Boeing made better planes when they had to compete with McDonnell Douglas.

Once they bought them out and became a monopoly that was deemed ‘not a monopoly’ they had room to relax and replaced engineers with finance people.

This is what happens when finance people make aircraft.

Airliners have gotten steadily safer over the years and decades. So much safer that we tolerate a much lower rate of errors.

I think the idea was that capitalism was at fault, so we should go back to whatever variant of the system Boeing operated under when there were less failures. Or else I’m not sure why their conclusion would be that the fix would be to reel in capitalism.

Think the govs lost their vetoes a while ago. Airbus is now a play by American asset managers AFAIK. Since the market’s mature, it’s more attractive and profitable to buy up programs like the A220 and farm EU subsidies vs. betting on a Boeing turnaround.

It certainly was in the beginnings. But more recently? Can you give any examples or data how?

Of course they take all subsidies they get, but that does not distinguish that from many other big companies not founded on government initiative.