cturers happy and humming, so they build commercial aircraft, mostly older and inefficient designs which are not in high demand anywhere in the world.

To save these ailing, non competitive industries so they will be here to build new warplanes as needed, the U.S. Government subsidizes t

A half dozen fully loaded airliners could fall out of the sky every year and flying would still be safer than driving, so what is really going on with the airlines? For starters, it really is about Homeland Security but in a very different way than it appears. It does not matter how safe flying is. What matters is public perception. If the public feels unsafe, the public doesn't fly. And it isn't that most people will refuse to fly. It is the small drop in business would drive all the marginally profitable and chronically unprofitable airlines out of business.

Did I hear you say so what? I'm glad you asked. It is all about taxpayer subsidies for government preferred industries. The government does not care all that much about the airlines, even though it looks as though they have been partners a long, long time. The subsidy is an indirect one for the companies which build warplanes. In spite of global conditions, there are many suppliers outside of the United States and government wants to keep the U.S. industry competitive, in spite of all industry efforts not to be. The U.S. military is not using up their airplanes to keep the U.S. aircraft manufacturers happy and humming, so they build commercial aircraft, mostly older and inefficient designs which are not in high demand anywhere in the world.

To save these ailing, non competitive industries so they will be here to build new warplanes as needed, the U.S. Government subsidizes th

ng is. What matters is public perception. If the public feels unsafe, the public doesn't fly. And it isn't that most people will refuse to fly. It is the small drop in business would drive all the marginally profitable and chronically unprofitable airlines out of business.

Did I hear you say so what? I'm glad you asked. It is all about taxpayer subsidies for government preferred industries. The government does not care all that much about the airlines, even though it looks as though they have been partners a long, long time. The subsidy is an indirect one for the companies which build warplanes. In spite of global conditions, there are many suppliers outside of the United States and government wants to keep the U.S. industry competitive, in spite of all industry efforts not to be. The U.S. military is not using up their airplanes to keep the U.S. aircraft manufacturers happy and humming, so they build commercial aircraft, mostly older and inefficient designs which are not in high demand anywhere in the world.

To save these ailing, non competitive industries so they will be here to build new warplanes as needed, the U.S. Government subsidizes t

u say so what? I'm glad you asked. It is all about taxpayer subsidies for government preferred industries. The government does not care all that much about the airlines, even though it looks as though they have been partners a long, long time. The subsidy is an indirect one for the companies which build warplanes. In spite of global conditions, there are many suppliers outside of the United States and government wants to keep the U.S. industry competitive, in spite of all industry efforts not to be. The U.S. military is not using up their airplanes to keep the U.S. aircraft manufacturers happy and humming, so they build commercial aircraft, mostly older and inefficient designs which are not in high demand anywhere in the world.

To save these ailing, non competitive industries so they will be here to build new warplanes as needed, the U.S. Government subsidizes t

hich build warplanes. In spite of global conditions, there are many suppliers outside of the United States and government wants to keep the U.S. industry competitive, in spite of all industry efforts not to be. The U.S. military is not using up their airplanes to keep the U.S. aircraft manufacturers happy and humming, so they build commercial aircraft, mostly older and inefficient designs which are not in high demand anywhere in the world.

To save these ailing, non competitive industries so they will be here to build new warplanes as needed, the U.S. Government subsidizes t

cturers happy and humming, so they build commercial aircraft, mostly older and inefficient designs which are not in high demand anywhere in the world.

To save these ailing, non competitive industries so they will be here to build new warplanes as needed, the U.S. Government subsidizes the airlines. One of these subsidies is in the form of the Transportation Security Authority, which provides the security services, not for the airlines, but for the flying public. The taxpayer subsidy gives fliers confidence, keeps failing airlines in business and a non competitive aircraft industry humming. If you have been feeling as though you have been making too little sacrifice for the war on terrorism, cheer up. You are sacrificing more than you will ever know.

What would happen if fewer people flew? First, the airlines would park planes they would be due to replace and orders at the airplane factories would drop. Next, there would be substantial savings in fossil fuel consumption, but not enough to affect prices. Small, start up airlines would use foreign made, modern airplanes to carry smaller passenger loads on more and more frequent routes with lower security threats, annoyances, costs and air fares. More marginal airlines would park their old planes and lay off maintenance workers and other staff, who would be unwilling to work for the new companies at half the wage. More airlines would go out of business. More new airlines would step in