Whilst I take no particular side on this issue, it is only fair to point out that by subsidising US airlines to the tune of billions of dollars over the past three years, and by allowing Chapter 11 protection for US airlines, the US govt is supporting Boeing's order book indirectly.

The weak dollar policy will also make it more difficult for US airlines to purchase foreign aircraft.

In addition, Boeing's stakeholders in Japan (who input a significant proportion of Boeing parts and labor) also receive state aid for the Japanese govt.

Boeing is also a major US govt contractor, and receives income from those activities which can sustain innovation and product development and research across it's divisions, both commercial and military which undoubtedly assists the bottom line.

Airbus does indeed have similar govt contracts vie BAe Systems and others, however the sheer scale of US Defence spending (particularly currently) dwafs that of Europe, and consequently there is also an element of state aid to Boeing in this regard which should not be overlooked.

So while I am all for a level playing field, competition and freedom from non-market driven intervention, it it only fair to set out the fact that Boeing is not as free from government backed aid, albeit indirect, as may at first glance appear to be the case.

And let us not forget that there are other, niche players in the commercial aviation market who provide good competition in the smaller 100 seater arena who could in time grow to take on the big boys.