Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
FAA unlikely to raise age 65 >

FAA unlikely to raise age 65

Search

Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

FAA unlikely to raise age 65

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-30-2022, 02:38 PM
  #161  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,785
Default

Originally Posted by SonicFlyer
Tax breaks aren't subsidies.
OOfff is offline  
Old 07-30-2022, 04:23 PM
  #162  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: A330 FO
Posts: 275
Default

Originally Posted by duck of death
I dunno. Looking back at history, 65 is a pretty arbitrary age. Who cares if they make it 67. If you want to keep flying and pass your medical more power to you.
Seems like you can already. Plenty of pilot jobs for 65 and older if you want them.
Moonbeam is offline  
Old 07-30-2022, 07:11 PM
  #163  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,547
Default

Obama was born in 1961. The Baby Boom generation was through 1964. He’s actually a so called “Boomer”.

I personally hate these classifications. They’re pretty much bull****. You could be Gandhi, but maybe born in 1960, and you be considered a “Boomer” in the broad (VERY broad) scheme of things.

How about we judge individuals for who they are vs. what generation they were born in? I’ve met so many amazing people from each generation, and many complete ****ups from each generation too.
450knotOffice is offline  
Old 07-31-2022, 12:46 AM
  #164  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Airhoss's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.
Posts: 5,726
Default

Originally Posted by OOfff
it absolutely is the goal under consumption-driven capitalist systems.

again because consumption and hoarding is the goal.

not possible. First world conditions rely upon extracting wealth from cheap labor
Oofff

Weren’t you humble bragging about having to do your own taxes and planning on your substantial trust fund not long ago?

We’d have to assume that your immediate ancestry extracted that wealth from cheap labor?

So in fact you’re a beneficiary of the oppression which you point out here.
Airhoss is offline  
Old 07-31-2022, 01:23 AM
  #165  
Gets Weekends Off
 
PineappleXpres's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2022
Posts: 1,209
Default

Originally Posted by Moonbeam
Seems like you can already. Plenty of pilot jobs for 65 and older if you want them.
Any age is arbitrary. 65 minus a day is not more dangerous than someone on the their 65th. Doesn’t mean having a limit is irrational or bad for the labor group’s self interest.
PineappleXpres is online now  
Old 07-31-2022, 04:37 AM
  #166  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,177
Default

Originally Posted by BoilerUP
Pilots can repeat this myth one million times, but it doesn't make it any more true.

There are exactly zero studies, from ALPA or insurance actuaries or anybody else, to support this thinking.

Yes, there ARE studies about decreased lifespan in shift workers - but none of those captured professional pilots.
The shift worker study is pretty damning....something like working nights cuts average lifespan by a decade.

Absence of a study on just pilots who just work nights doesn't prove anything.
Profane Kahuna is offline  
Old 07-31-2022, 05:02 AM
  #167  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,177
Default

Originally Posted by Otterbox
SWAPA and RAA most likely.
I read on the internet it was United.

Source: some random ahole.
Profane Kahuna is offline  
Old 07-31-2022, 05:13 AM
  #168  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,785
Default

Originally Posted by Airhoss
Oofff

Weren’t you humble bragging about having to do your own taxes and planning on your substantial trust fund not long ago?

We’d have to assume that your immediate ancestry extracted that wealth from cheap labor?

So in fact you’re a beneficiary of the oppression which you point out here.
No. You’re definitely confusing me with someone else
OOfff is offline  
Old 07-31-2022, 07:10 AM
  #169  
Gets Weekends Off
 
GogglesPisano's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Position: On the hotel shuttle
Posts: 5,931
Default

Originally Posted by OOfff
i like the part where you think capitalism will suddenly bring first world standards of living to places the first world relies upon exploiting to deliver first world standards of living to themselves.
I like the part where you refuse to concede that capitalism and free trade have improved the human condition faster and more effectively that any other system yet invented.

How much richer and better off would third world inhabitants be if they weren't "exploited?" Your answer will reveal whether or not you believe in verifiable data.
GogglesPisano is offline  
Old 08-01-2022, 05:55 AM
  #170  
Gets Weekends Off
 
DeltaboundRedux's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2020
Position: Enoch Powell Enthusiast
Posts: 2,303
Default

Originally Posted by OOfff
stopping the promotion and worship of a system of nonstop and infinite economic growth at all cost would be a start. Eliminating incentives to have children would be another place to start
All of the western world (and a good portion of the east re:China) are have TFRs far below replacement levels.

If you want America and Europe to depopulate itself, stop immigration and you’ve just solved your “problem”. (It’s not a problem, you’re wrong, and the “depopulate the world” is a death cult. By all means though, don’t reproduce, please.).

Japan is the case study in this. They’re going quietly into that good night. There are…problems with this approach.
DeltaboundRedux is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
OnTheKlacker
Major
208
09-09-2010 12:36 AM
eFDeeeX
Cargo
59
01-31-2008 01:30 PM
Brown
Major
115
12-27-2007 07:47 AM
pdo bump
Cargo
70
05-30-2007 06:01 PM

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