I think you should think twice before repeating the putrid garbage broadcasted by Boeing and Politicians in need of attention.
If you refer back to my post, all I said was that its not fair game and getting free money defies the point to competition. The agreement was only brought down to favor Airbus. Thats pretty straightforward. Everyone knows this, even the excs. at Airbus knows this too. But then again, this agreement was in place when Boeing, at the time, was very very successful. Hey, pal...its freedom of speech. Dont like what you read, then dont reply back as 'putrid garbage' as you put it. Sorry, dude!
And from my understanding, this has already been done by the Europeans, but not by Boeing...These subsidies are not, technically and contractually speaking, free money, this is written down.
yeah sure sure sure!! I'll believe that when pigs fly. Look up the word 'subsidies' for me will ya?? Airbus does get free money. (Example: If the A380 does not do as expected, they dont have to pay gov't money back that they were given therefore they have no liability...get the idea??)
This means that almost $4 billion (in USD) of European taxpayers' funding could go down the shute if Airbus can't sell the requisite number of airplanes for the program to be considered a success. I'd think you European taxpayers would be at least a bit concerned about this; giving Airbus an out to NOT repay the loans if the program is declared unsuccessful. Boeing, of course, balks because it doesn't have a similar cushion in case one of its commercial models fails to sell well, seeing this as an unfair advantage for Airbus.
Free Money I tell ya!! This hits it on the nail compeletely.
How do you call the illegal export subsidies used by US exporters (not only Boeing), that have been condamned by the WTO?
Well for starters....selling aircraft at way below market prices would be one violation.....Something Boeing cannot do. Remember, Airbus gets subsidies (free money from EU Gov'ts) and is able to do this practice by offering aircraft below market prices. Is that fair to anyone??
How do you call the fact that a big part of the 7E7 has been contracted to Japaneese firms, to get subsidies from Japan?
Irrevelant!! Baseless and off the point. Has nothing to do with anything. Airbus has suppliers in the USA just like Boeing has suppliers from Europe. Both companies are FREE to contract suppliers for needs. I dont see a crime here. If Airbus had a contract with Russia for making big parts for its A380, I wouldnt care less. Who cares!
How do you call the transfer of the headquarters from Seattle to Chicago? Tons of taxpayers money (money+tax breaks) ...Of course, yu will argue it is not goverment money, but State and city....
A) Stupidity was involved in the transfer to Chicago, Im sure the excs at Boeing realized this.
B) The 1992 agreement has nothing to do with the State of Washington at all. The agreement and the State of Washington have nothing to do with each other so the theory is irrevelant. The State of Washington did not want Boeing to leave the Seattle/Puget Sound area so they were the ones the offered the breaks, not Boeing. Do research on this and you'll see....
IF Boeing ever did get into serious financial trouble the U.S. government would bail them out.
Exactly...and the US Government would say "Screw the 1992 agreement..."
By the way, I would like to also bring up the fact that the State of Washington is NOT, I repeat, IS
NOT a part of the US Government, but a government of its own and still abides by national laws and makes its own state laws. So the 1992 agreement does not apply to the State of Washington. Also, It was our lawmakers who were the ones that signed the 1992 agreement, not Boeing. I think everyone should open the books and then decide how to move forward. I still think that the free money what the Europeans call "subsidies" should cease. Then it would definately be 100% fair competition.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.