3 ms·

It's not a grey area at all. Airlines should have the right to charge customers per pound of items they take with them --- be it flesh or carry-on.

by gragas 10y ago

hobofan 10y ago
As should Uber et al.! Cars, like airplanes, use more gas if they have to transport more weight.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- gambiting 10y ago
  Marginally though. About 0.5l/100km more for every 100kg of weight.
  - funnyfacts365 10y ago
    That's more than 10% increase on most new cars.
bdhess 10y ago
...or cane, or wheelchair, or guide dog. Glad you have this all figured out in your libertarian utopia; in the real world there is still a debate.
- gragas 10y ago
  This is what happens when you take "everyone is equal" to a delusional extent. Everyone should have the same rights, but not everyone is born the same. It is sad, but true. I think the only reason one could come to your conclusion is that one does not understand the difference between being a lesser human being and simply being very misfortunate. Many are misfortunate; no one is lesser. I had cancer when I was little. Should everything in the world be modified to accommodate my specific needs? Should everything in the world be modified to accommodate the "average" person's needs? Perhaps that is how things should be in government, where the sole purpose of the entity is to serve its people. But it should not be the duty of any private entity to do such a thing.
  - bdhess 10y ago
    > This is what happens when you take "everyone is equal" to a delusional extent. I'm not really arguing one way or the other, just pointing out a number of cases that would likely lead to public outcry and therefore attention from regulators who do have the authority to impose their will on the airlines. > I think the only reason one could come to your conclusion is that one does not understand the difference between being a lesser human being and simply being very misfortunate. Or one could recognize that airlines are chartered as common carriers, and are therefore subject to regulatory oversight. > But it should not be the duty of any private entity to do such a thing. The private entity in question necessarily consumes public resources as part of its business model (ATC, takeoff/landing slots, ...). Hence the corresponding regulatory authority.

It's not a grey area at all. Airlines should have the right to charge customers per pound of items they take with them --- be it flesh or carry-on.

by gragas 10y ago

It's not a grey area at all. Airlines should have the right to charge customers per pound of items they take with them --- be it flesh or carry-on.

hobofan 10y ago

As should Uber et al.! Cars, like airplanes, use more gas if they have to transport more weight.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
gambiting 10y ago
Marginally though. About 0.5l/100km more for every 100kg of weight.
- funnyfacts365 10y ago
  That's more than 10% increase on most new cars.

bdhess 10y ago

...or cane, or wheelchair, or guide dog. Glad you have this all figured out in your libertarian utopia; in the real world there is still a debate.

gragas 10y ago
This is what happens when you take "everyone is equal" to a delusional extent. Everyone should have the same rights, but not everyone is born the same. It is sad, but true. I think the only reason one could come to your conclusion is that one does not understand the difference between being a lesser human being and simply being very misfortunate. Many are misfortunate; no one is lesser. I had cancer when I was little. Should everything in the world be modified to accommodate my specific needs? Should everything in the world be modified to accommodate the "average" person's needs? Perhaps that is how things should be in government, where the sole purpose of the entity is to serve its people. But it should not be the duty of any private entity to do such a thing.
- bdhess 10y ago
  > This is what happens when you take "everyone is equal" to a delusional extent. I'm not really arguing one way or the other, just pointing out a number of cases that would likely lead to public outcry and therefore attention from regulators who do have the authority to impose their will on the airlines. > I think the only reason one could come to your conclusion is that one does not understand the difference between being a lesser human being and simply being very misfortunate. Or one could recognize that airlines are chartered as common carriers, and are therefore subject to regulatory oversight. > But it should not be the duty of any private entity to do such a thing. The private entity in question necessarily consumes public resources as part of its business model (ATC, takeoff/landing slots, ...). Hence the corresponding regulatory authority.