Anti Jones Act article in HuffPost

Surprised this hasn’t been commented on yet. Saw this article via a news link online: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/13/hawaii-alaska-jones-act_n_4961203.html

[QUOTE=Texaco;133461]Surprised this hasn’t been commented on yet. Saw this article via a news link online: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/13/hawaii-alaska-jones-act_n_4961203.html[/QUOTE]

This conversation never goes away, it only gets louder. We put up a pretty dandy resistance for now, but that won’t last forever. Economics always win. There is a bright side to this though! The Huffington Post is about as serious a news source as Pravda, so the fact that they’re reporting it, instead of some legitimate news outlet, only gives me confidence in the amount of B.S. that is probably contained within!

I read the article and all I can say is more dogshit propaganda

[QUOTE=c.captain;133466]I read the article and all I can say is more dogshit propaganda[/QUOTE]

Boy, that Arianna really knows how to run a paper! I bet she could get a golf ball out the other end of a garden hose in about 3 seconds flat too!

Actually, the article came from the AP.

According to a MARAD survey, 47 countries have laws that restrict foreign trade on domestic routes. It is common place for a country to protect its domestic trade with cabbotage laws. What happens when post-Jones Act, the Chinese who will be responsible for moving 90% of all U.S. cargo decide to shut down U.S. shipping? There are no more U.S. flagged ships to bring heating oil to the north east in winter. There are no more U.S. flagged ships to bring corn and weat from the mid-west to the east coast. Is it too late then to realize why we have the Jones Act? It is there for our protection from acts against the United States and her citizens. That is why almost EVERY developed nation with a merchant fleet has similar laws! When will these idiots get this through their heads?!

[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;133467]Boy, that Arianna really knows how to run a paper! I bet she could get a golf ball out the other end of a garden hose in about 3 seconds flat too![/QUOTE]
No…that was her ex with the garden hose.

[QUOTE=txwooley;133469]According to a MARAD survey, 47 countries have laws that restrict foreign trade on domestic routes. It is common place for a country to protect its domestic trade with cabbotage laws. What happens when post-Jones Act, the Chinese who will be responsible for moving 90% of all U.S. cargo decide to shut down U.S. shipping? There are no more U.S. flagged ships to bring heating oil to the north east in winter. There are no more U.S. flagged ships to bring corn and weat from the mid-west to the east coast. Is it too late then to realize why we have the Jones Act? It is there for our protection from acts against the United States and her citizens. That is why almost EVERY developed nation with a merchant fleet has similar laws! When will these idiots get this through their heads?![/QUOTE]

You are 100% correct and it is most unfortunate that these short and simple facts cannot be easily communicated to the American people. I simply have no confidence that these things will ever be understood, which is why I have taken the position that the ultimate demise of the Jones Act is not long in coming.

This is the last sentence of the article.

“The general population is utterly ignorant of either the Jones Act or its implications for us,” Dyson said. “We have a job to do to explain what the savings would be.”

Reading the comments will verify that. The message that we don’t want foreigners taking our jobs is a relativity simple one.

I was reading an entirely unrelated story that had this link. I don’t have as much concern today about the Jones Act demise as I did in the mid 90s. Then it was ADM and ConAgra with no MSP as a backstop trying to kill it. The industry was truly on the ropes until a R congress and Slick Willie passed the MSP (97-98?). I know it is a time worn subject on how to teach the civilian purpose of a strong USMM, the 4th arm of defense. Short memories of the sealift near disaster of the 1st Gulf War. I guess I get especially irritated when Puerto Rico starts whining. BTW, I think Ariana recently sold out. And I get my info from a wide range of news sources. Don’t particularly trust any of them to give a straight and clear story whether it’s R, L or center. JMO.

