta
3950
10-26-2021 11:17 AM
docav8tor
Southwest
7
12-23-2020 09:17 AM
docav8tor
Major
7
11-20-2020 09:41 PM
vagabond
Union Talk
0
07-13-2009 05:45 PM
SWAjet
Major
0
03-07-2005 09:48 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices