Departing politics:

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

You say if "HAD Obama done that, it would have been one of the things undone in Trumps first 100 days"! Well, Obama had 8 years to undo these " Republican "business friendly" policies" and didn't! So, I feel there is enough blame on both sides to point figures at!

Ever notice how people who support leftist policies tend to manufacture fantasy.

"What if" and "but" the 2 phrases of the Democratic party.

How about instead of dealing in manufactured fantasy we deal in actual facts.

It is a fact that Democrats tend to hamper business and progress of technology in favor of government oversight.

It is a fact Republicans tend to favor growth over other concerns.

The fact is if we swing too far in either direction it damages us as a society.

I lean more toward business friendly because from my viewpoint government has misused regulations to push agendas.

For instance De Blasio wants to cut start fining older buildings that don't meet carbon emissions. He "encourages" (and by that I mean extortion through the threat of fines to tune of 1 million per year) them to use renewable energy. Problem is that energy just happens to cost 50 percent more (which makes you question his motives even more). This is a fine example of a Democrat pushing obscene regulations in favor of an agenda over the well being of the actual people.

I think this Green New Deal is less about the well being of the people and the environment and more about lining someone's pocket with green. It's propaganda designed to socially engineer the general public to tolerate extortion inflicted by the US government.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/d...gs-in-his-green-new-deal/ar-BBWbRzH?ocid=iehp

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...investigation/ar-BBWgeCS?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

Some 300,000 migrants — mostly Central Americans but including Cubans, Haitians and people from Africa and Asia — have entered Mexico this year with the aim of crossing into the United States, Mexican Interior Secretary Olga Sanchez Cordero told reporters this week.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...cists-southern-poverty-law-center/2918416002/

Hate group count hits 20-year high amid rise in white supremacy, report says

Did it really or did the left greatly expand the definition of a "hate group" to push an agenda?

 

[KCFlyer]

Ever notice how people who support leftist policies tend to manufacture fantasy.

"What if" and "but" the 2 phrases of the Democratic party.

How about instead of dealing in manufactured fantasy we deal in actual facts.

It is a fact that Democrats tend to hamper business and progress of technology in favor of government oversight.

It is a fact Republicans tend to favor growth over other concerns.

The fact is if we swing too far in either direction it damages us as a society.

I lean more toward business friendly because from my viewpoint government has misused regulations to push agendas.

For instance De Blasio wants to cut start fining older buildings that don't meet carbon emissions. He "encourages" (and by that I mean extortion through the threat of fines to tune of 1 million per year) them to use renewable energy. Problem is that energy just happens to cost 50 percent more (which makes you question his motives even more). This is a fine example of a Democrat pushing obscene regulations in favor of an agenda over the well being of the actual people.

I think this Green New Deal is less about the well being of the people and the environment and more about lining someone's pocket with green. It's propaganda designed to socially engineer the general public to tolerate extortion inflicted by the US government.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/d...gs-in-his-green-new-deal/ar-BBWbRzH?ocid=iehp

Okayh...no what if's. Republicans DID turn over more oversight to manufacturers and airlines. No what if about it it....they DID in in 2005. And it was around that time that a lot more airline heavy checks ended up going offshore. No what if's....they DID. This is a reduction of "obscene regulations"...almost 15 years ago. A reduction of an "obscene regulation" that directly impacted your industry. And for the past almost 20 years, you continued to vote for the GOP representatives and presidential candidates who did that. So what do you do? Start talking about the "green new deal"

Almost 500 people are dead because the Republicans favored growth over "other concerns". You've watched airline maintenance jobs move offshore because Republicans favored growth over other concerns. Those things impact YOU and your industry. Done by Republicans. No if's ands or buts about it. And yet your response is 'ever notice is that "what if" and "but" are the two favorite words, and how we tend to "manufacture fantasy". But my "what if" was because Insp4 somehow related the Max tragedy to Obama since he didn't "roll back" those regulations. I simply said that if he had, given Trumps modus operandi for the first 100 days, it would have been eliminated by him...once again, eliminating a regulation that HELPED your industry.

Then you moved on to talk about the Green New Deal. Which, from what I read, had noting to do with the Max issue.

