patrick.net

Dan8267 says

Although you are a right-wing nutjob

Right wing on finance, the rest is your conjecture...Dan8267 says

You, like a typical conservative, simply choose never to listen.

Back at ya

thunderlips11 says

Didn't lose. Name one airline that competes on having larger economy

Ok then how should this be regulated into fairness?

indigenous says

Ok then how should this be regulated into fairness?

Ask the AMA and get an opinion about the minimum seat requirements to prevent DVT. Which people have died from. The numbers are most certainly higher than advertising because like a head injury, it can kill you hours later while you feel fine in the interim. And on most airline economy seats, an average male can neither stand in front of his seat, nor is there a standing areas anymore, they've been removed. I've been told to sit down when standing on an international AA flight just trying to move around a bit.

Also, Airlines are heavily, heavily, heavily government subsidized. From the airframe to the airport. Including special treatment for First Class, even though they pay the same security fee as economy.

indigenous says

Right wing on finance

The right wing is hardly financially conservative. The warfare budget unequivocally disproves that claim.

Dan8267 says

The warfare budget unequivocally disproves that claim.

Yep, and their propensity to cut taxes, then borrow and spend.

Dan8267 says

The right wing is hardly financially conservative. The warfare budget unequivocally disproves that claim.

Not with Libertarians

The true cause of poverty? The "wealth/job creators" still don't have a big enough piece of the pie.

thunderlips11 says

Ask the AMA and get an opinion about the minimum seat requirements to prevent DVT.

Would it not be more effective to have the AMA talk to the airlines about this problem? I would think they would be happy to market this to the public and their new remodeled airplanes.

BTW do you pee sitting down?

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

The right wing is hardly financially conservative. The warfare budget unequivocally disproves that claim.

Not with Libertarians

That's not an argument.

indigenous says

Would it not be more effective to have the AMA talk to the airlines about this problem?

No. As Curious talked about in another thread, Monsanto, ADM, and Lowe's Entertainment don't give a fuck that HFCS causes obesity, heart disease, and diabetes. They want to sell more HFCS; the airline wants more money per flight.

thunderlips11 says

As Curious talked about in another thread, Monsanto, ADM, and Lowe's Entertainment don't give a fuck that HFCS causes obesity, heart disease, and diabetes.

What does that have to do with airlines?

But lets not forget that the only reason they use HFCS is because of tariffs on imported sugar which enables ADM to coerce more corporate welfare than anyone save maybe Boeing or Lockheed.

Dan8267 says

That's not an argument.

You do realize I have been a registered Libertarian for over 30 years?

indigenous says

What does that have to do with airlines?

You said the AMA should talk to the Airlines. I'm telling you that would be as effective as having various medical and health groups talk with HFCS providers. Making carb addicts is their primary business model.

indigenous says

HFCS is because of tariffs on imported sugar

Yep. Deep Capture.

thunderlips11 says

You said the AMA should talk to the Airlines. I'm telling you that would be as effective as having various medical and health groups talk with HFCS providers. Making carb addicts is their primary business model.

Sorry to hear about your condition.

The last time I checked the customer has more pull than HFCS providers.

thunderlips11 says

indigenous says

There you go Thunderlips loses this round. Never question the free market...

Didn't lose. Name one airline that competes on having larger economy seats. IE in general. "Our seats are 2 inches wider with 2 inches more legroom". NOT charging people with bad knees extra to sit in the exit row - the last place they ought to be in an emergency (due to Deep Captured FAA)

To you as a consumer, they do. You can consider only airlines with extra-legroom seats priced with the surcharge. Since you do not have to consider the regular economy seats as an option, just pretend they do not exist.

By the way, who cares what the cabin is called? The new Economy Plus/Comfort/Extra/Select seats are better than the old economy seats. The Premium Economy seats nowadays almost rivals the old business class seats.

I have vivid memory about economy seats in the "good" old days. They are not that great. I will pick the new premium economy any day. Guess what? On an inflation adjusted basis, I am paying less too.

