Total Posts:29|Showing Posts:1-29
Jump to topic:

Cramped Airlines and Gov Regulation

bsh1
Posts: 27,601
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 12:09:48 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Should the Government regulate how much legroom there is on planes? As a frequent flyer, I must say I'd like some regulation there. What are your thoughts? I posted a link below for more info.

https://www.yahoo.com...
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

My Open Debate Challenges
:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 12:19:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
That just seems absurd to me. There are so many important things for the government to regulate. Legroom on airplanes seems like the sort of thing that the free market could handle on its own. If companies with planes that offered more legroom became more popular than companies with other planes that didn't, then more planes would offer legroom. As of now, planes with more legroom are more expensive than their counterparts, which in turn creates a cycle of people choosing the cheaper option.
bsh1
Posts: 27,601
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 12:22:52 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/24/2015 12:19:04 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
That just seems absurd to me. There are so many important things for the government to regulate. Legroom on airplanes seems like the sort of thing that the free market could handle on its own.

But it hasn't handled it. The free market sucks at treating people like people. The Jungle, anyone? Sometimes, Gov. just needs to say "enough." Sure, there are more important things to regulated, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't also regulate this.

If companies with planes that offered more legroom became more popular than companies with other planes that didn't, then more planes would offer legroom.

The problem is this: the cheapest airlines are the ones with the worst legroom. Because flight is so expensive generally, most people cannot afford roomier flights. Thus, we literally have no option but to be cramped. When consumers are provided with no or insufficient choices, the free market cannot force companies to not be abusive. That's why governments regulate.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

My Open Debate Challenges
:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,192
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 12:25:54 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I could agree if it were for safety reasons. For comfort...eh...
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 12:28:45 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/24/2015 12:22:52 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/24/2015 12:19:04 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
That just seems absurd to me. There are so many important things for the government to regulate. Legroom on airplanes seems like the sort of thing that the free market could handle on its own.

But it hasn't handled it. The free market sucks at treating people like people. The Jungle, anyone? Sometimes, Gov. just needs to say "enough." Sure, there are more important things to regulated, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't also regulate this.

Yes. That's not the free market's goal. The people get to decide that. By choosing the cheapest option, they're demonstrating that they value saving money at the cost of a few hours of discomfort.

If companies with planes that offered more legroom became more popular than companies with other planes that didn't, then more planes would offer legroom.

The problem is this: the cheapest airlines are the ones with the worst legroom. Because flight is so expensive generally, most people cannot afford roomier flights. Thus, we literally have no option but to be cramped. When consumers are provided with no or insufficient choices, the free market cannot force companies to not be abusive. That's why governments regulate.

Different airlines offer different amounts of legroom as well.
bsh1
Posts: 27,601
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 12:33:35 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/24/2015 12:28:45 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/24/2015 12:22:52 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/24/2015 12:19:04 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
That just seems absurd to me. There are so many important things for the government to regulate. Legroom on airplanes seems like the sort of thing that the free market could handle on its own.

But it hasn't handled it. The free market sucks at treating people like people. The Jungle, anyone? Sometimes, Gov. just needs to say "enough." Sure, there are more important things to regulated, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't also regulate this.

Yes. That's not the free market's goal. The people get to decide that. By choosing the cheapest option, they're demonstrating that they value saving money at the cost of a few hours of discomfort.

Right, you're misinterpreting profits as choice. Suppose I am the average American, and, for some reason or other, I need to fly to Germany. I look for tickets on a limited budget, because I literally cannot afford to spend more than a few hundred on the plane tickets. To spend more could put me in serious financial jeopardy when you combine it with other travel costs I'll be incurring. I have no choice but to go with cramped airlines; in fact, there was no choice.

Consequently, I would suggest that American's are not choosing cramped seats. Rather, they have no other realistic choice besides cramped seats. Therefore, people buying tickets on cramped airlines is not an expression of "being okay" with the status quo. Frankly, I think most Americans who fly are not content with the status quo, esp. when they pay lots of money for crappy seats that jeopardize health and safety.

Different airlines offer different amounts of legroom as well.

The vast majority of airlines are cramped. When you get decent seats, you pay an arm and a leg for them. I think that much can be taken for granted.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

My Open Debate Challenges
:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 12:40:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/24/2015 12:33:35 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/24/2015 12:28:45 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 9/24/2015 12:22:52 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/24/2015 12:19:04 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
That just seems absurd to me. There are so many important things for the government to regulate. Legroom on airplanes seems like the sort of thing that the free market could handle on its own.

