U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 11-01-2015, 09:26 AM
Status: "Ready for Fall" (set 26 days ago)
 
Location: Atlanta
4,647 posts, read 3,021,752 times
Reputation: 3867

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamerD View Post
Okay so I always look for the opportunity to learn from others. There are no Gulf carriers that operate from Atlanta to Dubai. Delta is the only carrier who has this route so I don't understand why the Gulf carriers being heavily subsidized was used as the excuse to cut the service. And U.S. carriers are not being subsidized as their Gulf counterpart is, but let's not pretend as if they are so perfect and were not bailed out by the U.S. government.
As jsvh mentioned, connecting service competes heavily. United was the only nonstop carrier from D.C. to Kuwait, and they are also pulling out. Airlines aren't in the business of cutting profitable routes. And the U.S. government has hardly bailed out our carriers, that's laughable and simply not true. Nobody is pretending that U.S. carriers are 'so perfect,' but you obviously have an agenda against them.

Quote:
As for discrimination against their employees, it would be nice to see a little more written with regards to that. And that is quite an accusation anyway...can you be certain that there isn't an American carrier that discriminates against its employees? Do all Gulf carriers discriminate against their employees? How so? One thing I know is that job discrimination can be very subtle (not codified, not said out in the open) in the U.S. I don't think it's wise to make the assumption that there are not people being discriminated against in the industry (U.S.).
I am in the industry, and it is common knowledge that the ME3 do indeed discriminate against their gay and female employees. I will repeat these accusations all day long. The outright abuse of the 'guest workers' that prop up the economies of these Countries is widely known and documented.

Enjoy your flight on Emirates.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-01-2015, 09:48 AM
 
Location: MMU->ABE->ATL->ASH
9,006 posts, read 16,152,680 times
Reputation: 9676
The routes may be profitable, But not as profitable as another route the plane could be on.

Noticed on some routes because of the flying times, and making it back so the passengers can HUB with out many/many hours sitting in some airport at 2am or so. They have the plane sit for 6-8hrs before it makes the return flight. Plane make money when they are in the air. Have a multi-million dollar sit on the ground cost them $'s.

Years ago I know CO was cycling planes thru RIO with a ~12hr plane layover, But they cycled different planes thru to get a "Deep" clean, and "B" checks with cheaper labor when they were there. Also got the Plane back in to EWR or IAH in time for the 1st flights the next morning. (Was a "RedEye" flight)
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2015, 10:37 AM
 
2,150 posts, read 1,046,568 times
Reputation: 1666
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
As jsvh mentioned, connecting service competes heavily. United was the only nonstop carrier from D.C. to Kuwait, and they are also pulling out. Airlines aren't in the business of cutting profitable routes. And the U.S. government has hardly bailed out our carriers, that's laughable and simply not true. Nobody is pretending that U.S. carriers are 'so perfect,' but you obviously have an agenda against them.



I am in the industry, and it is common knowledge that the ME3 do indeed discriminate against their gay and female employees. I will repeat these accusations all day long. The outright abuse of the 'guest workers' that prop up the economies of these Countries is widely known and documented.

Enjoy your flight on Emirates.


Me have an agenda? You are in the industry and I think you are taking this too personally. Many U.S. airlines were bailed out in 2001 and since then, many have gone under bankruptcy, which some would consider a backdoor bailout being that the business is prevented from failing. Does this compare to how the Gulf carriers are being subsidized? No, I wouldn't say that.

As for airlines not cutting what's profitable, I would say most businesses are like this but I have also seen other industries that have chosen to cut something that's profitable out of spite (usually to spite their employees) or to move down to the South where there are not strong labor laws for the people. Anyway, that's why I asked in previous posts if they were truly not profiting from their operations.


Okay with regards to your last paragraph, the first sentence is news to me. I don't watch the news too often and so what may be common knowledge to you, is not known to me. I am glad that there are U.S. carriers that have chosen to end discrimination against LGBT and even honor LGBT.

For the 'guest workers' sentence, that's another topic not really related to our conversation. But since you brought it up, it's definitely not right but it's not like the U.S. is such a model when it comes to such things. Look at how many people live in poverty in the U.S. it being such a rich, wealthy country. Minimum wage is slavery. How many U.S. businesses have companies abroad that encourage this treatment of their workers? Anyway, this is another topic.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2015, 11:48 AM
Status: "Ready for Fall" (set 26 days ago)
 
Location: Atlanta
4,647 posts, read 3,021,752 times
Reputation: 3867
Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamerD View Post
Me have an agenda? You are in the industry and I think you are taking this too personally.
LOL! Guess again, all I needed to see was this gleeful post of yours:

Quote:
I agree. For those who have had to use Delta, I'm pretty sure they are cheering the news that Emirates may take over. American carriers are such a laugh.
I don't work for them, but this could be interpreted as you being delighted that hometown Delta has been defeated by artificially propped up and subsidized foreign carriers. I find it totally offensive, deal with it.

