Ship travel in the age of sail was more accommodating. At least you can walk around and shit.
Only up on the poop deck though.
It takes so much longer though. I don’t think I’d prefer the travel time of a ship over the sea over the temporary discomfort of a flight.
Because we don’t own the means of production.
Someone clearly doesn’t understand how much it used to cost to travel by plane 50 years ago.
For the OP of this meme, you know you can still pay for food services on flights today, right?
Yeah but it sucks.
Ehh…
The bottom line
Proportionally (inflation considered), flights are much cheaper now than they were 50 years ago. Consequently, flying is a more accessible mode of transport for many and has resulted in the soaring popularity of air travel, which began after deregulation. However, despite the cost drop, the base cost of flying has increased as airlines operate small profit margins and seek to remain competitive.
It was like 135 bucks for the cheapest unrestricted ticket in the usa in 1975, which comes out to around 814 bucks today. Where as I can buy a round-trip ticket right now for 220, which is the equivalent of 38 bucks in 1975.
And to really put that into perspective, an average house in 1975 cost 39k, and if you take out a 20-year lone with 9% interest, you are looking at 193 bucks per month for your rent. So a single plane ticket in 1975 was 69% of the average monthly rent for a house.
Idk why I did all this, but my adhd told me I had to.
Also this image is bullshit
Tray tables are about half that size now.
But back then the price was regulated so they had to compete on service.
That might have been more that 50 years now.
It’s a shit post
Life’s been tough since Biden dropped out, hey?
Cheaper innit.
capitalism. next question?
actually, don’t bother! just assume the answer to why things suck is always capitalism unless you find hard evidence to the contrary.
Yeah, generations of people hunting for a deal and these companies responding to demand with cheaper options. So capitalism maybe but more so human behavior.
Totally, soviet planes where known from luxury and totally not from accidents /s
Planes are three times faster, five times longer range and 95% cheaper per mile, in real terms, than those early days.
The consumer was given the choice and they chose this. Honestly, air travel is great.
Yes, capitalism sucks. I hate being nickle and dimed for hand luggage, lottery tickets, snacks, hidden booking fees and all that shit. Some gentle regulations would be really nice.
saying consumers were given a choice is a bit generous.
also standing planes incoming.
They were and still are given a choice. I can fly from London to New York on British Airways first class or Easyjet. Consumers consistently choose the cheapest headline price.
You can also buy a Ferrari over a Honda, doesn’t mean everyone can afford it making it not a choice at all.
Virtually no one could afford air travel prior to the 1960s, that’s a very large part of my point. It got affordable in the 70s and very affordable in the 80s.
At some point during the 80s it became normal for almost every single working family to get on a plane and go somewhere sunny once a year for two weeks. Every year. Minimum.
Ok, fair point. Just came off a little weird to me.
Sorry, I know I’m not always the clearest. :)
This is the sort of weird back in the day post that doesn’t make sense. Boomers not understanding house prices and minimum wage, that is true.
This plane ticket stuff is wrong. For about the same cost as a ticket back in the day you get way more. In 1955, a one way transatlantic flight was roughly £5k. That’s $6.3k freedom dollars, one way. You can today buy a ticket on that type of route for half that price that includes a lie flat bed, amenities and pyjamas, 2 hot meals, unlimited snacks, unlimited drinks, lounge access on departure and arrival, priority check-in, boarding an ungodly amount of luggage, etc. And in the lounges you get free food cooked to order, free unlimited drinks, free second tier food like buffets, etc.
If you want to spend the equivalent money or a bit more, you could fly even better. You can have a private chef onboard making a meal for you anytime you want. You can take a shower in the sky. You can have a literal bedroom and attached private living room in a mini suite just for you. And that’s flying commercial.
The other side of it is that now people can also buy a ticket for $25. Which would be completely unfathomable back when civil rights weren’t a thing.
that includes a lie flat bed
That entirely depends on how tall you are. Walking through those seats on my way to have my knees crammed into the seat in front of me in coach I realized that even in first class I’m too big for an airplane.
Maybe there’s a market for a big & tall airline.
The old ones have seats with about 72in of lie flatness which is 6ft. But unless you sleep like a Victorian ghost, most people bend their knees or legs somehow. My friend that is 6ft4in has no issues and he’s tall and wide.
Most of the new ones are 76in to 82in. 6ft 10in is pretty generous. And if you need longer, there are first class seats which are full beds and you’d have no issue.
I fly in a pod every few weeks for 12hr+ flights and it’s very comfortable. I am hoping blimp travel makes a come back as I’d love to take the scenic way back with a full suite one day.
I’ve got a california king bed and frequently wake up with my feet dangling over one end and my arms over the other. I really, really doubt I’d fit on an 82 inch bed that has no space around it. And that doesn’t get into the constant light and noise and people on a plane which make it even harder for me to sleep, even if I could get comfortable.
Though many people have made it clear to me that airplanes are not supposed to be comfortable or nice, just something to endure to get to where you’re going.
Yeah but at least the quality of service has went from smiling attractive courteous flight attendants to snarling aisle donkeys.