 

[KCFlyer]

Then we move on to talk about white supremacy and immigrants, which again have nothing to do with the Max issue that this thread was started to discuss. Inspo4...please note that my introduction of politics into this thread actually related to what I believe to be a contributing factor. Thank your fellow conservative for somehow throwing immigration and white supremacy into the thread.

 

[Insp4]

Flying used to be fun! But not any more. Here's a take from UAL, but AA is no better!

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

A reduction of an "obscene regulation" that directly impacted your industry. And for the past almost 20 years, you continued to vote for the GOP representatives and presidential candidates who did that.

Airlines were offshoring jobs LONG before that.

Almost 500 people are dead because the Republicans favored growth over "other concerns".

No. They are dead because Boeing distributed a defective product trying to compete with Airbus. Even during massive regulations defects still caused crashes. Having a massive, expensive government bureaucracy is no guarantee against that. Again, Boeing will not get away with it. They have damaged their reputation and will endure years of legal battles, fines, and lawsuits.

You've watched airline maintenance jobs move offshore because Republicans favored growth over other concerns. Those things impact YOU and your industry. Done by Republicans. No if's ands or buts about it.

No. I watched jobs move offshore because American Airlines wanted cheap labor and customers want cheap flights. That had nothing to do with the Republican party. Before you start complaining about offshoring remember the baby boomers opened the door because they wanted cheap TV's, cars and VCR's. You communicated to business that you did not care where your products came from as long as they were cheap and they ran with it.

You've watched airline maintenance jobs move offshore because Republicans favored growth over other concerns.

That has nothing to do with Republicans. I don't know what your on about anyway, the left are the ones pushing for open borders. Let's not forget it was leftist that brought us the failed socialist experiment called the EU. The EU is what happens when you get a bunch of left globalist in control.

Then you moved on to talk about the Green New Deal. Which, from what I read, had noting to do with the Max issue.

I made it very clear why I brought that up.

Either you have sub par reading comprehension or you don't what to acknowledge that the left is pushing erroneous regulations in favor of agenda's rather than to better life for their fellow man. The Green New Deal is nothing but extortion disguised as concern for the environment. I know it, you know it, and AoC/De Blasio knows it.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

Then we move on to talk about white supremacy and immigrants, which again have nothing to do with the Max issue that this thread was started to discuss. Inspo4...please note that my introduction of politics into this thread actually related to what I believe to be a contributing factor. Thank your fellow conservative for somehow throwing immigration and white supremacy into the thread.

Funny. Seems someone else accused to of sidelining the thread with politics.

K.C. The idea was to get away from politics! But since you had to drag it back, what "regulations and requirements" are you refuring to? I believe we had off shore maintenance going on long before Trump!

I figured since you opened the door I would walk through it.

 

[KCFlyer]

Funny. Seems someone else accused to of sidelining the thread with politics.

I figured since you opened the door I would walk through it.

You didn't walk thru it, you stepped in it. If you read my comment, you would see that the political side may be related to the Max issue. FAA oversight turned over to Boeing....Boeing push for profits 'approved' their faulty system. See the relation?

Tell me how white supremacy or immigration relates to the Max issue.

 

[Insp4]

You didn't walk thru it, you stepped in it. If you read my comment, you would see that the political side may be related to the Max issue. FAA oversight turned over to Boeing....Boeing push for profits 'approved' their faulty system. See the relation?

Tell me how white supremacy or immigration relates to the Max issue.

It don't!.......... But the fact that the FAA may have gone too far in turning over authority to Boeing, cannot be blamed on either party because that authority, or lack of, was in place throughout both Democrat and Republican administrations!

 

[KCFlyer]

It don't!.......... But the fact that the FAA may have gone too far in turning over authority to Boeing, cannot be blamed on either party because that authority, or lack of, was in place throughout both Democrat and Republican administrations!

Yes, it was. All true. Perhaps you could explain that to La Li Lu Le Lola.

 

[Insp4]

Yes, it was. All true. Perhaps you could explain that to La Li Lu Le Lola.

Listen K.C........ La can read. If he agrees with what I wrote, or not, is totally up to him!

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

You didn't walk thru it, you stepped in it.

You're opinion.

If you read my comment, you would see that the political side may be related to the Max issue. FAA oversight turned over to Boeing....Boeing push for profits 'approved' their faulty system. See the relation?

