all 74 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 12 points 11 months ago (8 children)

I feel like this is a fairly common opinion. Also, I believe they do have to after some point; not sure how the airline decides though?

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago* (5 children)

    It's got to do with calculating the amount of fuel for the plane. More weight requires more fuel.

    Edit: I'm sure it's also partly exaggerated capitalism, the companies want every dollar they can milk from the passengers..

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 3 points 11 months ago* (4 children)
  • [–] -1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    You're using actual reasoning, while dismissing my edit of corporate greed reasoning. You better believe, especially in capitalist USA, they'd just as soon charge you $10 a fart if they could..

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 child)

    I won't lie, I've never flown before in my life.

    I only lived within walking distance of two airports, one of them an international airport, and the other lightweight airport flew their planes right over our house.

    So I'll pretend I don't know anything if that makes you happy. Those of us on the ground learn the real rules when planes start crashing in your back yard..

    Edit: This comment coming from someone that actually applied to refuel airplanes at the local international airport. No they didn't hire me, they probably figured me as a corporate risk, as I had too much experience seeing planes crash, not too far behind our house.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 11 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Why not both? Bigger seats and weight-based ticket prices!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 40 points 11 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] 15 points 11 months ago* (2 children)

    Actually, I prefer the tight packing. I wanna get from A to B, and have you seen how expensive tickets are?

    They should really be using wide body flying/blended wings so the cabin is more spacious for the same max payload, but that’s a separate matter.


    That being said, I think airlines should mix in a few spacier seats, for big/tall people, for a small, markup, and exclude all the business class extras.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 6 points 11 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago

    Folks should not down vote him, the cost of flights considering inflation have dropped a ton over the years. Its comodetized and made highly efficient with cramped quarters and more efficient technology. If you want more room to fly old school it simply costs more...

    https://www.travelandleisure.com/airlines-airports/history-of-flight-costs

    "In 1970, a domestic round-trip flight from New York to Los Angeles cost about $150, which is equivalent to over $1,000 today when adjusted for inflation, while today the same flight averages around $300. "

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)
  • [+] 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)
  • [+] -2 points 11 months ago (2 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 12 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    If you're thinking of this, consider that those who buy clothes in XS have to pay the same amount as the XXL size for that same shirt or pants. Despite the XS garment being a third as much material and stitching.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    That only works for some clothing. Usually by the time you get to XL the arms or legs aren't proportionately wider, only the body, so the sizing often doesn't really work. If it's numbered sizes, above the regular range there usually is a premium price for + sizes, same as for petite.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    Why is people downvoting an actual unpopular opinion? I meant, you might have your opinion on the subject but the post itself is on point.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Because they're offended 😂

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    It's an inherent flaw in the community concept in its alignment with the up/downvote system. People just droll along, don't look at comm, instance, or user, just title, and maybe text content, and then they hit up if it made them feel good, and down if it made them feel bad. This one particular comm goes against this pattern that basically every other one follows, so it never gets the correct reactions.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago

    I'm not sure this is unpopular, even on Lemmy.

    Someone else already said that they should stop making the seats tiny.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago

    Fatty here.

    Southwest Airlines in the United States let's you buy an extra seat, and then when you check in at the airport, they will refund the cost of the extra seat provided you are a "person of size."

    Being that the center arm rests go up, this makes it significantly more tolerable for both me, and the regular sized person who sits in the row with me.

    A lot of the other airlines used to do this as well. Now only Southwest does... For now...

  • source
  • [–] 31 points 11 months ago (11 children)

    No.

    Airlines should be regulated so the seats are larger and accommodate larger people.

    And if you managed to fly before airlines were deregulated, then you know that this was once the norm and isn't too much to ask.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] 13 points 11 months ago (11 children)
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago* (5 children)

    You're just reinforcing my point here.

    That's why airlines need to be regulated. It should be illegal to draw a profit while giving zero value.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 11 months ago* (5 children)
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

    The value is being transported from point a to b.

    If you flew in the 80's or 90's, then you know how significantly de-regulation has affected the value of the product.

    Frankly, you're wrong, but you have a right to be. The problem here isn't fat people, it's rich people wanting to extract more money from passengers while offering nothing of value in return.

    Have a great day.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Lemmy is extremely anticapitalist and still disagrees with you, does that not give you pause?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

    Not at all.

    Our culture hates fat people and thinks being fat is a moral failing. This doesn't surprise me at all, and it likely hasn't even crossed most people's minds to blame billionaire capitalists instead of fat people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    Right so, really the airlines should calculate the volume of a person and allocate a box of that size. When you get to your box, you have to fold yourself into it. If anything hangs out, maybe cut it off or just smash it in violently. Screw the bathrooms, just hold it or piss on yourself. Air conditioning and heating? Unnecessary. Think of the weight savings if the boxes were packed in like cargo. You wouldn't need seatbelts. Maybe then those poor airlines that are barely eeking out a profit, might make money. We don't need any amenities. I mean, did you get there?

    Oh and if the airlines aren't making money then that just proves that deregulation doesn't work. They were the ones that lobbied for it.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    There was also far fewer planes, far fewer pilots, far fewer airports (infrastructure in general), and far less advanced technology. Prices fell way before they started cramping seats.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    And did you also know that those old timey flights included check through baggage, actual food, rules regarding getting passengers to their destinations and a host of other amenities and important regulations that were thrown in the trash because we trusted corporations to NOT create a plane that requires you to stand up for an entire flight (an actual concept that was considered). And you know how when you search for a flight a few times, the price keeps going up? Conspicuously lacking back then along with paying extra for a seat with a window only to be told an actual window isn't guaranteed. Yeah, there was no Internet, but it's still true.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (2 children)

    I'm complaining yes but I never asked for this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah, I don't believe you. I priced flying first class to Germany from Florida and it was $3000 one way. That's not an option for me. I doubt seriously that air travel was that expensive. I did travel with my parents as a kid and I don't think we spent an equivalent of $6000 per person for a round trip. That's not something they would have done.

    The airlines continuously take things away and then act like it's such a great deal if they give one back as a perk. They can go fuck themselves and if you think it's so great you can do the same.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    I'm tall and don't fit in any seat other than an exit row. If there aren't any exit rows should I be forced to pay for the seat in front of me?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    I mean, look at it from the passenger in front's perspective. They're paying as much for their seat as everyone else presumably, and yet if you're too tall to fit in your seat and your knees are pressed up against theirs for the whole flight, they're having a considerably worse experience than everyone else. Should they have to pay as much as everyone else does, with that in mind?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago

    Really covering new ground with this one...

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 8 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    People will always hate fats more than billionaires.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    False comparison. No one mentioned billionaires. Two completely separate topics.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    I can draw the tangent. Airline industry executives cut costs to make more profits including decreasing seat sizes and increasing number of seats. If they cared less about profit and went back to sizes decades ago, almost no one would be uncomfortable. They go on to tell us it's about fuel economy and the environment while they fly their private jets.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    Why punish the fat when being stupid is still free everywhere?

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago
    [+] -6 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Oh look, another post arguing that obesity isn't a disease but a choice.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [+] -8 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Fat people shouldn’t have to pay extra on airplanes, the assholes who don’t check luggage should.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago

    Good lord yes. Time to start charging for anything other than the first small personal sized item and maybe a laptop. Even when they tell people the plane will be overloaded and that they can check their bag for free, people won't. Our last flight was delayed by 30 mins trying to get the overhead luggage sorted. Really wanted to heave the assholes luggage onto the tarmac and leave it there.

  • source
  • parent