Quote:
Many U.S. airlines were bailed out in 2001 and since then, many have gone under bankruptcy, which some would consider a backdoor bailout being that the business is prevented from failing. Does this compare to how the Gulf carriers are being subsidized? No, I wouldn't say that.
Your agenda is showing again. Are you a sales rep for Emirates? Prove this bailout you speak of, and our bankruptcy laws are NOT the same thing at all as nationalized/subsidized carriers.

Quote:
As for airlines not cutting what's profitable, I would say most businesses are like this but I have also seen other industries that have chosen to cut something that's profitable out of spite (usually to spite their employees) or to move down to the South where there are not strong labor laws for the people. Anyway, that's why I asked in previous posts if they were truly not profiting from their operations.
Now this is a real reach. Again, are you an Emirates sales rep?


Quote:
Okay with regards to your last paragraph, the first sentence is news to me. I don't watch the news too often and so what may be common knowledge to you, is not known to me. I am glad that there are U.S. carriers that have chosen to end discrimination against LGBT and even honor LGBT.

For the 'guest workers' sentence, that's another topic not really related to our conversation. But since you brought it up, it's definitely not right but it's not like the U.S. is such a model when it comes to such things. Look at how many people live in poverty in the U.S. it being such a rich, wealthy country. Minimum wage is slavery. How many U.S. businesses have companies abroad that encourage this treatment of their workers? Anyway, this is another topic.
We don't lure guest workers here with false salary promises, confiscate their Passports and treat them like expendable slaves. Try again.

Again, enjoy your flights on Emirates. You couldn't pay me to step foot on them, and I wish for nothing less than their banning from the U.S. when the dust settles. I feel the same way when it comes to Etihad and Qatar. Until the playing field is leveled, they should have ZERO rights to serve the U.S.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2015, 01:06 PM
 
Location: World
3,148 posts, read 3,215,828 times
Reputation: 2070
Those complaining about ME Airliens getting subsidy should first see whether US Airports are Privately owned or Public-owned. Unless all commercial airports are in the control of Private Companies and they recieve zero money in tax-payer subsidies, this attempt at blaming Foreign Airlines is laughable.
Different Regional Airlines which fly under the banner of Delta Connection also recieve subsidies to fly at smaller airports. Same is the case with United and American.
It is hilarious that people trumpeting the cause of "Free market" very conveniently forget their own subsidy and Government help and then slander the opposition with the same reason that Ban them because they get Subsidy.
How about accepting that in so called "Free Market", the better product wins.
Talking about Discrimination, there are many incidents where Muslim or Sikh passengers have been offloaded from airplane (Various US Airlines) without any reason other then their appearance.

Last edited by munna21977; 11-01-2015 at 01:30 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2015, 02:51 PM
 
9,918 posts, read 6,909,650 times
Reputation: 3022
munna21977 - Even publicly owned airports like ATL make more money for the city coffers via landing fees, gate fees, concessions and other ways than they cost the city.

Yes, the government gets its hands in there too much. But the US airline industry is still probably the most "free market" form of transportation and it is definitely way more "free market" than the government owned ME carriers.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2015, 03:13 PM
Status: "Ready for Fall" (set 26 days ago)
 
Location: Atlanta
4,647 posts, read 3,021,752 times
Reputation: 3867
Quote:
Originally Posted by munna21977 View Post
Those complaining about ME Airliens getting subsidy should first see whether US Airports are Privately owned or Public-owned. Unless all commercial airports are in the control of Private Companies and they recieve zero money in tax-payer subsidies, this attempt at blaming Foreign Airlines is laughable.
Different Regional Airlines which fly under the banner of Delta Connection also recieve subsidies to fly at smaller airports. Same is the case with United and American.
It is hilarious that people trumpeting the cause of "Free market" very conveniently forget their own subsidy and Government help and then slander the opposition with the same reason that Ban them because they get Subsidy.
How about accepting that in so called "Free Market", the better product wins.
Talking about Discrimination, there are many incidents where Muslim or Sikh passengers have been offloaded from airplane (Various US Airlines) without any reason other then their appearance.
You are obviously beyond clueless on all points you raise regarding U.S. airports, Airlines and the subsidies they receive. And anyone unfairly discriminated against in the U.S. has recourse through legal means. In case you are not aware of this, that's a vital part of life in a true Democracy.

This is absolutely NOT the case with the ME3 carriers home governments, by any stretch of the imagination. If you are comfortable with such governments and their policies, then you endorse human rights abuses and perhaps would be much happier living outside the U.S. in the UAE or Qatar.

I hope you also enjoy your flights on Emirates, Etihad & Qatar.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2015, 03:14 PM
 
2,150 posts, read 1,046,568 times
Reputation: 1666
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
LOL! Guess again, all I needed to see was this gleeful post of yours:



I don't work for them, but this could be interpreted as you being delighted that hometown Delta has been defeated by artificially propped up and subsidized foreign carriers. I find it totally offensive, deal with it.