Sometime I wonder how airlines are managing such low prices when oil price is so much higher now.

.Peter P says

By the way, who cares what the cabin is called? The new Economy Plus/Comfort/Extra/Select seats are better than the old economy seats. The Premium Economy seats nowadays almost rivals the old business class seats.

Yep, it's the old, make the main product shittier but offer expensive options.

Economy Seats used to be 19" and over even to 22", then 18.5", now they are size zero model sized 17". It races downwards as newer planes offer smaller seats at the airlines' request, and older models are refurbished to make the product shittier. Many "extra" economy class seats might give you a few inches of legroom, but not wider seats.

Meanwhile the average demographic in the US is getting older and chubbier. Some customer response!

I remember all passengers got hot meals. That's extra even for "Economy Comfort" these days.

Peter P says

Sometime I wonder how airlines are managing such low prices when oil price is so much higher now.

Finally got new aircraft - doubtlessly heavily subsidized for both the buyer and the seller, some of whom are moving to China anyway.

The new engines and airframes are more efficient.

thunderlips11 says

Economy Seats used to be 19" and over, then 18.5", now they are size zero model sized 17". Many "extra" economy class seats might give you a few inches of legroom, but not wider seats.

Can you explain to me how they could possibly have six-across 19-inch seats on a Boeing 707? It has the exact same cross-section as the ubiquitous 737.

Nowadays, true Premium Economy seats are about 19-inch wide. On an inflation-adjusted basis, even after the 80% premium over coach, they are still cheaper than the "good old" economy seats before deregulation.

thunderlips11 says

I remember all passengers got hot meals. That's extra even for "Economy Comfort" these days.

Yes, that is a bit sad. I doubt you can even pay for them if you choose to.

But I seriously did not care for those so-called "hot" meals in coach class. They still sucked.

Peter P says

Can you explain to me how they could possibly have six-across 19-inch seats on a Boeing 707?

You mean one of the first commercial jets that hasn't been in production since Jimmy Carter and isn't flying much anymore?

Or the original 737, one of the most popular commercial aircraft ever made, which had 100 seats when first rolled out in 1967. Today's versions and interior remodeling has 200.

Airlines are reducing economy seats and making way for more expensive seats. It's kind of a reflection of the USA's GINI. A shift of focus from Joe Middle Class to luxury and the growing number of trust fund babies.

thunderlips11 says

Or the original 737, which had 100 seats. Today's versions have 200.

The highly-popular 737 has grown in LENGTH. The cross-section did not change. The number of seats per row did not change.

Seat Width is up to the airline.

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/07/travel/feeling-cramped-battle-airline-seat/

"Seats are getting smaller and smaller as airlines look to squeeze revenue from their economy seats," noted Ranga Natarajan, the senior product manager at SeatGuru, a website that rates the best and worst seats on nearly every plane in the industry.

In the 1960s, a seat width of 17 inches was standard, and for a period in the 1990s and early 2000s, that grew to 18.5 inches with the introduction of the Boeing 777 and Airbus A380.

Recently, however, airlines been filling planes to a capacity that Natarajan calls "historic proportions."

"What our customers haven't asked for is an arbitrary, self-serving seat-width standard."
Kate Bergman, Boeing

"Airlines used to fly at 70% capacity. Now, that number is closer to 80 to 85%, which means every middle seat is occupied, so the elbow room just isn't there," he said.

Peter P says

The highly-popular 737 has grown in LENGTH. The cross-section did not change. The number of seats per row did not change.

SOME of the models are lengthier. Other models have just had the legroom removed, seats narrowed, standing areas removed, etc.

I was using the good old 707 as the gold standard. Even the glamorous Pan Am, with their girdle-wearing stewardesses, have six-across economy seats.

http://www.everythingpanam.com/

thunderlips11 says

Other models have just had the legroom removed, seats narrowed, standing areas removed, etc.

The six-across model for narrow-bodies has not changed for decades. So the seat width pretty much remained the same. In fact, if you fly on a newer A320, you do get slightly more cabin width for the same number of seats across.

thunderlips11 says

Seat Width is up to the airline.

