McCain to lose pilot vote block.

[PCL_128]

Many people argue that management has a choice, but in reality, the Choice is to give in to higher salary demands that a company may not Be able to afford or face a debilitating strike that may cripple the
Airline and force it out of business. I don't believe that anyone Would argue that is a choice.

False premise. Pilots wages don't contribute enough to the CASM to bankrupt a company. That's management propaganda. Besides, no union wants to engage in a strike. They are just as damaging to the pilots as they are to the company. They are last resort actions that are only taken when management is so unreasonable that the union has no choice.

 

[MountainFreak]

Will one of you "universal healthcare" idiots please point me to the exact article/section/amendment of the U.S. Constitution where it states healthcare is a right???

News flash: it ain't there.

Furthermore, name one instance of an individual in this country who was denied life saving trauma care because he didn't have health insurance.

None of these candidates speak of true freedom and self reliance - it's all about what the government can do for me. How can Uncle Sam get in someone else's pocket and redistribute their hard earned waelth to me so my wife can go download another tricycle motor and I can afford to take that road trip to the next race in Talladega????

Oh, when universal healthcare does come to fruition and one of your loved ones is denied a transplant or other procedure because they are a bit too old or feeble, just send a PM to old tittyjet and let me tell you, "I told you so."

Why the hell do you think Canadians cross the border in droves to get medical work done??????

Dude, is that what they teach you in Georgia? Universal healthcare-whether you are for or against it- is a matter of POLICY, not "rights".
There are many free-market, capitalistic arguments in favor of universal healthcare.
For example, our corporations would be able to compete more efficiently globally without the extra costs of employee healthcare.
Another example- entrepreneurs would be much better able to get out there and start businesses if they know their families have healthcare, especially if pre-existing conditions are involved.

By the way. You might want to re-read the Constitution, though I doubt you have ever read it in the first place.
Hidden in there is the statement that the enumerated rights are NOT meant to be exclusive.
In other words, the founders believed there are many inalienable rights, only some of which were spelled out. In fact, some founders argued against adding the bill of rights, because they feared that over time the list would be seen as exhaustive, when it was only meant to be exemplary. Sadly, their fears have been realized by the wingnuts. But you knew that didn't you?

How bout them Dawgs?

PS There are thousands of examples of insurance companies who deny life-saving coverage. But you knew that too.

 

[Smarta$$]

Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago and our nation was the most prosperous in the world, had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids. What happened?

CEO's now make 1500 times what the average hourly worker makes. And they have a government to help them achieve it.

I will be voting for Obama.

 

[UALjan15]

Furthermore, name one instance of an individual in this country who was denied life saving trauma care because he didn't have health insurance.

Why did you feel the need to include the qualifier "trauma care" in this statement? It seems that you believe we have a moral obligation to treat a guy without insurance, but only for trauma care. If that same guy comes in with leukemia or a brain tumor, does he get the "stiff arm" at the hospital door? Could you at least be consistent and say "screw 'em all, I'm covered."

Speaking of that great coverage you have, do you take great comfort in knowing that if you get sick someday, your health insurance company will have an obligation to its stockholders to give you the cheapest treatment that they can get away with? Gives me a great big warm fuzzy....

 

[JoeMerchant]

People will pay $75 month for a premium cable/sat. tv package, $4 for a cup of Starbucks coffee, 30K for a new car every 5 years......Then complain when they have to pay for health care.....Somewhere people got the impression that health care is free.....while coffee should cost 4 bucks a cup......Our priorities are all screwed up.......

Canadian health care isn't free and it isn't very good......

Car insurance is mandated......why isn't health insurance?

 

[WabiSabi]

Canadian health care isn't free and it isn't very good......

It sure is accessible to more of the population. Not to mention, there are companies and even congressman organizing the purchase of cheaper Canadian pharmaceuticals.

Car insurance is mandated......why isn't health insurance?

Non sequitur. Driving a car is not mandatory either. However, health as a concept sort of comes with the whole human body thing.

 

[JoeMerchant]

It sure is accessible to more of the population. Not to mention, there are companies and even congressman organizing the purchase of cheaper Canadian pharmaceuticals.

It's not accessible to those who are considered too old or too sick......I have dual citizenship and have relatives in Canada.....My grandmother didn't receive care when she got old....and my Uncle now, who has Cancer, is going to come to the US for care.....Canada rations it's care.....and there are long waiting lists for care......

Pharmaceuticals could be made cheaper.....but if you take out the huge profit motive, you will have less effort exerted to find cures for things like Alzheimers and Cancer.....Whether the socialists want to admit it or not, profit is a huge motivator for things that are good......Most of us get out of bed and go to work to make money......Same thing for the pharmacetuicals.......Big profits are big motives for big cures......

Non sequitur. Driving a car is not mandatory either. However, health as a concept sort of comes with the whole human body thing.

Wrong analogy grasshopper.......Neither driving nor health care are "mandatory"......If being financially responsible for your car accident is mandatory, then paying for your health care should be also......If you aren't going to mandate health insurance, then don't mandate car insurance......

