Do you think that the decision of the US government to award a 40 billion aircraft related contract to Airbus?

Question

in Europe is absolutely appauling given the state of the US economy and unemployment situation at present.?

Answer 1

Being from Everett (where they would be built) I find it will be 9000 less jobs. Which means probably 20,000 less cars on the road (1 for the wife and 1 for the kid) which means less traffic. We can't handle the traffic we have. People who live 5 miles from the plant take 45 minutes to an hour to get to work.

Boeing workers are generally overpaid compared to the local workforce which translates to inflated prices for anyone who doesn't work for Boeing.

For those who say we are sending our tax dollars overseas, look where your TV, car, pants, shirt, socks, shoes, etc. are made.

Besides we are borrowing money from China and other foreign countries to keep us afloat since we are spending our grand kids money on Bush's War.

Besides, I'm sure Alabama can use a boost to their economy.

Answer 2

Nothing surprises me any more.  I do think the decision is a bit stinky from a political viewpoint, but as mentioned, the direct contractor IS an American company, and the contract will generate jobs on US soil.

As an old Boeing fan, I'm a bit miffed, but like all government contracting, you don't know who will win and who will go bankrupt until about 12 years after the deliveries are complete.  So bide your time and listen for surprises.

Answer 3

I was disappointed Boeing lost.

One thing to keep in mind is that for

years Europe has purchased much

US hardware.  By outright refusing

to consider non US aircraft we could be

'shooting ourselves in the foot'

for the long run. About the only weapon

we've bought from them in great numbers

is the Beretta 9mm (huge mistake imo)

but it created a lot of jobs in Accokeek

Maryland.

Hopefully the folks at Northrop/Grumman

will make some dough and keep there hand

in the manned aircraft business a while longer.

Answer 4

Has anybody considered that the B767 is a 25 year old design and, as such suffers from obsoleteness?

That the  A330 is a much more efficient aircraft, and that setting up an aircraft plant in the South just might cut down on poverty.

Another point - to the radical responders: Since when have the countries of Europe become enemies??????

Answer 5

In relation to employment, only parts are made in Europe the total assembaly of the Aircraft is in the US. I am an Aircraft Captain which I can also include that Airbus normally are more stable and less effected by turbulance very important for air to air refueling.

Answer 6

I think McCain had a hand in the decision. He has been anti-Boeing for a long time and was instrumental in "opening the door" for a foreign company to build this plane. The thought of giving more jobs to the Europeans is absurd. We don't need to send more US jobs overseas. Boeing has the expertise to build the tanker on time and on budget. Watch what happens when this novice builder of a refueling aircraft suddenly has production problems. This was a really bad idea. A comment to Dennis H....The 767 is a PROVEN design with the latest technology. Just because the airframe design has been around for a while does not make it inferior, and no, we are not enemies with those who won the contract, but we need to keep our defense dollars in our country. The "jobs" in the south will not be as good as those in Europe where the aircraft will be built. It will only be finished here. A very minor step in the process.

Answer 7

nnnnnnnnnno

Answer 8

How many of you naysayers drive a foreign car? While I am a Boeing fan, I have flown both Airbus and Boeing aircraft. Both build an excellent airplane. American manufacturers supply almost 50% of Airbus parts, GE engines,Goodyear tires,BF Goodrich brakes,etc. If it is the best for the troops, then I am for it.

Answer 9

It's nothing short of bizzare,....to pump up your enemy's coffers. I buy American at twice the cost sometimes. Anything else will come around to bite you, even if it's a decade later.

Answer 10

U.S. goverment contracts should not be given to foreign companies.

Answer 11

keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.....it is all about leverage.  we'll put a big chunk of your labor force out of work if you.......

Answer 12

Well it was actually Northrup Grumman who is using a body from Airbus and Airbus is going to build a plant here in the US as well. I'm for the best product for our armed services.

Answer 13

I just got up and Read the story. this country is sicker than I thought. low paying jobs in mobile for high cost Europe airframe and parts. we are selling out, we have become a Nation of traitors. industry that we were the masters of are going over seas, if we keep selling ourselves we will not be able to defend our self if "they" get pissed at us because we cant build anything anymore to defend ourselves. this old vet says shame on you air force, shame on you

Answer 14

Boeing has the technology and capabilities, but lack the professionalism and etiquette in the industry.

Meanwhile, Airbus has a strong future plan..a new research center in Alabama, which will create tons of job openings..

Boeing was all poised to win..they lost bcoz of themselves..