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

Boeing workers vote to strike

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 578 posts

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#541

Post by beaned »

AlexandrB wrote: post #174
beaned wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that take is a little cynical. If it's only for the rich then the prices will be high. Meaning the capitalist mechanism of resource distribution will be even higher (more paid by the rich received as income by the non-rich). It will also take demand from existing airlines making fares lighter for everyone else. It also employs people. It also drives technology forward. And ultimately it does let people travel…

> It will also take demand from existing airlines making fares lighter for everyone else. That's not how airline economics work. The first class passengers (the ones who could afford to leave for supersonic) subsidize the economy seats[1]. If they left you would probably see worse prices, worse amenities or both. There are airlines that don't have business or first class seats (e.g. Spirit), and they're generally a t…

On the other hand demand for premium seats would be down, lowering their price and making a nicer ride more accessible. Overall this would net to lower prices for the same distribution of amenities on a given plane ride. Supply and demand theory would seem to suggest that equal supply with lower demand leads to lower prices overall. Supply could of course adjust as more people move to supersonic, but that means more people are now getting a better product than before. And if supply of regular jets remains (they're pretty expensive to just have sit there and not try to use for income), lower-end fares and seat availability invite people at the lower end of the resource spectrum to now buy more plane tickets.

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#542

Post by xnyan »

kpw94 wrote: post #381
Rinzler89 wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't Boeing engineers also get insurance and 401k from their employer? Plus, they'd have to learn french also. France is not very accommodating to non French speaking foreigners. Trying to get around in life with just English there outside of Paris is not easy.

> France is not very accommodating to non French speaking foreigners. Trying to get around in life with just English there outside of Paris is not easy. I don't really get this kind of comments... Usually people also say the same thing when visiting Japan. "This restaurant only has menu in Japanese and staff only speaking Japanese!!". That's true a bit everywhere in the world, isn't it? In the US, apart from places w…

>That's true a bit everywhere in the world, isn't it?

That has not been my experience. I'm not arguing it should be this way, but for better or worse I've gotten by very well with english virtually anywhere with tourists and most places without. I lived in east ukraine for two years and learned russian - enough people spoke english there that at times it could be hard to get practice time in russian. This was with a younger student crowd, most non-students and older people did not speak english, but the point stands that you can find english speaking people and get by in most situations.

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#543

Post by naasking »

refurb wrote: post #222
naasking wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So stock buy backs were legal before 1982, but companies faced a risk of stock manipulation if they were reckless in how they did it. Sounds like a much better state of affairs.

Really? You think it's bad that the government is explicit in its rules? I think that's a good thing. I'd rather have it be clear to all parties what is acceptable and what isn't, rather that a murky legal framework where you never know if you're breaking the law.

Being explicit is good unless it yields outcomes that are strictly worse, which seems to be where we are. I expect plenty of lobbying to clarify rules and be more explicit naturally comes with carefully crafted loopholes that permit unethical behaviour. In that case, being less explicit meant the regulators had discretion to go after truly abusive actors. This has upsides and downsides. I would always prefer more explicit rules if the rule-making process were not compromised.

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#544

Post by bonzini »

WalterBright wrote: post #522
bonzini wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pivoting to internet didn't work great for Bill Gates. Nobody really used MSN other than for chat and possibly hotmail, the browser wars were lost, and the bulk of the revenue was done on Windows at the time Nardella took the helm. However Microsoft was big enough to afford a failure.

Microsoft pivoted to the internet very successfully in the 90s under Gates, and the stock went up like a rocket. Nadella didn't arrive until a full 10 years later. I appreciate the value Nadella brought to the company (as I own some MSFT), but have pivoted away from Windows to Linux for development work. I remain with Windows 7 for other uses, so much so I bought a complete set of spare parts for my Win7 box for when…

In the 90s what made MSFT shoot up was Windows becoming a household name, and Windows NT becoming the standard enterprise setup (often at the expense of mini-mainframes like the AS/400, rather than Unix); not Microsoft network.

The (almost successful) EEE strategy with Internet Explorer was the only part of Gates's internet strategy that survived the 90s.

This also explains why Ballmer went full in on Windows: there had been no pivot to speak of.

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#545

Post by giraffe_lady »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #532
giraffe_lady wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're conflating political and economic systems here. Capitalism is fully compatible with fascism. And it emerged out of and is an evolution of manorialism, the economic system used under european feudalism.