It would be nice if they asked for more efficient US flagged vessels to be built. That would really cut down on the price as well. I see Maersk-Rickmers are splitting up. 2 pretty new US flagged vessels sitting around…

[QUOTE=KrustySalt;133491]It would be nice if they asked for more efficient US flagged vessels to be built. That would really cut down on the price as well. I see Maersk-Rickmers are splitting up. 2 pretty new US flagged vessels sitting around…[/QUOTE]

those ships have hardly been US flag for a year…were those enrolled in MSP?

here’s the text of the article

Hawaii, Alaska And Territories Team Up Against The Jones Act

AP | by CATHY BUSSEWITZ Posted: 03/13/2014 11:01 pm EDT Updated: 03/13/2014 11:59 pm EDT

HONOLULU (AP) — Lawmakers from Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico and Guam are teaming up to pressure the U.S. government for relief from a maritime law passed in the 1920s.

The Jones Act was designed to protect the domestic shipping industry. It states that only ships made in the U.S. and flying the country’s flags can deliver goods between U.S. ports.

That means that a cargo ship filled with goods from China can only make one stop in the U.S. at a time. It can’t stop in Hawaii to exchange goods before heading to Los Angeles.

Hawaii state Sen. Sam Slom says the law punishes the people of Alaska, Puerto Rico, Guam and Hawaii with high costs of living.

Representatives from the impacted states and territories met in a videoconference Thursday.

“All of our areas are specifically impacted by the Jones Act,” Slom said. "It is now known that the Hawaiian cost of living, primarily because of our additional shipping cost and because of the Jones Act, are now 49 percent higher than the U.S. mainland. And this is becoming unbearable. It’s difficult for individuals. It’s difficult for families. It’s difficult for small businesses as well.

Slom is part of a bipartisan group of Hawaii lawmakers pushing Congress to reconsider the Jones Act or to consider a waiver for noncontiguous states and territories. Slom said it costs about $790 to ship a 40-foot container from Los Angeles to Shanghai, but it costs $8,700 to ship the same container from Los Angeles to Honolulu.

Alaskan lawmakers have made a similar request to Congress, but the state hasn’t yet seen results, said Alaska state Sen. Fred Dyson. Like Hawaii, the state brings in most of its goods by ship or airplane.

Most of Alaska’s goods move along the coast, and freight rates would be drastically reduced if the state could use foreign ships, he said.

The American Maritime Partnership, a coalition that represents vessel owners and operators, unions, equipment yards and vendors, says the Jones Act is critical for economic and security reasons. It says the domestic maritime industry is responsible for nearly 500,000 jobs and more than $100 billion in annual economic output.

The Puerto Rico Senate passed a resolution calling for an investigation of the economic impact of the Jones Act, Puerto Rico Sen. Rossana Lopez Leon said. Studies by the World Economic Forum and Federal Reserve Bank in New York have concluded that the Jones Act hinders economic development in the commonwealth, she said.

“If we truly want to create jobs and boost our economic development, we need to eliminate the implementation of the Jones Act in Puerto Rico,” Lopez Leon said.

The territory of Guam is currently exempt from the Jones Act, but because natural shipping lanes pass through Honolulu the law affects Guam.

Rep. Gene Ward of Hawaii said the state isn’t asking for much, just a waiver from the rules. “Having something made, flagged, and owned by America is obsolete,” said Ward, a Republican.

The cost of building ships in the U.S. is five times higher than constructing comparable ships in Japan and South Korea, said Michael Hansen, president of the Hawaii Shipper’s Council, an association that represents the interest of cargo owners. There also are far fewer ships built in the U.S. than abroad.

“The extraordinarily high cost of shipbuilding and the artificial shortage or commercial ships in the U.S. creates a narrow and highly concentrated domestic shipping market,” Hansen said.

The group agreed to stay in touch and meet again to coordinate efforts.

“The general population is utterly ignorant of either the Jones Act or its implications for us,” Dyson said. “We have a job to do to explain what the savings would be.”

First. I wish to say that the statement that a foreign ship cannot stop in Hawaii before calling in California to be utterly false. Such a ship cannot load any cargo in Hawaii for discharge in California is all.

