Puerto Rico - Statehood and attack on the Jones Act


#161

[QUOTE=tugsailor;172963]No. We protect the entire world at our own expense and with only token help from others. Through NATO we provide the vast majority of protection from the Russians. We protect South Korea from the North. We protect Taiwan and Japan. Any time the UN does anything the US pays for most of it, and when the going gets rough anywhere in the world it’s mostly only the US that steps up.

We pay the highest costs in the world for pharmaceutical, in effect subsiding reach and development of new drugs, and routine drug costs for the rest of the world.

Americans are the most generous people on earth.

If it were not for the US, everyone in Europe would be speaking German or Russian and everyone in the far east would be speaking Chinese.

There are more Norwegians in the US than in Norge. Some of the wealthiest people in Norge made their initial fortune in the US-- for example Kjell Inge.

So the US is far from alone in the world.[/QUOTE]

That is the staple claims of American generosity and exceptionalism. You forgot the Marshall Plan though.

You are right that there are more people claiming Norwegian ancestry in the US then there are people in Norway. They are proud of it to.
They eat Lutefisk, Lefse and Brunost in large quantities, thus contributing to the trade balance between the US and Norway.

You are also right that Kjell Inge Roekke made his initial fortune in the US. He introduced modern fishing methods and on board processing to the US fishing industry. He is still contributing to US shipbuilding as the defacto owner of the Philly Yard, introducing modern methods there to.
His Aker Solutions are a major operator in the GoM subsea equipment and construction industry, using many US flag vessels, but also some others when no suitable US flag vessels are available, or able to handle the task.

But that has nothing to do with the UNCLOS or OCS, which is the subject here. The UNCLOS give US the right to claim exclusive rights (EEZ)even outside the OCS, up to 200 n.miles offshore.
It also open up to extend that claim if the OCS extend past that limit, which the US would love to do in the Arctic, but is stopped from doing so since it has not ratified the UNCLOS. Russia is making such claim in the Arctic, as does Denmark on behalf of Greenland.

Australia has claimed extended OCS in the Timor Sea, thus many of the large Gas fields there are within Australian EEZ, although closer to Timor Leste. (David and Goliath?)

In the GoM area the only possible conflict over the OCS would be with Cuba or Mexico. I’m not sure if there are any counter claim, or if the various EEZs are defined and agreed according to the median line principle, as is normal.

In short, ratifying the UNCLOS would be to the advantage of the US and not loosing “sovereignty” of the OCS, which you cannot claim anyhow. (Only territorial waters are “sovereign”)


#162

good luck to anyone questioning any claims to the U.S. OCS.


#163

[QUOTE=z-drive;172975]good luck to anyone questioning any claims to the U.S. OCS.[/QUOTE]

I have not said that. What I have said is that it enhance the claim to reach outside the OCS.


#164

[QUOTE=z-drive;172975]good luck to anyone questioning any claims to the U.S. OCS.[/QUOTE]

True, the multinational oil companies would insist the USA declare war to protect the interest of Exxon, Shell, Chevron etc which pay relatively little tax. The USA taxpayer will pay for that war even though the oil companies are among the most taxpayer subsidized industries in the country what with depletion allowance, drilling expense allowance etc. Meanwhile the people of the USA get some of the lowest royalties of any country in the world. As a comparison…what does Norway derive from its oil?


#165

[QUOTE=c.captain;172970]you SIR seem to have neglected to realize this forum is comprised mainly of American professional mariners so in effect you are stepping into a very tough biker’s bar and screaming in a high pitched sqweaky voice that we are all homosexuals! Unless you want to be collecting your teeth into a small bag off the floor I suggest you cease and desist immediately in your desire to declare the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to be in violation of the Law of the Sea! [/QUOTE]

Man, you really know how to keep the debate civilized!!!
I don’t know what you get so worked up over. Just because a foreigner ask some questions and voice an opinion contrary to yours and your “biker” friends doesn’t give you the right to threaten violence. Luckily I’m out of reach.(I hope)

Again, I have NOT said that the OCS Act is in violation of the UNCLOS. On the contrary, the UNCLOS expends US rights and make claims legal under international Law.

