The 70s had decent size seats. Just one problem.... smoking sections
Weird to think we used to fly in our funeral/interview suits.
For the average middle-class person before the industry was deregulated, flying was something you only did a few times throughout your life. So it was "special" and worth dressing up in your Sunday best when it was very infrequent.
Back in the CAB days, airlines had regulated monopolies and ticket prices on their routes. Flying was
expensive. So instead of giving you the bare-bones experience and competing on price like they do now, they competed on amenities and spaciousness because they had the guaranteed revenues to do it (while stuffing us into crowded cabins along the way). A couple airlines tried to offer more service for more money, but consumers clearly indicated they wanted lower prices, so we all get the cattle treatment.
Up to you if you think the "good old days" was when flying was comfortable yet the domain of the affluent and well-heeled business travelers compared to today when it is affordable to everybody. We could just go back to 10-hour (+) family road trips whenever you wanted to go somewhere or simply not traveling at all, like we used to do.
Unlikely to take it seriously enough to warrant change when what they are doing is making $$$.
I do not think the profit motive is really what is behind climate change.
I think what is behind it is consumer demand -- people like cheap and reliable access to transportation (e.g., cars and airliners), heat, electricity, and cheap, high-quality consumer goods made overseas and then shipped over here. It is our want of those types of energy service and goods/services that require it that makes it all happen.
Nobody ever pointed a gun at me and made me fill up my gas tank, and burning a 20-gallon tank adds another 400 pounds of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. The fact is we are all just as much (if not more) culpable as consumers for buying it.
Even if the economy was made up entirety of nonprofits, co-ops, or the public sector, with no profits to be seen, it would still have to deal with consumer demand being what it is and that demand being aimed straight at stuff that creates the emissions.