But it hasn't handled it. The free market sucks at treating people like people. The Jungle, anyone? Sometimes, Gov. just needs to say "enough." Sure, there are more important things to regulated, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't also regulate this.

Yes. That's not the free market's goal. The people get to decide that. By choosing the cheapest option, they're demonstrating that they value saving money at the cost of a few hours of discomfort.

Right, you're misinterpreting profits as choice. Suppose I am the average American, and, for some reason or other, I need to fly to Germany. I look for tickets on a limited budget, because I literally cannot afford to spend more than a few hundred on the plane tickets. To spend more could put me in serious financial jeopardy when you combine it with other travel costs I'll be incurring. I have no choice but to go with cramped airlines; in fact, there was no choice.

I'm not misinterpreting profits as a choice. Americans are making an opportunity cost. There are certainly a minority of instances where people absolutely HAVE to fly, but it is just that. A minority. They do it for the convenience and the cheapness. The amount of space airlines offer 1st class passengers versus everyone else is certainly ridiculous, downright lunacy, but it hardly merits regulation, which fails on both ends. The government can't regulate everything. It can't be everywhere, and jamming it in here is a disservice not only to private companies but to the government itself. It's a waste of taxes, a waste of bureaucracy, and a waste of time. And once again, different airlines offer cheap flights with different amounts of legroom. If everyone chose the one with the most legroom (which is often still cheaper than the others), that would send a message.

Consequently, I would suggest that American's are not choosing cramped seats. Rather, they have no other realistic choice besides cramped seats. Therefore, people buying tickets on cramped airlines is not an expression of "being okay" with the status quo. Frankly, I think most Americans who fly are not content with the status quo, esp. when they pay lots of money for crappy seats that jeopardize health and safety.

Different airlines offer different amounts of legroom as well.

The vast majority of airlines are cramped. When you get decent seats, you pay an arm and a leg for them. I think that much can be taken for granted.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,215
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 1:05:16 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/24/2015 12:09:48 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Should the Government regulate how much legroom there is on planes? As a frequent flyer, I must say I'd like some regulation there. What are your thoughts? I posted a link below for more info.

https://www.yahoo.com...

Cramped airlines allow for more passengers. If they had more spacious airlines they'd be able to fit fewer passengers. Prices would rise slightly.
The question is: are people generally willing to pay a little bit extra for more legroom?
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Fly
Posts: 2,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 3:31:54 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I actually think it may be headed that way (toward government regulation). The trend continues to be toward tighter spaces. It is a bit naive to say that the market will solve this because passengers in general gravitate toward the cheapest tickets at first glance. They tend not to read the fine print on extra fees (which is why there ARE extra fees), and they tend not to take their own comfort and convenience into consideration when purchasing.

In my experience, passengers will gladly pay for the cheap seats and then gripe all the way to their destination about their small seat, no food, and overly tight connections. That is not exactly "enlightened self interest" in action.

Every legacy airline has now had to divert to another airport because of passenger fights over space. Yet the cheapest tickets still get the people. It would take a government regulation to enlarge the space while also keeping the playing field level, and that is the key point to keep in mind...
"If you say you pray to God, that makes you normal. But if you say you pray to God through your hair dryer, you are clearly a lunatic."
-Sam Harris
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 6:42:30 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
"They say the increasingly cramped conditions airline passengers (especially those flying in economy class) face are no longer a consumer issue; they"re calling it a human rights issue."

Fcking lulz. I'd rather bare the discomfort than pay for expensive plane tickets.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
jprice19
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 8:40:25 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
A) 1st World Problems.
B) I know an Airline CEO and they charge the bare minimum. If there has to be more legroom(thus less seating), the price will rise, making Air travel less affordable and quite possibly less safe.
JMcKinley
Posts: 314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 5:53:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
In general airlines are not very profitable. The majority of them could not exist without government subsidies already. We all grumble about the costs, but the fact is that without some engineering improvements, a drop in fuel prices, or a new fuel source, there isn't much the airlines can do about it.

