[0xy]

I don't work for nor hold stock in any airline or aviation manufacturer, I can just adequately judge risks.

You are the one who thinks 180 separate, independent regulators colluded to protect a company at the risk of the people they are supposed to protect. Any argument against the MAX has to be against the regulators as well as Boeing itself.

Why is the Dreamliner acceptable and the MAX is not? Same company manufactured and maintains them, after all.

[netjiro]

> Why is the Dreamliner acceptable and the MAX is not?

I remember [1?] hearing that Emirates threatened refusing 777s & 787s from one of Boeing's plants due to repeated quality control issues. Have not tracked the issue.

> 180 separate, independent regulators colluded to protect

Not necessarily. But if 180 _independent_ bodies were effectively independent, one of them would probably have found issues with the max. But they are not operating effectively independent.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/emirates-doubts-fi...

[jim-jim-jim]

The plant with the quality control issues is the non-unionized one.

[0xy]

The MAX (before design updates and re-certification) has a fatal crash rate of 3.08 per million. Meanwhile 11.9 per 100,000 people die in car crashes.

The MAX, before being fixed, was significantly safer than a car.

Do you refuse to get in a car, since it's substantially more deadly than a MAX?

[landemva]

Different airframes. Different issues here.