Yes, there is more flexibility on a wide-body. Then again, long-haul airlines are more likely to offer a true Premium Economy cabin. It is well worth the 30%-80% premium.

Note that SeatGuru talks about the average seat width. The introduction of tightly-packed low-cost airlines would have skewed the result. I use that site extensively to find good seats. You should do the same.

Peter P says

The introduction of tightly-packed low-cost airlines would have skewed the result.

Sounds like somebody like JetBlue will see this marketing niche, with the boomers getting older and all...

Good article showing why/how air fares have dropped so much over the last 30 years.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/02/how-airline-ticket-prices-fell-50-in-30-years-and-why-nobody-noticed/273506/

It confirmed my suspicion that on an inflation-adjusted basis, the cost of an economy seat 30 years ago is about the same as that of a business-class seat nowadays.

debyne says

Good article showing why/how air fares have dropped so much over the last 30 years.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/02/how-airline-ticket-prices-fell-50-in-30-years-and-why-nobody-noticed/273506/

And legroom, food and beverage, waiting times,permitted luggage, freebies, etc. has also decreased.

Most of the savings was due to Airlines scrapping 40 year old planes and/or upgrading engines.

Manufactured Goods and the services that use them staying the same price or even falling after inflation is called "Normal". Take a look at computers or cars. However, car makers aren't removing features and options to maintain profitability; on the contrary, they are getting cheaper with more extras simultaneously - even in the bottom of the market.

Have subsidies for airports and airlines and aircraft builders (many now going to China despite the gifts of billions in subsidies and breaks given over the past decades by taxpayers) decreased after inflation - or increased?

Airlines are America's Train System and should be regarded as such, they're certainly heavily taxpayer supported. As a tradeoff, reasonable comfort should be expected.

thunderlips11 says

they're certainly heavily taxpayer supported.

Citation please

By the way, premium seats are also use to reward frequent flyers. The current cabin layout is a reflection of how airlines try to maximize profit. As a result, the consumer also has more choices. A win-win in my book.

2013: Boeing gets "Biggest State subsidy in US History"
http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2013/11/11/boeing-biggest-state-subsidy-in-u-s-history/

"Essential Air Services" - mostly to small cities in Red Areas, btw.
http://wyofile.com/gregory_nickerson/subsidair-essential-air-service-subsidy-great-lakes-airlines/

~$19B for the FAA

http://www.dot.gov/budget/2012/fy2012budgethighlights.pdf

Jet fuel is taxed at about 22 cents - unless it is used by commercial airlines, who only pay a 4 cent tax. Kerosene not used for jet fuel is taxed at about 25 cents.
http://taxmap.ntis.gov/taxmap/pubs/p510-008.htm

I wonder how much of the subsidies are absorbed by the unions.

Newer airlines like Virgin America and JetBlue are providing good service at a competitive price.

If I was going to bring Boeing into this I would talk about the EX IM Bank.

EAS with 38 planes does not show up on the radar

The gas thing is not small, although your link is busted at the upper one.

But I will bet it is small compared to what ADM gets.

At any rate I say get rid of all of them. At the state level I suppose that is hard because the states have to compete with one another to keep the tax base. But at that point it only affects that state, if too onerous the masses vote with their feet.

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

That's not an argument.

You do realize I have been a registered Libertarian for over 30 years?

That is also not an argument.

Dan8267 says

That is also not an argument.

In that case splain yourself.

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

That is also not an argument.

In that case splain yourself.

Honey, I don't even know what you're asking clarification for.

Dan8267 says

Honey, I don't even know what you're asking clarification for.

The only time I see your kind of hubris is when it is accompanied by a lot of ignorance.

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

Honey, I don't even know what you're asking clarification for.

The only time I see your kind of hubris is when it is accompanied by a lot of ignorance.

Ah, so you have no questions and just want to be a dick. Please, continue to vent your sexual frustrations.

300 comments in 5 days. Exceeded my expectations.