Question

where do you stand? do you think EU subsidies and soft loans to AIRBUS are fair? why or why not?what advantaged are gained by airbus from free finicial support from the EU governments? are complaints about EU subsidies fair in light of Europe's history of democratic socialism?

Answer 1

I believe that Airbus ' subsidies and soft loans are unfair and give them an unfair competitive advantage. Airbus receives assistance from the UK, Spain, France, Germany, and the EU. The governments of these countries are not only responsible for providing the funding that Airbus has created but also for supporting its ongoing progress. Indeed, the government is this multiple for all their aircraft models to be created. Helping a company start up is one thing, but constantly infusing money into a company that ensures its survival offers unfair advantages for firms like Boeing that were able to sustain without such drastic support.

The extensive financial support has enabled Airbus to gain market share and outsell Boeing quickly. As a result, Airbus was able to grow and profit, while Boeing had no choice but to sit back and watch Airbus take over the commercial aviation sector-the Boeing industry had led for decades. Airbus is gaining sustainably through free financial support. Airbus ' subsidies provide for research and development, resulting in lower production costs and improved industry knowledge. Free support enables Airbus to earn profits much sooner than it would be possible for a business not to receive subsidies.

The loans granted to Airbus are referred to as soft loans" along with the grants (money that does not have to be paid back), which ensures that Airbus does not face any threat if the business fails. Loans must only be repaid if viability is met by Airbus. The fact that Airbus has borne practically or no debt over the past two decades greatly strengthens the company's prospects and generates more opportunities for long-term success. Getting little or no debt strengthens their financial statements and makes Airbus for other investors a more attractive investment choice.

The complaints about the intervention of the EU government are still fair even after taking into account the long history of Democratic Socialism in Europe. Governments in Europe play a major role in controlling the national economy, and government intervention are very common. I would normally agree that government interference that serves the public's well-being is a good thing, but it's a different story if one country's government intervention helps the local economy at the expense of foreign economies.

It is understandable that European countries are more vulnerable to government intervention, but this does not give them a valid excuse to allow their practices of intervention to impact ways on a global scale. While the EU's acts were most likely aimed at achieving economic goals that would boost Europe’s airline industry and more importantly, the well-being of European citizens, Airbus was ultimately given a favorable competitive position and an unfair advantage in the conduct of business a competing firm such as Boeing, our result is unfair.