Fly Boy Knight

That is the point of the free market... the market demands, and businesses supply. Well, if demand for such low prices cannot be met because industry wide, pilots and FA REFUSE to make crap... well if the airline industry can no longer provide these low wages, the airlines will have to raise ticket prices in order to compensate for the added wages.

If every airline (meaning pilots INDUSTRY WIDE stop accepting low paying positions) raises prices, then the public will have no choice but to accept (read: demand) the higher prices. If even one carrier cuts wages and lowers ticket prices, the public will flock to that carrier forcing the other carriers to cut wages as well. If they can't find pilots to work for that new low wage... they cease operations and go under. That is the balance and regulation of the free market.

When airlines merge to the point where there is only two or three left industry-wide... prices will rise. When prices rise enough, a smart entrepreneur will come along and start a new airline offering MUCH lower prices. Again, the public will flock away from the conglomerate and it will be FORCED by the market to cut prices or cease operations.

Any industry that is free to act in a free market is inherently regulated by the demands of the market. The market ensures that strong businesses survive and weak ones fail and that EVERYONE's interests (worker, buyer, customer, manager, etc.) are taken into account in the cumulative whole of the market's pressures. That is the best regulatory action because.... it is 100% free. You CAN start a crappy business and seep all of your money into it... but, you will probably fail. No government intervention required!

JamesNoBrakes

So you don't think congress and lawmakers influence and provide benefits to those who "bail out" the airlines, due to the massive loss of jobs and economy that would result? I think if you dig a little, you'll see the connections. In one sense, government "bails out" airlines constantly with EAS. Other examples would include how arbitration is handled during bankruptcy. Right to work states. Railroad Workers Act, etc. If you think it's a "free market", that is impressive...

On the other hand, I do agree that you "can't have it both ways", better jobs means fewer jobs and at some point people decided it was far better to have a job than have a good job, however no matter how bad that job went, which is one more example of why regulation may be essential in the industry.

FDXLAG

Better jobs means fewer jobs. Please provide some insight to this?

For bonus points work FDX and UPS into your treatise.

jungle

Cash in these transactions is not government provided, it is provided by the private sector. We all know that plenty of carriers have been allowed to slip beneath the waves, never to be heard from again.

Of course, you must first understand that all government expenditures come from cash generated in the private sector too.

Could you point out any major industry that is not subject to heavy regulation?

jrutt

I guess I can ask the inverse question tell me about another industry that is more heavily regulated than aviation? maybe the railroads and the are really subsidized.

jungle

They are all heavily regulated: pharmaceuticals, medical, automotive manufacture, oil, steel, coal, nuclear, food, agriculture, shipping, mining, accounting, banking, timber-I think you get the general idea. For a real treat, take a look at the history of ladder manufacture-yes, something as simple as a ladder has volumes of regulation.

A major chunk of any corporations time and money is spent on compliance and discovery of new and existing regulation.

jrutt

Jungle guess i get the picture and i can find fault with all those industries as well.

Only elections can overturn the apparat's hold on political power. Adding new word to my vocab, that is why i like these forums

jungle

It is a mistake to assume that all regulation is bad, just as it is a mistake to assume that all regulation is good or useful.

Regulation has exploded regardless of which party is in power. It goes far deeper than simplistic politics.

Finally, the fault does not lie with industry.

Unfortunately, many have a misguided notion that a free market means no rules or regulation, that is never the case, rules are needed to maintain a fair and transparent market-the rule of law rather than the rule by exception.

There is a growing regulatory class that tends to shape law and even in many cases overrides law, this is very clearly not of benefit to anyone, at least to anyone in the general population.

Sir Winston Churchill:
If you have 10,000 regulations, you destroy all respect for the law.

This effect has been noted as long as civilization has existed. Show me a nation with more laws than you can count and I will show you corruption.

It is a deep question that delves into morals, philosophy and your view of the individuals rights and responsibilities, the later you will note is hardly ever mentioned by anyone.

Lest your eyes grow heavy, that is enough about that.

EasternATC

You'd be better served to cite someone who:

a)doesn't have an axe to grind, and
b)has more sense than a cabbage.

Winged Wheeler

Is stability always good? I think if you were to advocate re-regulation you would have to justify why stability is preferable to its alternative.

WW