Regional pilots shown in Capitalism movie
10-06-2009, 10:06 AM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 790
10-06-2009, 10:18 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 777, sofa
Posts: 1,183
The current economic crisis reminds me of high school American history. After the Civil War and Reconstruction, but before WWII - does anybody else remember it? Most people find history boring, and this period was possibly the most tedious of them all. No battles, no great social changes, just a repetative pattern of economic booms and busts. And a constant search for a means to control them. The gold standard, the silver standard, soft money, all were ultimately failed efforts to bring a semblance of order to a chaotic economic system.
It really wasn't until the Great Depression that a framework of a powerful central bank was created with enough leverage to push or pull the economy in roughly the desired direction. And a safely net was set up to catch some of those who could no longer provide for themselves.
If you build a powerful engine, but provide no mechanism to control its fuel flow what happens? It accelerates to its maximum capacity then burns out. The same thing happens in an unregulated economy. The history of Capitalism is nothing - nothing at all except a series of booms and busts. Long uninterrupted periods of steady growth are as alien to unconstrained capitalism as they are to 'perfect' Communism. The regulations put in place from the 30s to the 70s were dismantled from the 80s onward... and the biggest boom and the biggest bust ever followed in this decade.
So, in much fewer words, Capitalism requires strong regulation to work properly, in the broad interests of the many, as opposed to the narrow interests of the few. Without it you've got a high performance rocket engine, with a nasty habit of blowing up in your face.
It really wasn't until the Great Depression that a framework of a powerful central bank was created with enough leverage to push or pull the economy in roughly the desired direction. And a safely net was set up to catch some of those who could no longer provide for themselves.
If you build a powerful engine, but provide no mechanism to control its fuel flow what happens? It accelerates to its maximum capacity then burns out. The same thing happens in an unregulated economy. The history of Capitalism is nothing - nothing at all except a series of booms and busts. Long uninterrupted periods of steady growth are as alien to unconstrained capitalism as they are to 'perfect' Communism. The regulations put in place from the 30s to the 70s were dismantled from the 80s onward... and the biggest boom and the biggest bust ever followed in this decade.
So, in much fewer words, Capitalism requires strong regulation to work properly, in the broad interests of the many, as opposed to the narrow interests of the few. Without it you've got a high performance rocket engine, with a nasty habit of blowing up in your face.
10-06-2009, 10:41 AM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Cessna 150
Posts: 655
Slander and defamation are illegal. If you say Moore lies about everything, you are the hypocrite.
Do we (pilots) really need more regulation (new regs), or less regulation (no RLA) to allow us to get what we deserve?
Do we (pilots) really need more regulation (new regs), or less regulation (no RLA) to allow us to get what we deserve?
10-06-2009, 11:29 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2008
Position: Hotel
Posts: 714
The current economic crisis reminds me of high school American history. After the Civil War and Reconstruction, but before WWII - does anybody else remember it? Most people find history boring, and this period was possibly the most tedious of them all. No battles, no great social changes, just a repetative pattern of economic booms and busts. And a constant search for a means to control them. The gold standard, the silver standard, soft money, all were ultimately failed efforts to bring a semblance of order to a chaotic economic system.
It really wasn't until the Great Depression that a framework of a powerful central bank was created with enough leverage to push or pull the economy in roughly the desired direction. And a safely net was set up to catch some of those who could no longer provide for themselves.
If you build a powerful engine, but provide no mechanism to control its fuel flow what happens? It accelerates to its maximum capacity then burns out. The same thing happens in an unregulated economy. The history of Capitalism is nothing - nothing at all except a series of booms and busts. Long uninterrupted periods of steady growth are as alien to unconstrained capitalism as they are to 'perfect' Communism. The regulations put in place from the 30s to the 70s were dismantled from the 80s onward... and the biggest boom and the biggest bust ever followed in this decade.
So, in much fewer words, Capitalism requires strong regulation to work properly, in the broad interests of the many, as opposed to the narrow interests of the few. Without it you've got a high performance rocket engine, with a nasty habit of blowing up in your face.
It really wasn't until the Great Depression that a framework of a powerful central bank was created with enough leverage to push or pull the economy in roughly the desired direction. And a safely net was set up to catch some of those who could no longer provide for themselves.
If you build a powerful engine, but provide no mechanism to control its fuel flow what happens? It accelerates to its maximum capacity then burns out. The same thing happens in an unregulated economy. The history of Capitalism is nothing - nothing at all except a series of booms and busts. Long uninterrupted periods of steady growth are as alien to unconstrained capitalism as they are to 'perfect' Communism. The regulations put in place from the 30s to the 70s were dismantled from the 80s onward... and the biggest boom and the biggest bust ever followed in this decade.
So, in much fewer words, Capitalism requires strong regulation to work properly, in the broad interests of the many, as opposed to the narrow interests of the few. Without it you've got a high performance rocket engine, with a nasty habit of blowing up in your face.
