Earlier quoted context omitted.
Boeing is basically an extension of .gov
So it'd be .gov.boeing?
No, boeing.gov, but rhetorically.
FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s
861–870 of 884 posts
Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s
#862Earlier quoted context omitted.
One has got nothing to do with the other. Illegal immigrants aren’t driving up housing costs. Standard of living is stagnant, because wealth doesn’t “trickle down” like Reagan promised us. It trickles up. You’re repeating right wing talking points.
How are immigrants not driving up housing costs? Aren't they using housing? Isn't housing driven by supply and demand?
The "demand" in supply and demand means "how much money are people able&willing to invest into x"
For illegal immigrants, the answer to that is "not a lot"
Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s
#863Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fortunately, Boeings work on the 737 MAX was independently checked by non-US aviation authorities who aren't subject to US Congress provisions.
"All good boss. Let's certify this!"
EASA insisted on additional requirements then the FAA did - so I think "no".
Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s
#864Earlier quoted context omitted.
Embraer was a smaller manufacturer, much smaller than Boeing. The had some success, but it was tough for them to compete with Boeing, especially because Boeing bullied them through regulators. They outmanoeuvred Boeing by letting Airbus buy them for 1 dollar. Now Embraer planes are rebranded as Airbus 200 series
That was Bombardier, not Embraer. It's also not clear at all that that was a win for Bombardier, other than giving a free win to Airbus to spite Boeing. Given up the project that they were relying on for the future direction of the company for a nominal sum? Airbus made out like bandits, and the government of Quebec cut their losses, but Bombardier almost certainly lost as badly as Boeing in the C-Series/A200 outcome…
Ah yes, Bombardier. I got it mixed up in my head. Thanks for the correction and a perspective on the deal
Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s
#865Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then perhaps you meant to reply to a different subthread. I'm merely addressing the upstream poster's childish argument. ("Let the guillotine come out, I want to see heads roll.")
You did so by (as I understand) suggesting the status quo attracts competent leadership. I offered an argument that it does not. I agree we do not need to bring out guillotines. I disagree that Boeing has competent leadership. This is how Internet conversations work.
Oh, I definitely don't maintain that they have competent leadership, and clearly the status quo isn't ideal for attracting and retaining it. The board is clearly negligent.
I just disagree with some proposed solutions in the thread, that's all. Also don't necessarily agree that the situation was any better in the past.
Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s
#866Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not Capitalism, it's just a result of the judicial system that results from Capitalism. Right?
America is not founded on capitalism and our judicial system is not innately born from it. Not saying capitalism via corporate lobbying and bribes hasn’t had an effect on the notion of justice , but our foundational legal principles exist outside of our nation’s choice of economic policy.
No one said it was founded on capitalism. But that is our economic policy, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s
#867Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Supremacy clause reserves no rights for the people. Only for states. Only a state can challenge a law based on the Supremacy clause.
The Supremacy Clause establishes that federal law takes precedent over state laws. The Tenth Amendment says that powers not specifically given to the federal government are reserved to the states or the people at large. The Ninth Amendment says that the enumeration of some rights does not mean people don't have other, unenumerated rights.
No ruling aligns with this interpretation from any court opinion.
Nor would such an opinion apply to corporations.
You do not get "rights" which are the ability to ignore federal law because you decided the federal government wasn't allowed to do something.
The only successful challenges have been based on enumerated rights outside of states sueing based on the tenth.
Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s
#868Earlier quoted context omitted.
So if the FAA works with Boeing to fix a safety issue and Congress overrides FAA on the implementation we should blame the FAA. Why?
Because the FAA is "responsible for the safety of civil aviation." They don't get to say that, and accept tax monies for that, and then throw up their hands when someone else tries to block them from doing their job. The director (or whoever heads the agency) should have resigned, alongwith the entire rest of the management. Instead of being content with letting someone else take the blame when the next accident clai…
Obviously the best thing that the FAA could do is remove all upper management from being able to do their jobs...
Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s
#869Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lol nothing to fear except the death penalty if employees you never heard of 5 reporting lines below you screw up badly enough? Where do people come up with this stuff. If you want a mass exodus from airline management and sudden collapse of the entire industry that would be a fast way to do it.
> if employees you never heard of 5 reporting lines below you screw up badly enough? Sounds like a good way to encourage execs to prioritize safety systemically. In either case, of course negligent decisions on part of the C-suite would be considered. > sudden collapse of the entire industry that would be a fast way to do it. Compensations would increase accordingly. The industry would be fine.
There is no level of compensation you can give someone to compensate for the risk of sudden execution because they tried, but didn't succeed.
Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s
#870Earlier quoted context omitted.
The best part is that Boeing had EICAS, the engine indicating and crew alerting system, in the early 80s with the introduction of the 757/767. In the mid-90s, when they updated the 737 to the Next Generation, they opted to stay with the six-pack recall light system that every 737 pilot hates. Same in the Max. Too expensive to change and would likely require a new type rating. The A320 was such a technological leap fo…
I can't imagine EICAS is that expensive, the P-8 has it. Requiring a new type rating seems far more likely given that's how we got MCAS.
The P-8 having EICAS is more of an indictment of Boeing than anything (the P-8 is a Navy 737). It’s completely technologically possible, just that entrenched interests (namely, Southwest) kept Boeing from advancing the technology of their aircraft.