yes, let’s
I don’t HATE anything, or anybody, with the exception of intolerance and hypocrisy.
But I don’t want to be blamed for you blowing a vain, or worse, so you can have your dreams in peace.
so by this can I take it that you are going to stop opining about the USA and US maritime legislative matters? Why am I highly skeptical?
The day I stop having opinions I’m (hopefully) dead.
If my voicing my opinion is so painful to you (and some others here) I’m sorry. No, not for having or voicing my opinion, but for that upsetting you.
As to promise not to voice an opinion on anything about USA or US maritime, legislative or otherwise, I cannot do that.
Likewise, I do not expect you, or anybody else here to stop voicing your opinions on anything and everything not US related. I may not agree with you, but that doesn’t mean I should try to stop you from saying so. I may refute your statements and try to prove that you are wrong, or lack information about the subject.
The day everybody in this world agrees on everything will be a sad day. But even worse will be the day when nobody is allowed to have and voice an opinion different from the majority in any forum.
Now, can we get back to solving the problem of the USMM and lack of ships to sail on for US Mariners??
1 Like
WE? Who asked you to do anything other than to do nothing at all? I for one, do not want to hear a single word from you regarding the US maritime industry. You have ZERO standing and the same degree of knowledge about it!
Of course you can’t and thus by this taccid admission you are telling all of us you are in fact the internet troll we all have been saying for years you are!
You simply do not have any ability to STFU…do you?
1 Like
I’d love to hear your practical ideas for revitalizing US flag shipping.
Here is another story about the poor condition of us flagged ships.http://ow.ly/9AaU30opOGz
ABS, USCG , MARAD and ship operators should be ashamed that this is happening. I am guessing that some of the ones that lost their coi are the MARAD rust buckets in Newport News.
1 Like
The mothball fleet should be scrapped. Much better to replace them with a fleet of nearly new commercial ships that are militarily useful and in constant operation with whatever amount of subsidy that requires. Good used, nearly new, ships, and entire shipping companies, routinely get into financial trouble and end up being sold by the banks for pennies on the dollar.
3 Likes
I guess you missed the memo; there is no longer a concept of shame. Shame is dead.
1 Like
Well, with the danger of facing the c.captain’s pointy stick I’ll take up that challenge. (Not that I haven’t said all this before on this forum)
- Scrap the 100 year old Jones Act and replace it with a modern Cabotage Law that guarantee US flag and US crews on all ships in domestic trade.
- If need be, have separate protection for US shipbuilding, with subsidies limited to OECD limits, but scrap the requirement to build and repair US flag ships at US shipyards. (Unless they can compete, normal free market rules should apply)
- The new Cabotage Law should not cover anything not relevant to domestic trade, such as protection of seafarers etc. This should either be covered by ratifying MLC’06, or by separate legislation.
- Fully implement IMO rules and regulations for US flag ships, both in foreign or domestic trade, incl. STWC for education, training and licensing and 1969 convention for tonnage measurement rules, etc. (Maybe with exception for purely inland waters, like rivers and canals, but not Great Lakes, Fisheries, OSVs etc.)
- Ratify UNCLOS to be in line with international law on all things maritime and be able to influence future development of such laws, rules and regulations.
I know it is unpopular in some quarters that a foreigner dear to say something like this. But, at the risk of having to hide from pointy sticks and irrational accusations of being a troll, a commie, or a know nothing idiot that have no rights to have any opinion on the matter because I haven’t lived in the US,or worse, I repeat what I have said here many times before.
Now let the insults and abuse commence.
How would a “modern cabotage law” be any different than the existing Jones Act? It’s mostly just six of one vs. half a dozen of the other.
US flag ships can be repaired in foreign shipyards, and frequently are, under existing law. Only domestic trade ships, with numerous exceptions, must be US built under existing law. US flag ships in foreign trade can be built anywhere, and they are. There is no reason why US shipyards should ever be expected to competing with State owned foreign shipyards that pay low wages, have no employee healthcare costs, and do not need to adhere to any environmental rules, such as in China.
Personally, I might prefer to allow foreign built ships into the domestic trade, provided that there is a 100% import duty of foreign built ships, AND on foreign built ship equipment.
A feature of US lawmaking in Congress is that unrelated matters often get bundled together through, legislative “riders” in order to obtain enough political support for passage. The Jones Act is a case in point, it bundles cabotage, and liability for seamen’s injuries, and a few other things into one package. So what? This ain’t pretty, but it’s how it is. As someone famous once said “ there are two things that you never want to watch being made: laws and sausages.”
I certainly agree that harmonizing US licensing with STCW to the extent practical, and especially the elimination of US GRT tonnage in favor of only ITC GT tonnage is a good idea.
The US, as the world’s largest democratic country and economy, and the World’s only naval power capable of enforcing any freedom of navigation, has tremendous influence. The US needs to do nothing more to have influence. To the contrary, Americans would be a lot better off, if the US government did a lot less to gain or retain influence in foreign affairs arena. As to UNCLOS, it is largely an American creation, even though the US has not formally ratified it. I have mixed feeling about ratifying UNCLOS, but it probably does not matter much either way.
1 Like
First get your facts straight, there is no requirement that a U.S. ship be repaired at a U.S. shipyard, in fact most are done overseas, China most often (I should know I’ve dropped off and picked up many a ship in Nantong)\
Secondly, there is no requirement that U.S. Flag ships be built in U.S. yards, in fact Matson, APL and Maersk all operate U.S. Flag ships of foreign origin.
We are talking about the Jones Act here?
I’m fully aware that US flag ships not under the Jones Act can be and are foreign built and are repaired at foreign yards and that many of them are owned and managed by US subsidiaries of major foreign shipping companies.
In fact I have posted pictures of US ships at Singapore yards several times, incl. USN ships, tugs and barges.
But what has that got to do with the Jones Act, which (aside for the bit about seafarer’s rights) is strictly speaking about about domestic trade??
Don’t try to make me out to be an idiot that is not able to comprehend simple facts.
Several Jones act ships myself and friends have worked on have been repaired in foreign yards.
Then get your facts right.
3 Likes
Jones Act qualified US flag ships can, and do, obtain foreign shipyard repairs. Just ask Canadian and Mexican shipyards.
2 Likes
The above is the post you responded to, note that Tugsailor states, “I’d love to hear your practical ideas for revitalizing US flag shipping.” not, “I’d love to hear your practical ideas for revitalizing US Jones Act shipping.”
And as WT and TS have pointed out Jones Act ships can can, and most often are, repaired and overhauled in foreign yards.
Also U.S. shipyards are busy building quite a few Jones Act ships at the moment.
Is that the best you can do?
So if SOME Jones Act qualified ship OBTAIN permission to get repairs done in foreign yards, does that solve the problem of fewer and fewer ships flying the US flag?
I cannot think of ANY other flag state where an Owner have to ask for permission to do repairs anywhere he wants. If he chose to do so in a foreign or domestic yard that is not qualified, or not capable of doing the job efficiently, that is nobody’s but his own business.
They don’t need permission
You were simply wrong, deal with it.
1 Like
Jones Act vessel owners normally do NOT have to ask permission to obtain foreign repairs. They merely may have to pay some duty on foreign repairs.
Admittedly, the duty is much more favorable under NAFTA for foreign repairs in Canada or Mexico, or under CAFTA, for repairs in Colombia or the Dominican Republic, than it would be for foreign repairs in China. This is as it should be.