Should we bail the airlines out, again?

[dsee8driver]

I have been reading various articles regarding the goverment bailing out the airlines, again. Some of these reports say that a goverment bailout would be a slap in the face to those airlines that are operating profitably. I was wondering what the opinion of you guys and gals was regarding this. Should the goverment bail the airlines out again?

 

[KingAirKiddo]

In short, yes. I really don't think that the bailout was adequate immediately following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. I think the money was not properly or adequately distributed.

Things are definitely looking up regarding the Iraq situation. I hope that this conflict ends quickly and resolutely. My thoughts and prayers are with all the men and women serving overseas right now. Thanks for keeping America great.

Regards,
KAK

 

[ultrarunner]

NO, in short, there has been a massive excess in capcity for the last several years. IMO a massive decrease in capacity could be the best thing in this industry right now.

Simply bailing out airlines that have cost structures not allowing them to be competitive is NOT the answer.

Survival of the......

 

[RideandDrive]

No

The sooner these poorly run companies cease operations, the better for all.

 

[KingAirKiddo]

Forgive me for thinking in terms of the tens of thousands of employees who will be on the street should one of them fail. I agree that huge changes will be needed in order to continue a sustainable operation, but I also don't think it's impossible.

Personally, I'm beginning to think FlyDeltasJets has been right on target all along. If the RJ and the LCC is the wave of the future, then so be it, but I can't really say that I wouldn't have wanted to fly a 777 someday.

 

[Singlecoil]

The airlines aren't asking for a "bailout". They are asking for a one-year reprieve from the taxes and fees they pay to the government. This adds up to roughly 11 billion dollars a year. Since 9/11, the government has added about 4 billion dollars a year to the airlines in increased fees, and opportunity costs, such as giving seats to thousands of air marshalls. Congress also said they had to install secure cockpit doors and pay for it themselves.
Ours isn't the only industry being asked to shoulder the costs of defending the country. Port authorities around the country are being asked to spend an additional 4 billion dollars on port security.
To me, the role of keeping our enemies from attacking us belongs within the budget of the Department of Defense.
One B-2 costs 2.1 billion dollars.
We are spending 7.8 billion dollars a year on missile defense.
Are F-15's so outclassed by our enemies that we need to spend 62.7 billion dollars on the F-22?
Yet when airlines ask for help securing their systems against attack it is a "bailout".

Why don't the airlines pass these costs along to their customers? Right now, they are making more headway by passing the costs along to their employees in the form of pay cuts, work rule concessions, eliminating retirement benefits, and furloughs. These actions take billions of dollars out of our economy, money that would be spent on goods and services and help promote the economy.
I say the industry needs some assistance, but don't call it a bailout.

 

[Joseph II]

It's all about supply vs demand and making a profit.

The airline industry needs to be totally revamped to return to profitibility. Any other company would be gone if they were loosing millions a month.

 

[trainerjet]

It seems as though everyone is missing the point, even though Singlecoil did an excellent job of laying it all out.

 

[ksu_aviator]

The way I see it, there are some companies that go along seemingly unaffected by 9/11 and there are some that are devestated.

The USA is supposed to be a free market, and in a free market you either sink or swim. United, US Air, American are all sinking while Jet Blue, Airtran and SWA are swimming. Yes United, US Air and American will all lay off more employees, but in the long run companies like Jet Blue, Airtran and SWA will pick up the slack.

 

[100LL... Again!]

A bailout by any other name...

Since when is it the Government's job to protect the jobs of a certain sector? I'm furloughed, but would not want my parents' tax money to buy my job back through some ultra-inefficient corporate structure.

If we give money to one, we must give it to all. Anything less would seem un-American to me.

 

[sidesaddle]

I agree with singlecoil and merikeyegro, "Bailout" is a misnomer. When the government lets countless illegal aliens into the country and even issues them Visas after they blow up our buildings, they certainly shoulder some of the responsibility for 911, not just the airlines.

 

[skyking1976]

Hmmm....

How about seizing terrorist governments' bank accounts and other liquid assets as war penalties and using those to fund airline relief programs. IMHO, the way I see it, they have already bought 2 757's and 2 767's.


Skyking

 

[100LL... Again!]

Skyking for president!
That's actually not a bad idea. That part of the world hates us anyway. Take their $$$. Screw 'em.

 

[ultrarunner]

take the money

You guys hit the nail on the head. You stop the flow of money, and you stop the problem.