Why should I pay for the health care of someone who chooses to spend their money on cable tv, Starbucks, and a brand new car instead of health insurance?

Take care of them, then put a lien on everything they own....

 

[MountainFreak]

Why should I pay for the health care of someone who chooses to spend their money on cable tv, Starbucks, and a brand new car instead of health insurance?

You shouldn't; everyone should pay for healthcare. The problem is that people who WANT to purchase healthcare can't. Either denied entirely, or with premiums more than the mortgage. Worse yet, the insurcance companies will gladly take your premium, but deny when it comes time to pay. Any major catastrophe, and you will hit an artificial limit. They will drop you. Now try to buy more coverage.
Solution: quit your job, declare bankruptcy, and go on Medicaid. You didn't want to, you just wanted to keep a job and affordable coverage. But if you want to keep your child on that cancer med, our system forces you to be a drain on society. Insurance companies need those profits you know.

 

[FR8mastr]

But people like you don't care about that because you are a Republican no matter what, your right to own an AK47 Supersedes the right of the rest of us to actually work and make a descent living that will actually pay our bills.

Typical anti gun anti constitution crap. You spout off about AK-47's do you even realize the scum bag nut jobs that have been killing people did not use that or anything like that? I know you do but it doesnt make good copy if you tell they truth. Why don't you check out the crime rates in England and "down under" and see what banning guns actually does to the population.

PS Bush has been the worst president ever!

I would be happy if any politician actually followed the constitution.

As for Bush and the loss of all the jobs to China etc. Yes that is correct, however both Dem Candidates also voted yes to all these BS trade agreement thereby committing treason on the American people. As another poster said "we are in a world of hurt"

 

[JoeMerchant]

You shouldn't; everyone should pay for healthcare. The problem is that people who WANT to purchase healthcare can't. Either denied entirely, or with premiums more than the mortgage.

This simply isn't true....Health care premiums aren't "more than the mortage".....You can get good coverage for the price of a premium TV package and cell phone service.....

Pre-existing conditions are a different case.....sorry, but that isn't how insurance works.....You can't pay for car insurance after an accident....Insurance is simply legalized gambling.....The house has to have an advantage, or there isn't a point to providing it.....

 

[pilotyip]

False assumption

False premise. Pilots wages don't contribute enough to the CASM to bankrupt a company. That's management propaganda. Besides, no union wants to engage in a strike. They are just as damaging to the pilots as they are to the company. They are last resort actions that are only taken when management is so unreasonable that the union has no choice.

No there may have been room in the CASM to cover the outrageous 35% increase the pilots were asking for, but it would have made the profit margin so low that access o the financial markets would have been limited. Not mention if pilot get that much money, why are the mechs FA's, and Cust Serv people going to sit back and ask for nothing? I watched the UAL debacle in 2000 and was kinda happy then did not hire me in 1996. The pilots had backed management into corner wit ha unoffical work slow down. Managment hadsno choice but to make a bad decision. In 2001 the average UAL pilot flew 38 hrs and got paid for 82. That is bad management

 

[WmuBronco]

a quote from your Ahole John Mccain

STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN McCAIN
CHAIRMAN SENATE COMMITTEE ON
COMMERCE, SCIENCE AND TRANSPORTATION
FULL COMMITTEE HEARING
ON THE STATUS OF LABOR ISSUES IN THE AVIATION INDUSTRY
APRIL 25, 2001


We are all aware of the numerous problems facing the aviation industry.
Congestion, delays, and modernization of air traffic control are all issues
that seem to rise to the forefront to be addressed again and again. This
Committee, industry, the regulatory agencies and others have redoubled their
efforts to address these serious problems.

Recently, however, a new problem has risen, creating further havoc in our
system. While labor negotiations in the airline industry have been ongoing
for years, things have begun to worsen. The trend towards larger airlines
has given unions greater leverage which appears to have contributed to a
mind set that views any work stoppage as legitimate. Normally even
acrimonious labor negotiations are a part of the negotiating process with
both sides using what leverage is available to them to reach the best deal.
However, times have changed; these acrimonious negotiations now adversely
affect the American people.

Let me say from the outset that I have no problem with the right to strike.
Strikes are a legal remedy available under applicable labor statutes.
Recently, however, courts have found more and more that labor unions in the
airline industry have engaged in concerted illegal job actions. These
courts have issued temporary restraining orders and injunctions prohibiting
such actions. In recent months, United, American, Northwest, and Delta have
obtained court ordered relief from these alleged illegal job actions. In
American's case, the court fined American's pilots over $45 million for not
adhering to the injunction.

These actions have affected millions of consumers. Middle America has been
stranded time and time again as a result of this illegal union activity.
According to published reports, last year, United cancelled over 23,000
flights as a result of its pilots' refusal to fly overtime, destroying
carefully planned vacations and business trips. Northwest and Delta
cancelled thousands of flights preemptively over the holiday seasons to
combat alleged mechanic slowdowns and failure to fly overtime by pilots,
respectively. The pilots' sickout at American in 1999 left thousands of
people stranded, some of which have banded together to sue the pilots for
damages.