Your agenda is showing again. Are you a sales rep for Emirates? Prove this bailout you speak of, and our bankruptcy laws are NOT the same thing at all as nationalized/subsidized carriers.



Now this is a real reach. Again, are you an Emirates sales rep?




We don't lure guest workers here with false salary promises, confiscate their Passports and treat them like expendable slaves. Try again.

Again, enjoy your flights on Emirates. You couldn't pay me to step foot on them, and I wish for nothing less than their banning from the U.S. when the dust settles. I feel the same way when it comes to Etihad and Qatar. Until the playing field is leveled, they should have ZERO rights to serve the U.S.

You can find it totally offensive if you want. You have that right. "Ain't no skin off my nose."

'My agenda' is showing again? LOL. Okay you and this agenda. They were bailed out in 2001. Maybe not all but many major U.S. carriers were. You can research this yourself as I had to do. I never said our bankruptcy laws are the same thing as subsidized carriers. Please read my post again. I just wanted it noted that before U.S. carriers go pointing fingers, they should take a look at themselves and their history. They have been propped up by taxpayers. Can we compare how much the Gulf gets subsidized to the U.S.? Of course not...the Gulf would obviously win that contest.

Okay and to respond to your last paragraph, actually it is known that many companies lure workers from abroad on H1B1 (can't remember if that's exactly what it's called) visas and promise to help them get their green card and go back on their promises. They are often paid much less than U.S. workers as a matter of fact and they tend to replace U.S. workers. Or what about how many people from South America, especially Mexico reported seeing advertisements to work in the U.S. and when they arrived, got paid less than minimum wage or none at all. And what about all the low income U.S. workers who are victims of wage theft? People have no clue how big that is in the U.S.

Again, is it worse over there? Yes, but we can't go pointing fingers especially when everything isn't so perfect in the U.S. That's hypocritical.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2015, 03:23 PM
Status: "Ready for Fall" (set 26 days ago)
 
Location: Atlanta
4,647 posts, read 3,021,752 times
Reputation: 3867
Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamerD View Post
You can find it totally offensive if you want. You have that right. "Ain't no skin off my nose."

'My agenda' is showing again? LOL. Okay you and this agenda. They were bailed out in 2001. Maybe not all but many major U.S. carriers were. You can research this yourself as I had to do. I never said our bankruptcy laws are the same thing as subsidized carriers. Please read my post again. I just wanted it noted that before U.S. carriers go pointing fingers, they should take a look at themselves and their history. They have been propped up by taxpayers. Can we compare how much the Gulf gets subsidized to the U.S.? Of course not...the Gulf would obviously win that contest.

Okay and to respond to your last paragraph, actually it is known that many companies lure workers from abroad on H1B1 (can't remember if that's exactly what it's called) visas and promise to help them get their green card and go back on their promises. They are often paid much less than U.S. workers as a matter of fact and they tend to replace U.S. workers. Or what about how many people from South America, especially Mexico reported seeing advertisements to work in the U.S. and when they arrived, got paid less than minimum wage or none at all. And what about all the low income U.S. workers who are victims of wage theft? People have no clue how big that is in the U.S.

Again, is it worse over there? Yes, but we can't go pointing fingers especially when everything isn't so perfect in the U.S. That's hypocritical.
Well, then call me a hypocrite all you like. I could hardly give a damn, at all.

The bottom line is that our Government doesn't endorse willful lying to lure guest workers here under false premises, and then confiscate their Passports while basically trapping them into slave labor.

Perhaps you would also be happier living in these mirages of prosperity, with zero human or civil rights.

In the meantime, DO enjoy you fabulous future flights on Emirates.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2015, 03:25 PM
 
2,150 posts, read 1,046,568 times
Reputation: 1666
Quote:
Originally Posted by munna21977 View Post
Those complaining about ME Airliens getting subsidy should first see whether US Airports are Privately owned or Public-owned. Unless all commercial airports are in the control of Private Companies and they recieve zero money in tax-payer subsidies, this attempt at blaming Foreign Airlines is laughable.
Different Regional Airlines which fly under the banner of Delta Connection also recieve subsidies to fly at smaller airports. Same is the case with United and American.
It is hilarious that people trumpeting the cause of "Free market" very conveniently forget their own subsidy and Government help and then slander the opposition with the same reason that Ban them because they get Subsidy.
How about accepting that in so called "Free Market", the better product wins.
Talking about Discrimination, there are many incidents where Muslim or Sikh passengers have been offloaded from airplane (Various US Airlines) without any reason other then their appearance.

Thank you for posting this. I haven't been kicked off a flight but I know for certain that there are how many passengers that are discriminated against. I'm not sure if most people in the U.S. know how hard it is for some to travel and how that makes them feel. Sometimes you don't want to travel at all just to avoid being treated a certain way.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top