a glimpse of our progressive future

[cubby1223]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100412/pl_afp/usairlinecompanyspiritconsumerpolitics

Democratic US Senator Chuck Schumer has warned he may introduce legislation to bar airlines from imposing fees for carry-on luggage, joining a congressional chorus of outrage at such charges.

We are entering an era where private business may no longer be able to make any decisions any more. Spirit Airlines plans on reducing the cost of the airline ticket, then making up for it in baggage fees. Why shouldn't they be allowed to try different price structures and see if consumers might actually prefer it? Last time I checked there re still several different carriers competing for our business.

If consumers like the new structure, then why should the government tell us we can't do it? And if consumers do not like the new structure, then a different airline will capitalize on it and steal away Spirit's customer base.

Yet the progressives in the federal government feel it is there duty to regulate this. Why? Is it the duty of the federal government to protect us from airlines?

 

[Throckmorton]

Well it's a lot better than regulating who you can and can't marry, don't you think?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Well it's a lot better than regulating who you can and can't marry, don't you think?

Yes, the gov't shouldn't have anything to do with it at all. Now back to the topic... Hmmm... yeah...

 

[nick1985]

Well it's a lot better than regulating who you can and can't marry, don't you think?

How about neither, because the dont have an enumerated power to do either?

 

[sandorski]

Sounds like a Populist move that will probably not gain traction. I totally agree that Airlines should have the option to do this or not. There's just no point to opposing it.

 

[Patranus]

I don't understand what the big deal is.

This all came about because Spirit airlines started doing this.
Their rates are significantly lower than their competitors.

Now, how do they do that?
Charge for everything.

If I do not need to carry on a carry on, why should I be expected to pay as much as someone who does carry on a carry on?

 

[Kadarin]

I concur with the idea that they should allow this pricing model, so long as the extra fees are not hidden. That way potential customers can make their own informed decision as to whether or not to pay.

 

[Patranus]

I concur with the idea that they should allow this pricing model, so long as the extra fees are not hidden. That way potential customers can make their own informed decision as to whether or not to pay.

The fact of the matter is that the "progressive" doesn't believe in true choice and competition.

 

[sandorski]

The fact of the matter is that the "progressive" doesn't believe in true choice and competition.

Has nothing to do with Progressivism.

 

[TwinsenTacquito]

Well it's a lot better than regulating who you can and can't marry, don't you think?

You mean can and can't marry under the law. Which is FUCKING MEANINGLESS.

 

[Kappo]

The fact of the matter is that the "progressive" doesn't believe in true choice and competition.

+1

[edit] Find a democrat (hell Im hard pressed ATM to find ANY politician) that is not advocating some sort of removal of CHOICE or DECISION MAKING from a consumer. [/edit]

 

[IGBT]

Well it's a lot better than regulating who you can and can't marry, don't you think?

I wana marry my rooster. Do ya think I can do that some day??

 

[sMiLeYz]

I for one will welcome our socialist overlords.

 

[RocksteadyDotNet]

I wana marry my rooster. Do ya think I can do that some day??

A rooster isn't a 'who' you moron.

Any two consenting adults should be able to marry.

 

[IGBT]

A rooster isn't a 'who' you moron.

Any two consenting adults should be able to marry.

Moral relativism says we're all part of the same cluster fusk so I wana do it with my rooster.

 

[sMiLeYz]

Moral relativism says we're all part of the same cluster fusk so I wana do it with my rooster.

Government has no right to tell you that what you do to your rooster, and issuing you a piece of paper, while giving you tax benefits for you and your rooster; is wrong! YEAH!!!

 

[CrackRabbit]

Government has no right to tell you that what you do to your rooster, and issuing you a piece of paper, while giving you tax benefits for you and your rooster; is wrong! YEAH!!!

He already chokes that poor thing on a daily basis, might as well let him marry it. :awe:

 

[shira]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100412/pl_afp/usairlinecompanyspiritconsumerpolitics

We are entering an era where private business may no longer be able to make any decisions any more. Spirit Airlines plans on reducing the cost of the airline ticket, then making up for it in baggage fees. Why shouldn't they be allowed to try different price structures and see if consumers might actually prefer it? Last time I checked there re still several different carriers competing for our business.

If consumers like the new structure, then why should the government tell us we can't do it? And if consumers do not like the new structure, then a different airline will capitalize on it and steal away Spirit's customer base.

Yet the progressives in the federal government feel it is there duty to regulate this. Why? Is it the duty of the federal government to protect us from airlines?

A senator talking about introducing legislation - or even actually introducing legislation - is not the same thing as the legislation passing. Or are you not aware of all of the useless bills introduced by Republicans over the past year?

If any legislation related to this issue is passed at all, it will be to require that airlines provide a full-disclosure listing of all their add-on fees.

Or are righties opposed to full-disclosure requirements?

 

[Throckmorton]

I wana marry my rooster. Do ya think I can do that some day??

Yes I think you should be able to marry your rooster. Hell, you can kill him and eat him, so why ban you from marrying him?

BTW, I think this is stupid. Airlines have every right to charge however they want. This is just a political trick to try to get votes.

 

[Ancalagon44]

But America isnt run on choice and competition, its practically an oligarchy. Why do you think Coca Cola has to use high fructose corn syrup instead of sugar in its drinks (used everywhere else in the world)? Because the corn industry lobbied to have import duties imposed on sugar while corn is subsidized. Same thing with avocados.

 

[dmcowen674]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100412/pl_afp/usairlinecompanyspiritconsumerpolitics


We are entering an era where private business may no longer be able to make any decisions any more. <garbage snipped>

You can call it progressive or whatever you want but when businesses come up with absolutely bullshit business practices they deserve to be bitch slapped.

 

[her209]

Any two consenting adults should be able to marry.

I don't think brother and sister are allowed to marry.

 

[Red Dawn]

Moral relativism says we're all part of the same cluster fusk so I wana do it with my rooster.

That'd be incest.

 

[rudder]

You can call it progressive or whatever you want but when businesses come up with absolutely bullshit business practices they deserve to be bitch slapped.

You are free to choose another airline. You see... the airlines were deregulated in 1978.

And in case you did not know... bags fly free on Southwest.

 

[nonlnear]

You can call it progressive or whatever you want but when businesses come up with absolutely bullshit business practices they deserve to be bitch slapped.

Yes. Bitch slapped by their customers, not by dictators who decide that they don't like it.