Airlines were not more luxurious 50 years ago.
You had more legroom and the TSA didn’t exist, but everything else was way worse.
Also the safety was statistically worse for the most part
Yah, but you could smoke.
Yuck. That’s a con.
I swear, nobody on Lemmy gets sarcasm without being slapped in the face with it.
Well for me it was money, I flew Spirit
Airliner ticket prices used to be regulated. So when all airlines had to charge the same price, they had to find other ways to be competitive in order to bring in customers. Deregulation in the 70s brought ticket costs down but that means ticket cost is now the primary point of competition between airlines and amenities now come at a steep premium.
But on the plus side normal people can use air travel now.
I’m not so sure that is a positive. Airplanes are huge emission drivers and our dependence on the convenience of air travel has caused us to cease investment and innovation in other more efficient and environmentally friendly methods of travel.
No doubt there’d be a lot more support for high speed rails if airplanes weren’t as accessible. IMO airplanes should only really be used for intercontinental travel.
Seeing as I can see my family and not be homeless, I consider it a positive.
Are you saying a high speed train to your destination wouldn’t also solve that problem? It would likely end up being cheaper to travel via rail considering the lower costs of maintenance and fuel, meaning further accessibility than we have today with our dependence on air travel.
Yes I am, as most trains don’t cross oceans.
That’s fair, and please note that I mentioned air travel has its place in intercontinental travel in my previous comment. The whole point I’m trying to make is that domestic flights between areas that could support high speed land travel infrastructure are wasteful.
Even within continents, high speed rail is expensive, many cities and towns aren’t large enough or near large enough cities to make it practical. This would mean distant connections on slow trains and very long journeys.
When you factor in the number of people the airplane carries, they are about 3 times more efficient than a car with one person in it.
Note they mentioned rail as the desired alternative, rather than cars.
Just saying, compared to driving, airplanes are usually better. Also trains in the US suck. Much slower, and almost comparable in price to air travel.
Also trains in the US suck. Much slower, and almost comparable in price to air travel.
It doesn’t have to be that way, many other countries have solved those issues. But because we’ve leaned so heavily on air travel to get us to places only a few hours away by land there hasn’t been any incentive to innovate or invest in other forms of long-distance mass transit.
Yep, you can have it one way or the other…cheap flights or super luxury and only the rich can fly. Planes are not cheap to operate and fuel isn’t free.
Frankly for short haul flights it makes sense. Would it be worth paying double or triple for a three hour flight just to get a full meal? Anyone who truly wants a taste of old time flying can get that with a first class ticket, both in terms of cost and quality.
Meanwhile, me aboard a train: “Oh you can get whole massive meals on restaurant cars these days? No thank you, I’ll get a coffee and one of those overpriced naff sandwiches.” (Well, the Finnish train sandwiches are pretty good, but they are hella overpriced. Like 7€. WTF.)
So I remember taking a flight 10 years ago and they gave us pretzel pieces from snyders. I thought, great, we don’t even get whole pretzels…
Next flight, they give us generic “trail mix” in clear bags. The kind the old folks down the street would give out at Halloween because it was “healthy.” but that contained approximately 2 pretzels the size of quarters, 3 peanuts, 3 generic m&ms, and 2 raisins…
It gave me the impression that airlines are like schools, where the flight staff are the ones bringing in the snacks because the airline is too cheap to supply them.
My teacher friends live in big houses and travel all over the world but you know whatever. I don’t.
Liar.
My grandparents were both teachers and are rich. Granted one was a professor, but the other a public school teacher.
In any case, anecdotes do not and cannot disprove the actual statistics.
Also, if you live in a country that actually respects intelligence, I’d HOPE your teachers are actually paid well. Sadly, the US despises intelligence right now…
In dying rural areas in the US teachers are generally some of the best paid. Its mostly in cities where their pay lags. But no, they live in the US in LA(CA, not the state). Also, FYI just because I live in one country doesn’t mean its the same my grandparents live in.
Ahh yes, California, a state that pays more, AND in LA, where wages are WAY higher because cost of living is way higher…
Thank you for describing why your anecdote is an outlier and DEFINITELY doesn’t prove any norm.
Thank you for describing why your anecdote is an outlier and DEFINITELY doesn’t prove any norm.
Where did I say it was the norm??? You called someone a liar for giving an anecdote. Outliers do happen…
Fuck you. Not lying.
No thanks, you’re probably terrible in bed.
Stupid. The cost for flights then was more like beyond first class prices now.
Stupid. The cost for flights then was more like beyond first class prices now.
And a lot more smoky.
Don’t like the smoke? Then sit on the other side of the aisle in the non-smoking section.
You COULD be paying for first class seats and getting that kind of treatment, but you’re flying Economy, aren’t you.
this post seems kinda bourgeoisie to me. i literally don’t give a fuck because we have way bigger problems. if you’re here to bitch about the amenities on an airline flight, well, i guess that must be a nice problem to have.
I for one can only complain about one problem at a time. If something’s not the biggest problem in my life, I’m incapable of addressing it.