Tell me how white supremacy or immigration relates to the Max issue.

I understood your relation just fine.

Did you understand my point about the FAA and companies offshoring work?

The fact is the FAA is no longer capable of fulfilling SOME of their functions.

The FAA is no longer able to function in the same capacity as they did before. The dynamic of American airlines (as in airlines in America not the company) has changed and the FAA has not changed with it. At this point they are yet another bloated government bureaucracy that has outlived it's usefulness. I am not saying we don't need an FAA. I am saying they need evolve into something that actually justifies their cost or better yet, I would like to see laws stating that maintenance of American aircraft MUST be done in the United Stated unless of course the aircraft is in another country and is not flight worthy to return for repairs. Even then it should have to be checked off by an American mechanic prior to any revenue flights. In my opinion those conditions would be the only thing that would justify the FAA in it's current form.

That being said everyone is saying the FAA missed this due to budget cuts and lax regulations. First of all even in the FAA's heyday they missed things. The FAA is no guarantee that the MAX issue would not have happened anyway. Second, the public states the FAA is suffering from cuts but with all the offshoring how can they even justify the budget they have now?
FAA Receives $17.5 Billion for 2019 in Budget Deal | Business

In the funding bill, Congress set aside $17.5 billion for the FAA's FY2019 budget, a $549 million drop from FY2018 but $1.3 billion more than the administration request. The funding includes an additional $500 million bump for Airport Improvement Program grants. All but about $580 million of the FAA’s $10.4 billion operations budget will come from the Airport and Airways Trust Fund. The bill provides funding for unmanned research and integration, in addition to numerous other research projects such as on advanced materials, additive manufacturing, and environmental sustainability efforts.

I mean really...... 17.5 billion for what exactly? What are we actually seeing for that money?

Our airports by global standards are antiquated.

I would also like to know exactly what the unmanned research and integration entails.

Environmental sustainability efforts, much like the Green New Deal, this sounds like code for Democrat extortion.

An 18 BILLION dollar budget gets cut by half a million and Democrats lose their minds.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

I read a bit further after my previous post.

I think this guy hit the nail on the head. This article is fairly representative of opinion about this subject.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...0f9bdd74ed1_story.html?utm_term=.6511379ac7b3

“For too long, the federal government has been the impediment in updating our [air traffic control] operation to a world-class, state-of-the-art system,” said House Transportation Committee Chairman Bill Shuster (R-Pa.), applauding Trump’s proposal. “Like any transformative change in Washington, entrenched interest groups will do and say anything to protect their parochial interests. But the facts are not on their side.”

Read this article. Even if you don't agree it should give you another perspective. You say you try to see both sides, well here is an opportunity for you.

Trump is trying to cut a bloated system and move us forward. I support that. I believe the FAA has stifled innovation in the Airline business to keep the status quo. Not only do they cost the taxpayers a great deal of money but they also have held us back from a technological standpoint for decades. At this point I can only see putting a stop to that situation as a benefit.

 

[delldude]

Okayh...no what if's. Republicans DID turn over more oversight to manufacturers and airlines. No what if about it it....they DID in in 2005. And it was around that time that a lot more airline heavy checks ended up going offshore. No what if's....they DID. This is a reduction of "obscene regulations"...almost 15 years ago. A reduction of an "obscene regulation" that directly impacted your industry. And for the past almost 20 years, you continued to vote for the GOP representatives and presidential candidates who did that. So what do you do? Start talking about the "green new deal"

Almost 500 people are dead because the Republicans favored growth over "other concerns". You've watched airline maintenance jobs move offshore because Republicans favored growth over other concerns. Those things impact YOU and your industry. Done by Republicans. No if's ands or buts about it. And yet your response is 'ever notice is that "what if" and "but" are the two favorite words, and how we tend to "manufacture fantasy". But my "what if" was because Insp4 somehow related the Max tragedy to Obama since he didn't "roll back" those regulations. I simply said that if he had, given Trumps modus operandi for the first 100 days, it would have been eliminated by him...once again, eliminating a regulation that HELPED your industry.

Then you moved on to talk about the Green New Deal. Which, from what I read, had noting to do with the Max issue.

Airline repair stations out of the US have been around since the 80's if not longer. Who want outsourcing the most?? The airline CEO's to cut their labor costs.