Not just compatible, but capitalism requires fascism because by default it alienates the person doing work from capturing the value via exploiting the variability in standard of living and environmental sustainability. Economists call this “arbitrage” which is a fancy word for, “Someone can dominate you economically and you have no legal avenue to avoid it.” Proudhon covered this thoroughly in “What is property”

Agreed but I don't usually go that hard right out the gate in HN comments these folks are touchy about the virtues of capitalism.

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#546

Post by RaftPeople »

danielodievich wrote: post #397

During national neighbor night out few weeks ago I met a couple who just moved to the neighborhood, wife is a doctor and husband is a Boeing engineer in the material science something rather. Me being a huge Boeing fan we've immediately connected on the topic of Boeing's issues. His view from inside echoed mine - too many MBAs, too much focus on financial engineering and stock buybacks and shareholder returns (he was…

> And the CEO based out of wherever but not Seattle is just a huge spit into everyone's face.

The news reported that the new CEO said he chose to be based in Seattle.

From Seattle Times:

Kelly Ortberg, the new CEO of Boeing whose appointment was announced Wednesday morning, has chosen to be based in Seattle.

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#547

Post by arcastroe »

> [...] voted in favor of the strike, some 96 percent — far more than the two-thirds needed to launch the work stoppage.

> The Biden administration was monitoring the situation; acting Labor Secretary Julie Su has been in contact with both sides.

If it's important enough for the whitehouse to get involved, then the union members have incredible leverage. It's telling that 96% voted against the deal. They know they can get a better one.

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#548

Post by zahlman »

consteval wrote: post #307
OxO4 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Often, people try justify high pay for management positions by pointing out the responsibilities that comes with such a position. If that's the case, then it only makes sense to place blame on management when things go sideways. If not, then what exactly is the value that management adds to the company that justifies their high pay?

It's the same thing when people talk about the "risk" of owning a business. At the same time, those same people will advocate dodging accountability for business owners. If there's no threat of liquidation, fines, bankruptcy... what's the risk? If the fed can't come into your home and take your furniture... what's the risk? Because those workers end up homeless in the case of failure. And the owners just go back to t…

> At the same time, those same people will advocate dodging accountability for business owners.

I don't think this is true at all.

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#549

Post by willcipriano »

arcastroe wrote: post #547

> [...] voted in favor of the strike, some 96 percent — far more than the two-thirds needed to launch the work stoppage. > The Biden administration was monitoring the situation; acting Labor Secretary Julie Su has been in contact with both sides. If it's important enough for the whitehouse to get involved, then the union members have incredible leverage. It's telling that 96% voted against the deal. They know they ca…

Tell that to the railroad workers.

Re: Boeing workers vote to strike

#550

Post by myrandomcomment »

GuB-42 wrote: post #523
myrandomcomment wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case, yes, upgraded with miles to first. I have made this fight ~500 times over the last 15 years, in coach, premium, business and first. While first is nice, the hours back are still worth more.

Good point then. I have always traveled coach, and should I fly first class, I would definitely want my flight to last as long as possible, for the experience, but I guess the novelty wears out. But 500 flights is crazy, one flight every 10 days for 15 years... I certainly understand why you would want to fly supersonic. But now I am curious... why would someone fly that much with the remote communication abilities w…

One bit of clarification, I am counting the flight both ways. On average I would fly to Japan from SFO one a month, sometime twice. I would always have some work in Japan then half the time I would need to also fly to Singapore, Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia, Australia, NZ, etc.

1. The remote calls have gotten better but 15+ years ago not so much. 2. Timezone and remote calls are hard. 3. Face to face is very important to be able to build understanding and also judgement (you need to read the room, which you cannot do over a call). 4. Building relationships requires time not in a meeting, dinner or drinks with a client. 5. Having a relationship with your local team requires the same. 6. In Asia the foreigner flying moves the needle. It is a sign of respect for the customers that you value and will support them. 7. Languages. Unless you are fluent in the local language remote meetings are difficult. 8. Nature of the company. Im my case all 3 companies were startups. They are a risk for the customer. Your willingness to be there helps them feel more comfortable with the risk.

Durning the pandemic there was no flying of course and it was great to be home. I now have a new startup and we just started doing business in Japan at the start of this year. I have hired the same local team that I have worked with at 3 companies. They are amazing! However by the end of this year I will have visited 6 times. Reestablishing the connections lost durning the pandemic has already moved the needle enough that it will materially affect the success of my startup. To be fair, come next year I do not feel I will need to visit every month, but once a quarter is going to be required.

For me cutting flights times in 1/2 is a major win.

As to first class, yes the novelty goes away. It is just another segment of a very long day.

Post reply on HN