3 ms·
>The issue is that to optimize for profit you sacrifice the ability to maintain service through catastrophic events and can end up in a bit of a dominoes situat
by noobermin 4y ago
>The issue is that to optimize for profit you sacrifice the ability to maintain service through catastrophic events and can end up in a bit of a dominoes situation.
Sounds like an argument for nationalization.
- andruby 4y agoI don't follow. Nationalization might add more slack, and more resilience, but it'll be so much more costly to operate. Airlines run on very thin margins, so need to optimize heavily. We just need to accept that we can either get "affordable" tickets with occasional meltdowns or we go back to 30 years ago and pay double price for tickets but have more resilience. The market as a whole has already resoundingly chosen the former. Safely flying humans in metal structures is just really expensive and the current ticket prices pretty much reflect the real cost (and even ignore the climate externalities)
- noobermin 4y ago> I don't follow. Nationalization might add more slack, and more resilience, but it'll be so much more costly to operate. Who cares? The point of nationalization is costs don't matter, we just see it as a cost we bear because transportation is important for civilization. The primary mode (for better or worse) in the US is public (roads) and that "cost" is not covered by anyone.
- chasd00 4y ago> Sounds like an argument for nationalization. No, it sounds like an argument to never fly SWA again.