COMPETITION tends to reduce profits. That covers most of what you need to know to understand why Delta Air Lines, one of the world's largest carriers, is pushing so hard to block a small passenger airport in the Atlanta suburbs. The new airport, called Silver Comet, would compete with nearby Hartsfield-Jackson Internation, the world's busiest airport and one that Delta utterly dominates with a 78% market share.

A Delta executive wrote a column in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution making the airline's case that the new airport is a terrible idea that will hurt the region's economy:

A second airport can quickly expand, and the impact on Hartsfield-Jackson would be significant, with the potential of many international and domestic flights no longer being viable as traffic is siphoned away. That’s a threat to Atlanta’s economy, its jobs and its status as an international city. Leaders across metro Atlanta should think long and hard about the long-term impact — and consider what we see in other cities — before going down this road.

It's hard to take this seriously. New York City seems to be doing just fine with three large airports and several smaller ones; London is doing well with four; San Francisco seems to have survived the rise of Oakland airport; the list goes on. Delta has a right to speak about these issues, but it should probably think twice about doing so, because of the threat of appearing insincere or self-serving. Working behind the scenes to block the new airport could backfire, too, but Delta's extremely public stance against Silver Comet has drawn national attention—and scepticism—to the situation. The New York Timesoffers some context:

Big airlines have a history of fighting aggressively to stifle competition. American Airlines, for instance, long opposed lifting a restriction that limited destinations for commercial passengers from Dallas Love Field. The restriction, known as the Wright Amendment, protected the airline’s near-monopoly position at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport and, by extension, its near-monopoly on commercial air travel in the region. (Thankfully, the restriction on Love Field will end on Oct. 13, 2014.) Airlines know that competition from even small airports can hurt them, because smaller airlines try to offer service on routes that currently have the highest fares. They also fear that if customers get a taste of lower fares, they might demand that smaller airports be expanded.

Delta has the right to try to protect what it sees as its turf. But that doesn't mean policymakers or Atlantans should take the airline's complaints at face value. If decision-makers are confused about what to do, they should commission a truly independent evaluation. But the bottom line, as far as Gulliver is concerned, is pretty clear: making sure that Delta can profitably operate all the international and domestic flights it wants to operate out of Hartsfield-Jackson is not the government's or the public's job. It's Delta's.