Second, sending containers from the US to Asia is dirt cheap because most go empty since Asia buys little from us other than scrap plastic and paper. That is why such a low price is quoted. I do not know what a 40’ container filled with laptop computers costs to lift from Shanghai to LA/LB but it ain’t no $790. And I also doubt the average container costs the quoted $8700 to ship from LA/LB to Honolulu. That is likely the highest possible published rate with the vast majority being substantially less. PURE HYPERBOLE PROPAGANDA HERE! A SHITLOAD OF BS IN THIS PIECE!

[QUOTE=c.captain;133498]those ships have hardly been US flag for a year…were those enrolled in MSP?[/QUOTE]

alright they have been US flagged for a couple of years…my how time flies!

[B]Maersk-Rickmers Announces Breakup[/B]

By Mike Schuler March 21, 2014


maersk_illinois

The U.S.-flagged joint venture known as Maersk-Rickmers quietly announced this week that its services have been discontinued.

The JV, formally known as Maersk-Rickmers U.S. Flag Project Carrier, was formed in September 2011 by Maersk Line, Limited and Rickmers-Linie (Americas) and offered heavy-lift breakbulk and project cargo shipping using two newly-built multi-purpose ships, Maersk Illinois and Maersk Texas.

At the time of establishment, the 19,000 DWT vessels, each with a combined maximum lift of 480 metric tons, provided twice the capacity of any U.S. flag multipurpose vessels in operation.

In a statement posted to the Maersk-Rickmer’s website, a message only said that both companies have mutually agreed to discontinue their joint venture. All additional pages on their site have been taken down.

Neither MLL or Rickmers-Linie have addressed the break up on their websites, and no word yet on what’s going to happen with the two vessels.

[QUOTE=c.captain;133500]here’s the text of the article

First. I wish to say that the statement that a foreign ship cannot stop in Hawaii before calling in California to be utterly false. Such a ship cannot load any cargo in Hawaii for discharge in California is all.

Second, sending containers from the US to Asia is dirt cheap because most go empty since Asia buys little from us other than scrap plastic and paper. That is why such a low price is quoted. I do not know what a 40’ container filled with laptop computers costs to lift from Shanghai to LA/LB but it ain’t no $790. And I also doubt the average container costs the quoted $8700 to ship from LA/LB to Honolulu. That is likely the highest possible published rate with the vast majority being substantially less. PURE HYPERBOLE PROPAGANDA HERE! A SHITLOAD OF BS IN THIS PIECE![/QUOTE]

Yes, the $8700 figure got my attention too. That figure did not state what the commodity was. I looked around the web for some info on costs from LA to hawaii and did not get much, but did find one snippet relating tot eh story. It seems the $8700 figure was based on undeclared commodity or “general cargo”. Generally, that is the highest rate available, as opposed to a specific commodity.

The article also stated that it cost 5 times more to build a ship in the US vs Korea or Japan. It even remotely close, that indicates something VERY wrong with our shipbuilding industry. You’ll see a story on GCaptain today about Norwegian Cruise Lines starting a new build in Germany. As far as I know almost all those giant cruise ships get built in Europe. Europe certainly is not a cheap labor and parts market as compared to the US.

My guess is that government actions have something to do with that. While people tend to think that the US is the most free economy, the fact is that government regulation and taxation are higher here than most other countries, including Europe. Here’s one unrelated, but pertinent fact. The US is the biggest market for car tires. The only US owned tire company in the US is Goodyear. Every other major brand, old brands like Firestone, General, etc, are owned by foreign companies, mostly European. They can operate more profitably in the US than US companies can. That’s because of taxation.

Again, there is something very wrong with our whole manufacturing sector. When something effects ALL brands and lines, you can usually look at the government as the root cause, whether through action (negative) or inaction.

On another note, the guy from Alaska was complaining about the costs attributable to the Jones Act. Guess what! the price of fish would go down it they opened the Alaska fishing grounds to foreign boats. That same guy would be screaming bloody hell is someone proposed that. That’s known a hypocrisy; something American politicians are very good at.