In this day and age, a job action at a major airline can have a catastrophic
effect on the aviation system and the consumer. The rest of the system
would have a difficult time absorbing the excess passengers and the system
could come to a standstill. While management and labor are affected by
this, both parties have contingencies planned in the event of a job action.
The consumer is the one most affected by this increase in labor actions. It
is family flying across country for their vacation, the daughter coming home
from college, and the son going to visit a sick parent who can not reach
their destinations because the unions have taken matters into their own
hands. In the case of pilots, these are people who, according to industry,
on average make $140,000 while working less than 80 hours a month. At the
same time, according to the most recent data in 1999,the average per capita
income was $21,281.

The last two pilot contract negotiations, United and Delta, both of which
had alleged job actions with far reaching effects on the consumer, resulted
in a pay scale where, by the end of the contract, the senior pilots will
make over $280,000 in base pay with the ability to make one-third more for
voluntarily flying 25 more hours a month. Not only should the consumer not
have to suffer as a result of this avarice, but many analysts are concerned
that with labor costs rising so high, airlines will not be able to survive
economically or will at least put themselves in a hole for years to come.
Labor costs for an airline are now projected to be over 33% of its fixed
costs.

Many people argue that management has a choice, but in reality, the choice
is to give in to higher salary demands that a company may not be able to
afford or face a debilitating strike that may cripple the airline and force
it out of business. I don't believe that anyone would argue that is a
choice.

We have convened this hearing to look at these issues. Although this
subject is one that can be very divisive along party lines, I have received
complaints from both sides of the aisle about the current situation. I
welcome the witnesses today and look forward to a lively and spirited
debate.


Vote yes to MCCAIN if you are A AHOLE!! and think you only work 80 hours a month. Sorry d hole thats what they only PAY us for not what we actually work!

 

[uba757]

FR8mastr you did not understand my point. I am a gun owner but in no way would I ever make that a political necessity when I vote, we need to educate our children first on what ownership and use of a gun is, then we can worry about our "right to bear arms". I am tired of people saying that they are worried about loosing their right to bear arms but the arms they are talking about are weapons like an AK-47, M-16, etc. With all the problems we have today in our country for someone to say that they will vote for someone because they are worried about "the right to bear arms" is ludicrous. That was the point I was trying to make. I am sorry if I offended anyone that needs that AK-47 to hunt some Rabbits.

 

[UALjan15]

This simply isn't true....Health care premiums aren't "more than the mortage".....You can get good coverage for the price of a premium TV package and cell phone service.....

Pre-existing conditions are a different case.....sorry, but that isn't how insurance works.....You can't pay for car insurance after an accident....Insurance is simply legalized gambling.....The house has to have an advantage, or there isn't a point to providing it.....

Joe--Thanks for making my point for me and the anti-health insurance crowd. I don't consider my health a "gamble," and I don't want the "house" to have an advantage when it comes to my health care decisions. Your take on pre-existing conditions is exactly what I'd expect from someone who's never applied and been denied for coverage.

I once applied for single coverage for a few months while I was waiting for my employer's waiting period to expire. On the form I indicated that I had experienced some minor back pain (I had seen a chiropractor so I couldn't hide it). Other than that, I was totally healthy. Blue + accepted me for coverage, but not my back. That's right, the entire back....which I've grown pretty attached to even if it aches sometimes. There are hundreds of thousands of stories like this all across the country. You are definitely spot on--the house wants an advantage, and they do that by denying coverage, denying treatments, and by retroactively dropping you if they can find something (even minor) that you didn't put on your application. You think this is just good business while I think it is a load of dung. That's why I want the "business" part of health coverage to just go away.

You love to compare auto and health insurance, perhaps because they both involve the concept of insurance. Unlike cars, I can't just go trade my body in for a new model and then get it insured like a new car. We're stuck with these "pre-existing conditions," and the way we've structured our health care "program," those that have been sick or injured need to stay under the umbrella of group coverage at all times. Forget going to work for yourself or a small business--you're a bad risk now! And unlike car insurance, where I can turn myself from a bad risk to a good risk through good behavior, with the health insurance companies that concept doesn't play. Finally, I can go for years (or decades) without using my car insurance, but we all PLAN on using our health insurance every year to make routine visits affordable.

Maybe you don't want Canada's plan down here (I don't either). But I want something radically different from what we've got now, and the time had come.

 

[UALjan15]

You shouldn't; everyone should pay for healthcare. The problem is that people who WANT to purchase healthcare can't. Either denied entirely, or with premiums more than the mortgage. Worse yet, the insurcance companies will gladly take your premium, but deny when it comes time to pay. Any major catastrophe, and you will hit an artificial limit. They will drop you. Now try to buy more coverage.
Solution: quit your job, declare bankruptcy, and go on Medicaid. You didn't want to, you just wanted to keep a job and affordable coverage. But if you want to keep your child on that cancer med, our system forces you to be a drain on society. Insurance companies need those profits you know.

This pretty much sums up the problem....well said. I wish there were a solution on the horizon, but all of the major candidates propose keeping this totally flawed system in place and putting bandaids all over it.