This country is a country of money changers. Ever read "Rich Dad, Poor Dad?" This book, though motivating in some sense, is THE cancer on what we deem as capitalism. Making money from money, moving money at just the right time to convert it into more money, etc, but not really DOING anything to better society. The problem with this is that money is just a vehicle for exchange. It is the exchange itself that matters - the "underlying" if you will. Those who merely change money and accumulate it are nothing but leaches on society. They consume more than they add to the "societal pool". With the housing market, the dot com burst, etc, there was a perception of value that didn't actually exist. So the side effect is that the economy fluctuates about a mean as the bubbles build and burst - a slowly increasing mean in my estimation.
Those who work and produce something of value, screw the lids on the jars, fly airplanes, sweep side walks, etc are the ones making society a better place. These people will always need to be paid a fair compensation DIRECTLY for their efforts - an element that is missing in the socialist plan. Those who basically do nothing of value except flip houses, buy low/sell high, etc just consume the fruits of society. It is this absence of intrinsic worth that will always burst in the end.
Some money changers are good - an example is one who invests in a new business. Though not doing anything himself, the business will hopefully grow and provide a return on investment. My point is not a discredit all in this category, but you see my point.
10-06-2009, 11:32 AM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 888
It'd be nice if we didn't have the RLA handcuffing us, I'll give you that. Seems like more regulations are dangerous in their potential damage to our quality of life, though if the unions agree to less days off we should all burn it down.
I've always been an advocate that we're underpaid, however I read this same topic in the Majors forum. They too claimed to be underpaid. At a certain point, lets say 80k plus you're no longer underpaid. Sure we have lots of responsibilty but we get to hang our hat when we leave the plane and we have more time off than many careers. I do think that anyone making less than 30k is getting screwed, interestingly though I'm not sure screwed by whom. The only reason first year pay exists is because the union says so, if the union decided to pay 2nd year pay across the board then that'd be the end of first year pay. Unfortunately that is prevented by the guys at the top who say, I suffered why shouldn't they. Let's say one regional made first year 32 an hour (not unheard of second year pay), would they ever have a shortage of pilots? The reason that doesn't happen is the negotiating capital would have to come from somewhere....
10-06-2009, 12:00 PM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 298
This debate is as ridiculous as the people GLAD Chicago didn't get the Olympics because it looks like a failure to Obama.
ANY publicity about how terribly we're (and other American industry workers) treated is a good thing. Be it Ariana Huffington, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck or any left or right wing nut..i'm ok with it.
ANY publicity about how terribly we're (and other American industry workers) treated is a good thing. Be it Ariana Huffington, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck or any left or right wing nut..i'm ok with it.
I haven't seen the movie, and don't plan on it, so I can't really comment on it.
10-06-2009, 12:35 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: 737
Posts: 1,136
The reason for this is that much of what we label "value" is just a group agreement. The housing market problem was a huge contributor to this recent downturn. I purchased my house before the bubble burst and lost thousands over it. Same house, same everything. Just a perception in devaluation.
This country is a country of money changers. Ever read "Rich Dad, Poor Dad?" This book, though motivating in some sense, is THE cancer on what we deem as capitalism. Making money from money, moving money at just the right time to convert it into more money, etc, but not really DOING anything to better society. The problem with this is that money is just a vehicle for exchange. It is the exchange itself that matters - the "underlying" if you will. Those who merely change money and accumulate it are nothing but leaches on society. They consume more than they add to the "societal pool". With the housing market, the dot com burst, etc, there was a perception of value that didn't actually exist. So the side effect is that the economy fluctuates about a mean as the bubbles build and burst - a slowly increasing mean in my estimation.
Those who work and produce something of value, screw the lids on the jars, fly airplanes, sweep side walks, etc are the ones making society a better place. These people will always need to be paid a fair compensation DIRECTLY for their efforts - an element that is missing in the socialist plan. Those who basically do nothing of value except flip houses, buy low/sell high, etc just consume the fruits of society. It is this absence of intrinsic worth that will always burst in the end.
Some money changers are good - an example is one who invests in a new business. Though not doing anything himself, the business will hopefully grow and provide a return on investment. My point is not a discredit all in this category, but you see my point.
This country is a country of money changers. Ever read "Rich Dad, Poor Dad?" This book, though motivating in some sense, is THE cancer on what we deem as capitalism. Making money from money, moving money at just the right time to convert it into more money, etc, but not really DOING anything to better society. The problem with this is that money is just a vehicle for exchange. It is the exchange itself that matters - the "underlying" if you will. Those who merely change money and accumulate it are nothing but leaches on society. They consume more than they add to the "societal pool". With the housing market, the dot com burst, etc, there was a perception of value that didn't actually exist. So the side effect is that the economy fluctuates about a mean as the bubbles build and burst - a slowly increasing mean in my estimation.
