Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Let's Buy Spirit Air

letsbuyspiritair.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 628 posts

Re: Let's Buy Spirit Air

#361

Post by kelnos »

eru wrote: post #326
lostlogin wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it’s frowned upon many circles, but regulation can work and do good. There is plenty of crap legislation and regulation about, but it doesn’t have to be that way.

Yes, but be careful not to commit the 'nirvana fallacy' of comparing real world circumstances against idealised optimal regulation.

Sure, that's fair. But often enough I see people (not accusing you of this) doing the opposite: seeing bad regulation, and drawing the conclusion that the only solution is to remove all regulation and "let the market decide".

Re: Let's Buy Spirit Air

#362

Post by kelnos »

appreciatorBus wrote: post #112
striking wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the amount anyone would actually pay is substantially below cost for most routes, but it's still a service that many people depend on (either directly or by the indirect economic impact of travel). It's a genuine force multiplier that is unaffordable without being subsidized; making it a utility would just shift the subsidy from credit card points programs to the government.

If airlines didn’t exist, people and goods would continue to move around the globe as they have done for thousands of years. There’s nothing magical about air travel (or any other transport mode) that makes it worthy of subsidy .

There absolutely is something magical about air travel! We can get places much faster and much safer than we could before. I live in California, and another part of my family lives in Maryland. Are you saying that when I want to visit my family, instead of spending 5-6 hours in a metal tube in the air, I should spend a week (or more) either driving or taking various trains and buses?

If air travel didn't exist, I likely wouldn't move around the globe at all. Hell, I wouldn't move around the country even.

In the US, roads are mostly publicly-owned (the ultimate subsidy). Local bus and rail transit is usually also publicly-owned, though when it isn't, it's done through public-private partnership and/or subsidy. Regional and long-distance rail is subsidized. Why shouldn't air travel follow the pattern?

Re: Let's Buy Spirit Air

#363

Post by kelnos »

appreciatorBus wrote: post #241
striking wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Listen, I'm the type of fella who'd gladly take the Amtrak from the East Bay to Portland, 18 hours each way, and I'm telling you even I'd do so only as a novelty. If I actually had somewhere to be, spending basically an entire day on a train would be a non-starter. And that's just on the same coast! If I had to take the Amtrak back east to see my family for the holidays I would probably just not go. My travel to the…

I didn’t say anything about trains or Amtrak? People and goods have travelled around the world long for thousands of years before air air travel and train travel. And people have made decisions above the trade-offs of travel to see family for thousands of years before air travel and train travel. If air travel was unavailable or unsubsidized, people would continue to make those decisions and life would go on.

> People and goods have travelled around the world long for thousands of years before air air travel and train travel.

Yes, and it really, really sucked back then. And the number of people who could actually do that travel was much, much smaller than today. Air travel (and train travel, to some extent, though it mostly sucks in the US) has enabled people to travel around the globe who never would have been able to in the past.

What a bizarre argument.

Re: Let's Buy Spirit Air

#364

Post by kelnos »

appreciatorBus wrote: post #242
1shooner wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you oppose the federal highway system (or rail systems) as well?

Basically yes.

Ah, you're one of those people who think we shouldn't have nice things. Got it.

(And no, the market often does not provide.)

Re: Let's Buy Spirit Air

#365

Post by kelnos »

eru wrote: post #263
appreciatorBus wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically yes.

I guess at least when they are given away for free or severely underpriced to the user.

Right, the externalities of those road systems aren't really paid for properly, by anyone.

But that's hard to do, because for many people/uses, they have to use those roads to get done what they need to do. The alternatives (like high speed rail) just largely don't exist in the US, or are painfully sub-par.

Re: Let's Buy Spirit Air

#366

Post by kelnos »

appreciatorBus wrote: post #248
devsda wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't think of a single situation where an airline route is infinitely better and probably the only viable option ? Btw you don't need to completely disregard other modes of transport to appreciate bus :)

Buses and planes are both great! Both have advantages and disadvantages, and different cost structures. I trust people to make their own decisions about trade-offs for travel that work for them and their situation. When we arbitrarily pick one and shovel free money, land or infrastructure toward it, we are putting a thumb on the scale and depriving people of the power to make their own decisions. Of course, we can ar…

> When we arbitrarily pick one

Aren't all modes of transportation in the US either subsidized or public-owned to some degree? We haven't arbitrarily picked one; we picked them all.

Air travel is maybe the least subsidized, though? Essential Air Service is probably the main thing? Long-distance bus like Greyhound is only minimally subsidized too.

But local transit (bus & rail), and regional and long-distance rail are all subsidized or publicly owned in the US. Most roads are publicly-owned, either locally or by the federal government. Long-distance bus and rail are actually unusual in how little they're subsidized.

Re: Let's Buy Spirit Air

#367

Post by kelnos »

carlosjobim wrote: post #356
thrance wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we let the free market do its work, there'd be no airlines. Jet fuel is heavily subsidized, the State injects massive amounts of money into airports and plane manufacturers, etc. Honestly, with the looming climate crisis, we should probably just let them fail one by one and let alternatives (who can actually be profitable) take off.

In a free market, every working citizen could easily afford more expensive airline tickets, since they could keep their entire income with no taxes deducted.

That's a really cute idealized world, but it wouldn't work in practice. The structure of free-market capitalism all but precludes it.

Re: Let's Buy Spirit Air

#368

Post by wallst07 »

willio58 wrote: post #239
gizmo686 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does any of this imply they should become a regulated utility? This seems like a textbook case of the free market pushing prices down to cost. Having alternative revenue streams pushed that minimal price down; but even without that, there is no reason to think the market would have done anything other than push prices to the lowest level possible in that environment as well.

Airlines basically were a regulated utility until they were unregulated to the point where normal people can barely fit in a seat and there’s basically no amenities anymore. It used to be kind of nice to fly. That’s laughable now.

What other things changed besides regulation?

My guess is MANY more people fly and are able to afford to fly vs before. There are probably many others things that changed.

It's also very nice to fly.... in first class.

Re: Let's Buy Spirit Air

#369

Post by kelnos »

willio58 wrote: post #239
gizmo686 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does any of this imply they should become a regulated utility? This seems like a textbook case of the free market pushing prices down to cost. Having alternative revenue streams pushed that minimal price down; but even without that, there is no reason to think the market would have done anything other than push prices to the lowest level possible in that environment as well.

Airlines basically were a regulated utility until they were unregulated to the point where normal people can barely fit in a seat and there’s basically no amenities anymore. It used to be kind of nice to fly. That’s laughable now.

On the other side of that coin, when airlines were heavily regulated, most people couldn't afford to fly at all.

The "regulation vs. no regulation" stance is the wrong way to look at it. Airlines are still regulated, of course. Maybe some of the regulations we do have are unnecessary, some of the regulations we got rid of we should really bring back, and perhaps there are others that we never had that we need.

Re: Let's Buy Spirit Air

#370

Post by metalman »

100% guarantee of years of uncertainty, so any large venture built on disposable income is a non starter. The Cruise Ship industry is precarious, and with a hanta virus outbreak on one ship pointing to just how shoddy the whole thing needs to be for profit, a surge of sick ships is likely. Fuel for planes and ships could cost much more, and then become unavailible in certain locations, which would be part of the recipie for a full crisis involving a sick ship or resort, some small country refusing (legitametly) a quarantiened ship, whatever scenario, the point is that running these huge tourist operations requires significant EXCESS capacity, not missing pieces and ultra slim margins.
Post reply on HN