The people who run the company should be the people who know how to build planes. It's in our economic and industrial and defense interest to have a well run, high quality aerospace manufacturer.
The people who run the company should be the people who know how to build planes. It's in our economic and industrial and defense interest to have a well run, high quality aerospace manufacturer.
I seem to have lost the thread between that and
> The people who run the company should be the people who know how to build planes. It's in our economic and industrial and defense interest to have a well run, high quality aerospace manufacturer.
As a reminder, the leadership competitions in bureaucracy select for loyalty to the bureaucracy, not the bureaucracy's stated mission. Exceptions are rare and fleeting.
If the FAA can't hire competent independent inspectors then just let the competitor do the inspection and tie the bonuses for inspectors to finding something wrong with the competition's planes.
Reversing McDonnell Douglas merger wouldn't really work, the remaining product lines that could be separated are very much non-overlapping.
Gwynne Shotwell, engineer and COO of SpaceX maybe considered from the job of CEO of Boeing. It seems to me more USA-ish move than nationalize Boeing. Don't know witch one is the best for Boeing in the end.