Not that it is the epitome of free-markets in action, however it arguably still retains some semblance of competition as the firms must satisfy the wants of each consumer in order to stay in business (bailouts notwithstanding).
And believe it or not, but in contrast with the socialized space flight industry, the domestic airline carriers in America have a nearly flawless safety record — due in large part because they have an incentive not to blow up their customers:
Our safety record has been almost impeccable. Some 30,000 commercial aircraft depart each day in the U.S., carrying around two million people, and virtually every one of them arrives safely. The last accident involving a U.S. major carrier was almost six years ago — the longest such stretch in the industry’s history. There are now twice as many jetliners, carrying twice as many people, as there were a quarter century ago. Yet as a percentage of total flights, the accident rate has fallen sharply. Training and technology are the drivers here, and they continue to improve. Accidents will never be eliminated entirely, but in ten years we can expect to be looking at statistics that are no less impressive, or possibly better.
If the airline or auto industry was socialized (i.e., nationalized), would you still risk your life and limb traveling on the roads or in the sky?
If not, then why would you support a socialized road system or a monopoly on space flight; neither of which has the monetary incentive not to kill their customers, let alone employees?
[Note: this also ignores the small little detail that the taxpayer is coerced into subsidizing and financing these state-run entrepreneurial endeavors]
See also: A World Without NASA and Private Roads: 1 2 3 4
{ 9 comments }
Sometimes it’s not a question of what quality can be achieved, but one of what will it cost? A socialized industry can produce good quality products and service. We had good phone service and good electric service before deregulation. Those industries were socialized in all but name. The price we paid was a freezing of innovation and a dependence on foreign energy sources, but we did get good service.
Many countries have operated nationalized airlines. I wouldn’t vote for socializing the airline industry but I would probably fly on it.
Not just what it costs but who actually pays for it. I have flown on two nationalized airlines and had a wonderful experience. The best part was the fairs were cheaper on those flights than on the private companies.
So a government enterprise that charges(Note I do not use the term costs) less, has better quality? What gives?
More appropriately: WHO GIVES?
The answer is easy: TAXPAYERS!!!!!!!
The government can always provide superior products and services compared to the private sector. It simply steals the money from one person (They don’t matter anyway.) and gives it to its more preferred person. I did not say this was efficient but it does appear to the consumer that the product costs less and has better quality.
Part of what makes the monopoly airlines good is they have to compete with the other countries monopolies in some way (at least for international flights). Also the airplanes come from private companies (Boeing, airbus are the big ones now, but there have been others) who have to compete on something, and safety technology is one useful thing to compete one.
Of course monopolies work great where they want to. It is just they ignore other details that should be important.
The telephone companies were proud that they upgraded the entire country from mechanical switches to computers without going into debt. But they never consider the loss to the rest of us because it took them 30 years to make tone dialing universal. They never mention that the technology to put something like dial-up internet in every home was ready in 1985 (the web wasn’t invented until 1991, but email as we know it today was invented in 1982)
Who knows what opportunity costs were lost because of monopolies in power distribution?
I don’t think quality is a factor at all in the airline industry, people just want cheap, safe flights. From my own personal observations the government does a poorer job at providing the same service a private company could.
A Statist might assert that it is the rather draconian regulations enforced by the FAA which keep airliners in such good working order.
They could, but companies in other sectors have constantly improved on their product’s safety in advance of state decrees (e.g. automobile industry.) The airline industry is particularly sensitive to its reputation, so it has every incentive to invest in safety.
After 9/11, the government GAVE the airlines enough cash to have bought every major airline in the country at the stock prices then. That money benefited only airline shareholders and the executives who run the industry so poorly. I have no great faith in the government, but no one could do worse than the people who run most of the legacy airlines now. We should have bought the airlines and turned them over the people who actually work there for their careers. We have an incentive to run them well because we depend on them. Let the mechanics, flight attendants, customer service reps, pilots, rampers etc. decide.
Joshua DeVries – US Airways Flight Attendant.
Those of us old enough to remember flying before deregulation might disagree with the premise of this one.
“If the airline industry was socialized, would you still fly?”
What do you mean “If”?
Comments on this entry are closed.