Those who work and produce something of value, screw the lids on the jars, fly airplanes, sweep side walks, etc are the ones making society a better place. These people will always need to be paid a fair compensation DIRECTLY for their efforts - an element that is missing in the socialist plan. Those who basically do nothing of value except flip houses, buy low/sell high, etc just consume the fruits of society. It is this absence of intrinsic worth that will always burst in the end.
Some money changers are good - an example is one who invests in a new business. Though not doing anything himself, the business will hopefully grow and provide a return on investment. My point is not a discredit all in this category, but you see my point.
10-06-2009, 12:36 PM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2008
Position: Hotel
Posts: 714
The only reason first year pay exists is because the union says so, if the union decided to pay 2nd year pay across the board then that'd be the end of first year pay. Unfortunately that is prevented by the guys at the top who say, I suffered why shouldn't they. Let's say one regional made first year 32 an hour (not unheard of second year pay), would they ever have a shortage of pilots? The reason that doesn't happen is the negotiating capital would have to come from somewhere....
Pilot unions have been around for a long time now. Had they been doing their job in the world you describe, we'd all be getting paid much better right now.
Lastly, pilots do like to complain a lot. I haven't figured out what it is all about entirely. Even line holding FOs at majors complain about their six figure incomes. There aren't many other industries where you can merely be an employee (not holding a material ownership interest) and pull in over 6 figures. But the route to these jobs is getting longer and longer and longer and the total return on the career path is dropping.
10-06-2009, 12:46 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 888
The union can't just demand a certain level of pay or we'd all have it. The market is the market. The union does curtail things a bit, but it is still the result of supply/demand. There is a reason that all the regionals' first year pay are grouped around the 22-25/hr mark - that is what the market demands. In fact, in the current economy, I'd bet a slew of the furloughed guys would work for even less. Unemployment is running out, etc.
Pilot unions have been around for a long time now. Had they been doing their job in the world you describe, we'd all be getting paid much better right now.
Lastly, pilots do like to complain a lot. I haven't figured out what it is all about entirely. Even line holding FOs at majors complain about their six figure incomes. There aren't many other industries where you can merely be an employee (not holding a material ownership interest) and pull in over 6 figures. But the route to these jobs is getting longer and longer and longer and the total return on the career path is dropping.
Pilot unions have been around for a long time now. Had they been doing their job in the world you describe, we'd all be getting paid much better right now.
Lastly, pilots do like to complain a lot. I haven't figured out what it is all about entirely. Even line holding FOs at majors complain about their six figure incomes. There aren't many other industries where you can merely be an employee (not holding a material ownership interest) and pull in over 6 figures. But the route to these jobs is getting longer and longer and longer and the total return on the career path is dropping.
I only hope when I make it to the top (assuming I don't follow thru on another career path before then) that I'll remember vividly what it was to make darn near nothing and get furloughed twice. Maybe I'll get lucky and APC will still be around and I'll just search for my prior posts... easier to avoid being a hypocrite when it's all archived :P
10-06-2009, 01:02 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: Jet Pilot
Posts: 797
There tends to be a lot of "capitalism bashing" now as compared to five or ten years ago. Why is that? Perhaps because most people find capitalism just fine when they are doing just fine, but when things are not going the way they want, then most are quick to label capitalism as "evil". Here are my thoughts per this thread.
First, Michael Moore is most certainly a hypocrite. He criticizes capitalism for his perceived view of the system "exploiting" the little guy and gaining profitably in the process. Hmm, what is Michael Moore doing? He is profiting quite nicely by exploiting that same little guy for the sole purpose of a "documentary" about why capitalism is bad. Did it ever occur to Michael Moore that he is able to produce the films he does because of capitalism?
And how is the "little guy" who is victimized by "evil" capitalism being helped by Moore's film? Capitalism has benefited Moore very, very well. Just look at his waistline and it is easy to see he has no trouble putting food on his table.
Second, unions exist because of capitalism. How many powerful and successful unions do any of you see in Russia or China? Be careful what you wish for, especially if you think you want the government to come in and set the wages for you.
First, Michael Moore is most certainly a hypocrite. He criticizes capitalism for his perceived view of the system "exploiting" the little guy and gaining profitably in the process. Hmm, what is Michael Moore doing? He is profiting quite nicely by exploiting that same little guy for the sole purpose of a "documentary" about why capitalism is bad. Did it ever occur to Michael Moore that he is able to produce the films he does because of capitalism?
And how is the "little guy" who is victimized by "evil" capitalism being helped by Moore's film? Capitalism has benefited Moore very, very well. Just look at his waistline and it is easy to see he has no trouble putting food on his table.
Second, unions exist because of capitalism. How many powerful and successful unions do any of you see in Russia or China? Be careful what you wish for, especially if you think you want the government to come in and set the wages for you.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