What is confusing is whether it is the OCS Act alone that regulate activities within US EEZ, incl. by foreign flag vessels and personnel, or is the Jones Act also being enforced. I don’t see where the Jones Act is mentioned in the OCS Act. (Or did I miss something?)

besides SIR what the FUCK does any of this have to do with changes to the Jones Act desired by Puerto Rico which is the purported topic of this thread? SO ENOUGH…NOW!

You are right, this has nothing to do with changes to the Jones Act, or about Puerto Rico and should have been in a different thread
If you want to migrate to a more appropriate thread I would be happy to follow.


#166

[QUOTE=tengineer1;172982]True, the multinational oil companies would insist the USA declare war to protect the interest of Exxon, Shell, Chevron etc which pay relatively little tax. The USA taxpayer will pay for that war even though the oil companies are among the most taxpayer subsidized industries in the country what with depletion allowance, drilling expense allowance etc. Meanwhile the people of the USA get some of the lowest royalties of any country in the world. As a comparison…what does Norway derive from its oil?[/QUOTE]

I assume you already know the answer to your last question??:smiley:


#167

[QUOTE=ombugge;172984]I assume you already know the answer to your last question??:D[/QUOTE]

Assume I don’t :slight_smile:


#168

Sad news for some but good news for those who gets to work on board. The Far Sentenial is heading to the GoM for a three year contract: http://www.offshoreenergytoday.com/csv-far-sentinel-clinches-3-year-gig-in-gulf-of-mexico/

She is a brand new “State of the Art” Subsea/IMR Vessel with the latest and best of equipment on board to work in up to 3,000 m. WD and living quarters of absolute top class for 85 persons, all in single berth cabins: https://www.farstad.com/fleet/newbuilds/newbuilds-fleet-list/far-838-tbn

I’m sure many of those cabins will be filled by Americans, although the Marine crew may not be.


#169

[QUOTE=tengineer1;172985]Assume I don’t :)[/QUOTE]

In that case, here is an official study comparing Norwegian and US (in this case Alaska) ways of doing things: http://www.arcticgas.gov/norway’s-different-approach-to-oil-and-gas-development

This is from 2011 so numbers and some other facts are obviously not up to date, but it give a good and unbiased view of the Norwegian Oil & Gas Industry and how it is governed.

If that is not enough, here is the latest Prosperity Index (2015), which Norway topped for the 7th time: http://www.thelocal.no/20151102/norway-worlds-most-prosperous-country

Have a good read.


#170

Norway is headed for recession. It will be difficult to stay prosperous at $45/bbl, hence the rate cuts by their central bank.


#171

[QUOTE=ombugge;172983]Man, you really know how to keep the debate civilized!!! [/QUOTE]

what debate SIR! There is no debate on this nor should there be in this thread.

now concerning the “civilized” bit…you obviously are not aware of my wielding the famous pointy stick and unless you want to subject yourself to its jabs, I suggest you defer offering further commentary on this subject. Your treading on hallowed ground here.


#172

We need a Norwegian to run from president and lead our country into the future. If we are to become the welfare state our current politicians envision we need to do it right. I look forward to our Norwegian overlords leading us to the promised land.


#173

I think I’ve figured out the problem. You don’t understand how the US legal system works. It’s not one law trumps another. Laws are interwoven. We, as do many former English colonies and commonwealth nations are ruled by a common law system. Other parts of Europe, and many of their former colonies are ruled by a civil law system. To interpret law you have to take all of it into consideration, and previous rulings, to see what applies where and for what reason, it’s not all spelled out in a single chapter of CFR. So go and read the entirety of both the OCS Act and the Jones Act to find you answers.


