Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2017/06/06/what-could-go-wrong.html
…
5 Likes
Cory’s points are well-made, but it’s worth noting that Delta is opposed to privatizing the FAA.
23 Likes
Why do I have the impression that we’re about to see regulatory capture taken to bold new levels, and that this is only the first in a series of similar steps?
"O profitable commercial skies,
And golden waves of gain,
To benefit the shareholders
We circle round the drain!
America! America!
Trump brings disgrace on thee,
And scatters all thy riches on
Our corp’rate oligarchy!"
21 Likes
Good link 
2 Likes
I mean, I’m not automatically against the idea - We has “Nav Canada”, apparently the second-largest air traffic control entity in the world, which has been run by a non-profit since 1998. But there’s the question of how to transition to that, and the devil is in the details. Transition management is tricky, and the final result would have to be thoughtfully and carefully considered.
It’s a serious risk that it might end up being a bar to further entrants. It probably is in Canada.
7 Likes
So I guess we’d choose the best airline by the one that has the fewest planes falling out of the sky?
17 Likes
Corporations are pathological externalizers
I agree many corporations do externalize as much as they can, but not all do this. Plenty of corporations seek out partnerships with Subject Matter Expert companies to work in unison with one another.
And while yes, there is a very real and major concern that cutting any corners or making cost saving measures when it comes to safety can result in loss of life; let’s also keep in mind if flying because relatively unsafe, that would be “bad for business”. The one area many companies who self regulate safety often never cut corners…safety.
1 Like
I forsee spectacular fail.
3 Likes
Seriously, this news actually pisses me off i can’t begin to verbalize it. What the fuck guys. What. The. Fuck.
11 Likes
Who self-regulate AND prioritize profits – for which they’re often willing to sacrifice safety.
Just look for one example at privatized and thus profit-driven healthcare in the U.S. The “safety” of patients is routinely compromised for the sake of higher profits.
27 Likes
Even if safety were not to be sacrificed, the competition would in fact be over. The major carriers would be calling the shots and their monopoly cemented. What’s to stop them from jacking up prices further, reducing quality of service, and overall making things worse for the consumer. Don’t like it? Too bad, they’re running the show now. The FAA isn’t great but they still have an important role as far as protecting the public.
18 Likes
I still don’t know where the ‘free’ is in ‘free enterprise’.
5 Likes
First, ATC has ALREADY been optimized. The government implemented NextGen to modernize ATC a few years ago and while it managed to streamline operations it has also caused enormous damage to communities across the nation. Airplanes now fly in low concentrated paths over once quiet neighborhoods.Where planes were once at 5 min intervals they are now 30sec to 1min apart. Homes now have loud assembly lines of aircraft flying over their rooftops at 1500ft or less. These new superhighways were put in place WITHOUT community or political involvement. NO environmental studies to evaluate noise or pollution.
Airlines will continue to do whatever they can to make a buck and will resist any deviation in flight paths even if it’s only 30 sec difference to spare a neighborhood. There are several lawsuits pending across the country to stop or deviate these egregious flight paths. Having the airlines in control of things will just make matters worse. It will let them punch us in the face even more than they do now.
And as for safety, United has already been busted for flying defective airplanes Do you really think they would stop to fix an airplane if they hadn’t been caught? Oh, and by the way this airplane could have been flying over your neighborhood. Just waiting to drop out of the sky.
Airlines are not to be trusted.
20 Likes
Many manufacturing and supply corporations regulate their own safety protocols within plants and warehouses. Shutting down production or having materials destroyed do to safety violations and accidents is not good for their profit margin.
I am not sure where you are getting that healthcare regulates its own safety. Your doctor doesn’t decide what drugs are available to prescribe you. The hospital doesn’t decide which device/machine is working properly to use on you, or how to handle waste medical waste. This is what the FDA, OSHA, and WHO do.
While the FAA helps to encourage and develop new tech, I think it is a leap to say the industry would stagnate without them. Mind you, I am opposed to privatizing the FAA, I just am not sure it would doom air travel.
2 Likes
Safety doesn’t exist divorced from other business objectives. Much the opposite. In any safety critical industry safety exists in goal conflict with efficiency i.e. generating profit. It is a tug of wars and it is anybodies’ guess who wins at any given moment!
Just think through your argument for a moment: You would think that it would be bad for the oil business to watch tanker-loads of oil evaporate on Deepwater Horizon or spill it into the Ocean or have it burn down in Texas City, yet all of these things happened. And all these incidents were preventable with some investment, long term thinking–people raised the red flag. And were ignored.
The difference between the airline and the oil industry is that on oil rigs only the workers are in danger (and considered disposable) while in a plane the passengers are as well.
Recent indications are that the airline industry doesn’t have any more respect for its customers than the oil industry has for its workers.
18 Likes
The point wasn’t “doctors regulate drugs”, the point was “all fully privatized systems perform worse and cost more because the profit motive is the least effective way of determining efficiency and efficacy”.
19 Likes
United CEO Apology Bot apologizes for nothing.
Bow before United CEO Apology Bot.
10 Likes
However, there are regulations covering external effects like pollution, even if they sometimes seem to be ignored.
An airline has the opportunity for very large external effects - a plane coming down on a school for instance - and also has a large number of non-employees on board its assets, unlike manufacturing and supply corporations. The case is rather different.
3 Likes
More Trump market manipulation as the ultimate insider-in-chief: Invest in big four airlines before making announcement re FAA; eliminate FAA and the ‘costly to airline’ regulations that the airlines now follow; watch big four airlines’ stock rise; cash in.
5 Likes
which is why I view this latest move by 45 with suspicion.
which is why I’ll drive if I can. I refuse to give any business to the airlines if I don’t have to.
it only applies if you are part of the 1%
which is why this whole thing is a bad idea. But who cares if some people die as long as the profits are high?
Any corporation doesn’t care about it’s customers. They pay lip service, but in the end, all they care about is how much money you have.
11 Likes
