Blatant echo you just don't get it. Capitalism IS
NOT an ideology. To be very technical one can be a capitalist, owning a small buisness and therefore the means of production, and ideologically be a communist. The two are not mutually exclusive.
As for the specifics of your argument, I think CO
should close up shop tomorrow, along with HP
. These two airlines have been bankrupt before. Thier contimued presence has been a drag on the airline industry since the early 90s. IF CO
would just close up and pay UA
, and DL
the money they have made unfairly from thier contimued existance then the whole industry would be better off. These airlines couldn't make it after the Gulf War boom, now after sheltering themselves they are at unfair advantage to the other airlines who were strong and made money in the 90s.
Can everyone see how ridiculous and partisan saying UA
should just fold because they were weak in the early part of the year is. How silly, and naive can you be? Just folding would help the industry? UA
and its employees don't give a crap about whats good for the industry. We care about whats good for our customers, and that is in turn good for US. Blatant echo capitalism requires you to use every means at your disposal to make money. To make money UA
has to get bak on track take care of its customers and its employees. Not worry about what's good for the "industry."
Gen. George Patton said "You don't win wars by dying for your country. You win wars by making the other bastard die for his." The same is true in buisness. UA
fought off a cancerted effort by DL
to drive US and UA
out of buisness in the early part of this year. UA
survived, first AA
are struggling becasue they burned alot of their cash reserves keeping the fares artifically low in an effort to kill US and UA
. Tough. The marlet TRIED to kill UA
but we wouldn't let it. No one came rushing to UA
or US aid. On the contrary only commercial banks are involved. Banks who looked at the numbers and believe that thier money will be paid back with a tidy PROFIT. As for the ATSB loans which I think you're refering too, UA
hasn't gotten dime one from the ATSB. If the ATSB approved the gaurentees they still will not get a single dime from John Q Taxpayer. Because the money will come from COMMERCIAL BANKS, the government is only going to pay if UA
defaults. Which as UA
gets stronger and stronger grows increasingly less likely.
Blatantecho I have one more little capitalist phrase to teach you. "Spend as much of someone elses money to grow your buisness as you can." Borroeing against a loan gaurenteed by the US government is not only smart its good buisness.
As for UA
's service and ontime, look at the numbers they don't lie. UA
is the most improved airline. Basically a worst to first senario. I stand by my previous post that the only people who don't like UA
's service are those who wouldn't like it is they got it for $50, and they got thier own private BBJ
. People are too partizan about thier favorites to give you an honest answer.
For those of you who belive UA
is "padding" thier schedule two quick points.
In an artivle in ATWonline just a few days ago UA
was credited as the first airline to use a new software package that has dramatically inproved ontime. And that a similar package if going to be used for reservations and rebooking in addition to baggage. UA
has found ways to improve.
Additionally what does it matter how UA
gets ontime, so long as they are legitimately ontime. Be it padding the schedule giving extra time, or software that stremlines the process, the customers benefit, and that's all that matters. WN
' airplanes do not have ACARS, one of the few airlines who do not use it. This means unlike all other major carriers, who's ontime performance is judged by brake release automaticaly, WN
's captains call it like they see it. 1 min. late releasing brakes on an ACARS plane is 30 sec late. On a WN
plane its ONTIME. Is that legitimate?
A little less Hooah, and a little more Dooah.