The fact is that flying is expensive. And weight and volume are very very important to their bottom lines. If you increase the legroom requirements then you will automatically increase the cost of flights. Even a single extra inch per row could mean that an extra two feet of space is required for many airplanes. This would mean that they would lose at least one row per flight, which could mean anywhere from 4 to 10 less passengers which adds up to thousands of dollars per flight that will need to be made up one way or another. Who do you think will shoulder that cost? And an extra inch of legroom is a pretty marginal upgrade. I've paid for 2" extra before and I can tell you from experience that it doesn't make much difference. I think I'd need an additional 5-6 inches of legroom for it to be a noticeable increase in comfort. But now we're talking about losing more than 8 feet of space in most planes, which is probably at least 2-3 rows less which could mean 12 to 30 less passengers on board. We're talking about big money now. For overseas flights this could mean that an additional $20,000 would need to be spread out over the other passenger fares just for the airline to break even on the change.

No matter what way you slice it, you can't increase the legroom requirements without increasing costs. And airline tickets are already very expensive. Sure there are some people who can't afford to upgrade and are forced into the cramped economy class. But nobody ever said that we were entitled to air travel. Its already a luxury that many can't afford at all. And if you increase the ticket cost to cover the expense of new legroom requirements even less people will be able to afford air travel.

I'd rather be able to afford passage on a cramped airplane than not be able to afford to fly at all.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,896
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 7:36:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The consumers decided this issue, not the business owners. The government will, in effect, be regulating the consumer in this instance, and piss alot of people off.
I find myself intrigued by your subvocal oscillations.
A singular development of cat communications
That obviates your basic hedonistic predilection,
For a rhythmic stroking of your fur to demonstrate affection.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,471
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2015 1:25:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/24/2015 12:25:54 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
I could agree if it were for safety reasons. For comfort...eh...

Depending on the duration of the flight, it could pose a problem. You generally don't want your legs balled up underneath you for more than a few hours.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 37,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2015 11:22:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/24/2015 12:09:48 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Should the Government regulate how much legroom there is on planes? As a frequent flyer, I must say I'd like some regulation there. What are your thoughts? I posted a link below for more info.

https://www.yahoo.com...

I think there should be, yes. As a frequent flier also, I can tell you that the reason I only fly the one airline I do is because they have the most comfortable seats in any class. I have flown all the others; the worst is US Air and American. US Air is nothing less than a disgrace to the industry, because their seats are so uncomfortable, their flights are always delayed, their people are miserable curmudgeons, and they could care less about customer service.
bsh1
Posts: 27,601
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2015 8:50:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/24/2015 1:05:16 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 9/24/2015 12:09:48 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Should the Government regulate how much legroom there is on planes? As a frequent flyer, I must say I'd like some regulation there. What are your thoughts? I posted a link below for more info.

https://www.yahoo.com...

Cramped airlines allow for more passengers. If they had more spacious airlines they'd be able to fit fewer passengers. Prices would rise slightly.
The question is: are people generally willing to pay a little bit extra for more legroom?

I think they are.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

My Open Debate Challenges
:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
Devilry
Posts: 990
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2015 9:01:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
JMcKinley summed all of this up rather well.
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,215
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2015 2:34:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/26/2015 8:50:22 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/24/2015 1:05:16 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 9/24/2015 12:09:48 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Should the Government regulate how much legroom there is on planes? As a frequent flyer, I must say I'd like some regulation there. What are your thoughts? I posted a link below for more info.

https://www.yahoo.com...

Cramped airlines allow for more passengers. If they had more spacious airlines they'd be able to fit fewer passengers. Prices would rise slightly.
The question is: are people generally willing to pay a little bit extra for more legroom?

I think they are.

Of course, one could make more room by eliminating first-class seating.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,896
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2015 2:45:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/26/2015 8:50:22 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/24/2015 1:05:16 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 9/24/2015 12:09:48 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Should the Government regulate how much legroom there is on planes? As a frequent flyer, I must say I'd like some regulation there. What are your thoughts? I posted a link below for more info.

https://www.yahoo.com...

Cramped airlines allow for more passengers. If they had more spacious airlines they'd be able to fit fewer passengers. Prices would rise slightly.
The question is: are people generally willing to pay a little bit extra for more legroom?

I think they are.

More than a few airline CEO's lost their jobs with that idea.

Would you support a government subsidy for more legroom?
I find myself intrigued by your subvocal oscillations.
A singular development of cat communications
That obviates your basic hedonistic predilection,
For a rhythmic stroking of your fur to demonstrate affection.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,896
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2015 3:08:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I mean let's face it, the last time we had a CEO charismatic enough to convince consumers to pay more for something they might have marginally wanted was Steve Jobs.

