JMT21

You must have mis-read. It is going to create, not shift, move, or take away from pilots, an estimated $15.8 billion. I'm sure the "fuzzy" numbers were put together by someone who knows a helluva lot more about the economic implications of this thing than you.

Really, you've heard of Air America? I would never have thought judging by your rant. Try not to drink too much of their kool aid.

If foreign carriers can do the samething American carriers do for cheaper, why not? It doesn't make sense to pay more for something than you have to.

The data is there, I think you just don't want to see it. This is a good thing for Americans and Europeans alike.

ryane946

I saw an article yesterday saying that the US and EU were close to reaching an agreement, but I just saw another article saying they have reached a tentative agreement.

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/tic...12&Symbol=UAUA

Two MAJOR things to consider from reading this article.

Looks like VA (and their Ultra Low pay rates) could be flying if this agreement passes.

Second, there was a very good argument made earlier in this thread that this agreement will pretty much only benefit European carriers. While US airlines only want to fly to London in England, or Paris in France, EU carriers want to fly to Boston, New York, Newark, Philadelphia, Washington DC, Miami, Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Denver, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, etc...

I am against this, and I hope all US pilots are against it too.

NGINEWHOISWHAT

EXACTLY. They can fly to our Beverly Hills, Aspen, and NY and we get to fly to their Death Valley, Barstow, and other places where there is generally no real revenue. Yeah, I might have drank the Kool aid, but I know what's good for my profession and what's not.

Tom

NGINEWHOISWHAT

Yeah, it may CREATE 15.8 Billion, but it won't be created for the American worker. That money will be sent over seas. It will not benefit the U.S. economy. As far as the jobs created? Sub-standard and lower wages and yes it WILL take money out of the American Pilot's Pocket as Legacy carriers and even Southwest try to compete. We can't compete with a Ryan Air. Look at Skybus. Skybus is going to be to the US what Ryan Air is to Europe. This accelerates the race to the bottom and is NOT a good thing for us.

Oh yeah, I agree with you that this was put together by someone who knows a "helluva" lot more about this than me. They absolutely know a lot more about screwing the American worker and getting rich in the progress. You can spray perfume and powder on a turd and wrap it in gift paper, but it's still a turd. This new policy is a turd.



I drank the kool-aid, huh? Ok, if I drank the kool aid, you drank the Hemlock. All Nippon is currently delivering freight in the US via Alaska. Now, with this proposed policy, we are opening our doors to the interlopers of Europe and Asia. Things might be slightly more even with the EU, but we can not compete with communist nations. What will you say then when JAL, All Nippon, (all good carriers), come here and compete? After 9/11 all the foreign carriers increased their market share and placed new aircraft orders at an unprecedented rate while we suffered. Now, they want to come here and fly our routes too? Give me a break!

Tom

JMT21

American carriers have been able to fly to their Beverly Hills, Aspen, and NY for years. This is allowing the European carriers to do the samething American carriers have been able to do for years. This is leveling the playing field.

Why would you suggest it should directly create money for the American worker? It will create money for the U.S. carriers (which will trickle down to American workers/investors).

How will it not benefit the U.S. economy? More tourists = more money.

There are only two communist nations, North Korea and Cuba, neither of which pose much threat to U.S. carriers.

Why are you so afraid of competition? Do you feel U.S. carriers cannot compete with foreign carriers? Most airline economic factors are the same across the world, I don't see how one should have a great advantage over another.

What will I say when they come here to compete? I will say nothing. Whats the difference? All I'm interested in is getting from point A to point B. If fares are lower (or imports cheaper) and there are more direct flights overseas I, and most Americans, will be happy.

JMT21

U.S. carriers could have any of these routes now, so why don't they?

Busboy

What grade are you in? You could at least mention that other little one, named China.

JMT21

16th grade. That "little other one" is not a true communist, but rather socialist, nation. You might be interested to know that China is slowly becoming capitalist in it's economic system. What grade are you in?

http://www-chaos.umd.edu/history/prc.html

NGINEWHOISWHAT

Do you think we can compete with China? All factors being the same: Aircraft leases, Fuel, parts. Those are equal, but labor is not and I don't believe they have to refine their fuels to the same degree that we do. Mexican diesel has a higher sulfer content than that allowed in the U.S. I just want to know if you think we can compete with China and some other nations? I have to get to work, but I wait with baited (bated) breath on this one. Have a good day, gents.

Tom

Busboy

Wow!! OK, then. Not a true communist, eh? Boy, you got me on that one. You friggin' dork!!!

I can quote things off the internet, too... How about this one?

"List of current Communist states

The following countries are one-party states in which the ruling party declares allegiance to Marxism-Leninism and in which the institutions of the party and of the state have become intertwined; hence they fall under the definition of Communist states. However, they are not the only countries in the world that currently have Communist governments. ...

With the above disclaimer, current communist states and their ruling parties are:

People's Republic of China (since 1949); Communist Party of China
Republic of Cuba (Cuban Revolution in 1959, socialist state declared in 1961); Communist Party of Cuba
Lao People's Democratic Republic (since 1975); Lao People's Revolutionary Party
Democratic People's Republic of Korea (since 1948); Korean Workers' Party
Socialist Republic of Vietnam (since 1976); Communist Party of Vietnam
While these countries share a similar system of government, they have adopted very different economic policies over the past 15 years.

Moreover, during the Cold War era, various countries, especially in Africa, copied superficial aspects of the Soviet dominant-party system without necessarily sharing the Marxist-Leninist ideology of the Communist parties. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is often considered a Communist state by observers, although it no longer espouses Marxist-Leninsm; instead, it officially describes itself as a socialist republic governed according to the ideology of Juche."

Or, maybe check out what type of government the CIA thinks China has, here's that link:

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications...k/geos/ch.html


Ever been to ROC? Hong Kong? Korea? Ever been anywhere? Ever worked in this industry?

Anyone, working in this industry, that thinks we compete on the same playing field with most foreign carriers...Needs to be drug tested. Just before being shot!! For being an idiot.

You may have the last word, dipstick!!