Nolimit,
Sorry you feel that way.
I agreed with you that fatique is an issue at EK, and a non issue in this particular argument. I saimply pointed out that you mentioned tired crews as a part of your position, and wanted to point out that is by no means restricted to Emirates.
I also agree that governments should do the best by their Citizens. A minority of Canadians work for AC. Depriving the entire population of access to desired services in order to protect one company does not achieve that. Certainly the overall benefits of a more liberal Aviation policy should be weighed against the ecconomic impact. Most places with liberalised markets have shown a net benefit to the majority as a result.
You like to employ logical fallacies in your arguments. The good old false analogy- because I agree with EK gaining access to the Canadian market I must be a relentless sycophant for EK.
A lot of what EK has done in the last two years has been reprehensible, immoral, and ultimatley counter-productive. That doesn't mean that the companies continues success will not be ultimatley more beneficial to it's employees than its failure.
I did not say Australias success was because of EK (Another strawman there). But it DOES have a lot to do with liberalised markets. EKs access to Australia is an example of that, and the companies investment in Australia has been substantial as a result.
Now square these two statements:-
Besides, the debate about protectionism or economic gain or loss hardly interests me. It's the extortionist tactics EK is using, basically trying to blackmail their way into getting what they want. We see it all the time in our own dealings as employees, the bullying. It's ingrained in the culture, so it would be nice to see someone stand up to them.
and
Do I want to "stick it" to EK? Hardly.
They seeem contradictory to me....