Quote:
Originally Posted by taxwonk
Ah, very good! And if you turn that into a metaphor...?
|
Uh...it comes to bite you in the ass?
Unless you're now arguing that the increased costs associated with less frequently traveled routes should be spread across all airlines, I don't really understand your point. Air travel is very cheap to places that do not have the costs associated with connecting flights. It's not because there is a tremendous amount of competition. Competition helps, obviously. But the reason why it's cheap to fly to Chicago and not Cincinnati is because there is way more traffic to Chicago, resulting in larger planes and a bigger hub, etc.--all the economies of scale shit that make the per person costs lower.
From this string, your argument would be to force the bigger airlines to give up those economies of scale ("Then I guess we'll just have to outlaw loans that big") and spread costs from the crappy routes to consumers of the cheap routes.
You want to reduce loan size to help smaller banks compete. But all you're saying is that bigger banks must subsidize smaller banks. Just say that. Don't act like you have a market-based solution to the problem.
TM
Threaded Mode