#174

[QUOTE=lm1883;172999]Norway is headed for recession. It will be difficult to stay prosperous at $45/bbl, hence the rate cuts by their central bank.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-23/oil-at-50-is-driving-norway-to-zero-as-recession-risk-soars[/QUOTE]

It is going to be tough times for Norway’s oil and gas and associated industries until oil prices gets back up a bit, but $60/bbl. will be enough to break even and anything above a bonus. Can US Shale Oil and deep water GoM oil manage on that margin?

The price for Norwegian oil is now around $50/bbl. but since the USD/NOK rate is getting higher the price in NOK is not that much affected. With over $800 Bn. in the Oil Fund, I think Norway will survive nicely thank you.

More reason to look at how long the US can maintain oil independence. With the production dropping and investment in finding new oil also dropping, onshore and offshore, it may not be all that far away before the cry about “dependence on people that don’t really like us” will return.

But thank you for your concern anyhow.


#175

Norway will probably have to dip into that fund to maintain its generous lifestyle. It’s well to remember that the funds’ value is dedicated on the overall performance of the global markets, especially so with Norway’s fund because it is heavily invested in European stocks and real estate (worldwide). Any correction to futures prices will have a corresponding effect on the Norwegian fund, positive, or most likely negative.

Friends of mine in the Dakotas tell me that their break even point is ball park $55-60. As long as cheap financing still available, our shale is still in play.


#176

I think I’m a little lost. Does anyone know where I can find the thread about how the El Faro sinking is being leveraged against American jobs? I think maybe the forum is broken, because I clicked the title for that one and it sent me to this weird pissing contest about Norway.


#177

[QUOTE=Fraqrat;173007]We need a Norwegian to run from president and lead our country into the future. If we are to become the welfare state our current politicians envision we need to do it right. I look forward to our Norwegian overlords leading us to the promised land.[/QUOTE]

Not a bad idea, but you have to change the constitution to allow it first, which may be a mitt difficult.
Even to pass an amendment to regulate how Congressmen’s compensation in amended took over 202 years, so don’t get your hope up high.
Your best bet would be to hope that a self-proclaimed Socialist from Vermont becomes the next President.
Fat change of that with the loudest mouth in New York in the running. He is rich, very rich, so he’ll be able to buy the White House and turn it into a very expensive hotel.

PS> I believe it is/was possible to spend a night there already, but at the right price?


#178

[QUOTE=ombugge;173009]It is going to be tough times for Norway’s oil and gas and associated industries until oil prices gets back up a bit, but $60/bbl. will be enough to break even and anything above a bonus. Can US Shale Oil and deep water GoM oil manage on that margin?

The price for Norwegian oil is now around $50/bbl. but since the USD/NOK rate is getting higher the price in NOK is not that much affected. With over $800 Bn. in the Oil Fund, I think Norway will survive nicely thank you.

More reason to look at how long the US can maintain oil independence. With the production dropping and investment in finding new oil also dropping, onshore and offshore, it may not be all that far away before the cry about “dependence on people that don’t really like us” will return.

But thank you for your concern anyhow.[/QUOTE]

800bn in the Norwegian Oil Fund. The USA’s Oil Fund is??? Anyway, I am sure it is more than a mere 800bn


#179

[QUOTE=ombugge;173040]Not a bad idea, but you have to change the constitution to allow it first, which may be a mitt difficult.[/QUOTE]

since when does a foreign national get to comment here on the US Constitution or presidential politics? step back there SIR!


#180

What if a great NorgeAmerican family has been biding their time for generations? A great family name many here don’t even know they should hold in high esteem. The patriarchs invention allowed coonasses to travel further from shore than oars could carry them. His invention allowed the first GOM shrimper to venture out and trade shrimp for diesel and birth the modern OSV industry. If only the heir of Ole Evinrude will come to his country’s rescue.