The really sad part is that the money that is financing this activity is mostly ours in the first place, if not all ours.

 

[B190Captain]

The way I see it, there are some companies that go along seemingly unaffected by 9/11 and there are some that are devestated.

The USA is supposed to be a free market, and in a free market you either sink or swim. United, US Air, American are all sinking while Jet Blue, Airtran and SWA are swimming. Yes United, US Air and American will all lay off more employees, but in the long run companies like Jet Blue, Airtran and SWA will pick up the slack.

You also have to think about the size and route structure of the airline. JB, SWA and AirTRan are DOMESTIC LCC carriers and no, the Bahamas, Mexico and Canada do not count. UAL, AA, and US are airlines that cross the big ponds along with huge domestic route systems.

American, UAL, and USAir are much larger companies in terms of fleet, employees and logistics, therefore, lots more money to keep afloat.

Throw upper management greed, government fees and higher fuel costs only compound the enormous debt they have to endure. Pilot salaries are also larger than the low cost competitors.

Remember in 9/11 that it was deemed necessary to shut down the airspace for 3 days? This cost major airlines billions per day. I am not saying it was wrong to do that but did the government consider that they would have to assist the airlines with these huge losses? Not to mention the loss of consumer confidence after the airspace was restored. The government has a large responsibility for the way things are going today and it's their job to try to fix it.

Does anyone here remember Pan Am 103 in Lockerbie? It was also a terrorist act that as a result enforced security. The cost was imposed on the airlines and why not federalized then? Security was tighter for a while but then diminished. If those same security protocols along with yearly improvements since 1988 were being used prior to 9/11 the WTC would be standing today.

Comparing UAL, USAir and American to JB, AirTran and SWA are apples and oranges. I believe more assistance is needed from the government but the money needs to be dispersed in a more responsible manner. To assist the airline and not to line upper management's pockets with bonuses. They just need to throw them in prison.

I hope and pray for the best to everyone especially our men and women in our armed forces.

Fly Safe!

 

[Publishers]

Bailout

Obviously this is a difficult situation for the companies and the employee's involved.

While it is easy to say pass the cost along to the customer, unfortunately, the customer does not seem to willing to pick them up.

I was for the original bailout because I did not see it as a bailout. The industry was paying the price for government actions. Our enemies used airlines as a weapon and for that the nation owed them something to compensate for their losses.

Today, the losses are more wide spread and more related to economic reasons. The airlines in trouble today are in trouble because they did not take care of business or assets. They accepted large labor contracts, sold off their hidden reserve, and left themselves vulnerable to competition.

As is usual, some comtetitors are taking advanage of their strenght and taking market share.

 

[Swass]

No

 

[cessna_driver2]

When will these companies take responsiblity for themselves? If the government is always around to give free money, That puts a further burden on joe tax payer, in addition to the rising cost of air travel because the airlines are jacking up prices to cover their own losses. When does it end.

Aviation will recover. The airlines will recover and the fittest will survive.

 

[Eagleflip]

Horsehockey!

Sidesaddle wrote:

When the government lets countless illegal aliens into the country and even issues them Visas after they blow up our buildings, they certainly shoulder some of the responsibility for 911, not just the airlines.

No, the US Government DOES NOT SHOULDER ANY of the responsibility for the 911 attacks. I'm surprised that you'd say that.

From what I've read, at least 18 of the 19 hijackers/terrorists that committed the 911 attrocities came into the US legally under student or visitor visas. Not so sure about the 19th individual, but let's face it...the vast majority of them arrived with our blessing. Does that make us responsible for their actions? No.

The US has long led the way toward a better educated world--I do not blame the US government for the secret plan these ***tards held. The government simply allowed them to enter to study. While we should do strong background checks on those who wish to do so in these trying times, I don't blame the US for opening its doors during those innocent times.

I hold the terrorists--as well as their political system and social support network--wholy responsible for those horrendous actions.

The lamentable fact that some bureaucrat issued a couple of the dead terrorists student visas weeks after the attack is merely indicative that our government is not all too fast reacting and all-knowing. Show me a government that is and I'll show you a police state.

Bottom line--I fix the blame on those individuals who perpertrated and supported this act, not a country trying to help educate the world.

 

[fluther]

Two thoughts...

"Money doesn't solve money problems."

and

"This is free enterprise, you make it or break it on your own."


But for sure, if were going to give big tax breaks then EVERY airline should get them, regardless of profitability.