I don't see any airline CEO on that scale.
I find myself intrigued by your subvocal oscillations.
A singular development of cat communications
That obviates your basic hedonistic predilection,
For a rhythmic stroking of your fur to demonstrate affection.
Wylted
Posts: 21,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2015 6:31:16 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/24/2015 12:09:48 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Should the Government regulate how much legroom there is on planes? As a frequent flyer, I must say I'd like some regulation there. What are your thoughts? I posted a link below for more info.

https://www.yahoo.com...

Southwest seems to have good leg room and are really affordable. I always fly Southwest. Though last time they did take over another company and inherited their planes which were inferior to Southwest planes, so I was a little disappointed in the leg room, and some man spreader sat next to me.
Wylted
Posts: 21,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2015 6:32:56 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/24/2015 12:19:04 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
That just seems absurd to me. There are so many important things for the government to regulate. Legroom on airplanes seems like the sort of thing that the free market could handle on its own. If companies with planes that offered more legroom became more popular than companies with other planes that didn't, then more planes would offer legroom. As of now, planes with more legroom are more expensive than their counterparts, which in turn creates a cycle of people choosing the cheaper option.

The free market could handle it on it's own, but the over regulation of airlines has kinda killed the free market, so in this circumstance I'd be for regulating some stuff in the name of helping out the consumer.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,896
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2015 3:41:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/30/2015 6:32:56 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 9/24/2015 12:19:04 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
That just seems absurd to me. There are so many important things for the government to regulate. Legroom on airplanes seems like the sort of thing that the free market could handle on its own. If companies with planes that offered more legroom became more popular than companies with other planes that didn't, then more planes would offer legroom. As of now, planes with more legroom are more expensive than their counterparts, which in turn creates a cycle of people choosing the cheaper option.

The free market could handle it on it's own, but the over regulation of airlines has kinda killed the free market, so in this circumstance I'd be for regulating some stuff in the name of helping out the consumer.

Would you be in favor of a subsidized mandate? Or is an across the board increase in air ticket prices okay?
I find myself intrigued by your subvocal oscillations.
A singular development of cat communications
That obviates your basic hedonistic predilection,
For a rhythmic stroking of your fur to demonstrate affection.
Wylted
Posts: 21,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2015 5:45:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/30/2015 3:41:08 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 9/30/2015 6:32:56 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 9/24/2015 12:19:04 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
That just seems absurd to me. There are so many important things for the government to regulate. Legroom on airplanes seems like the sort of thing that the free market could handle on its own. If companies with planes that offered more legroom became more popular than companies with other planes that didn't, then more planes would offer legroom. As of now, planes with more legroom are more expensive than their counterparts, which in turn creates a cycle of people choosing the cheaper option.

The free market could handle it on it's own, but the over regulation of airlines has kinda killed the free market, so in this circumstance I'd be for regulating some stuff in the name of helping out the consumer.

Would you be in favor of a subsidized mandate? Or is an across the board increase in air ticket prices okay?

There are so many people who don't fly, that only an across the board price increase would be morally permissible. By the way I don't support any mandates for leg room. I just support more regulations for industries that have very little competition, and think it's okay to regulate some things more heavily
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,192
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2015 6:05:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
There is better transportation to regulate, like school buses.

I can't fit my legs in my seat facing forward. It's not new with private school - I had this problem with public school at times as well. That's more of a problem than airlines.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,896
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2015 6:20:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/30/2015 6:05:58 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
There is better transportation to regulate, like school buses.

I can't fit my legs in my seat facing forward. It's not new with private school - I had this problem with public school at times as well. That's more of a problem than airlines.

Perhaps it's a similar design to cop car back seats so the rider has no room to kick.
I find myself intrigued by your subvocal oscillations.
A singular development of cat communications
That obviates your basic hedonistic predilection,
For a rhythmic stroking of your fur to demonstrate affection.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,896
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2015 6:21:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
not saying I ever rode in a cop car :o forget I said anything.
I find myself intrigued by your subvocal oscillations.
A singular development of cat communications
That obviates your basic hedonistic predilection,
For a rhythmic stroking of your fur to demonstrate affection.
Devilry
Posts: 990
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2015 6:23:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I've been handcuffed, put in the back of a paddy wagon all on my own, and presented to court handcuffed. And lol.
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.