Actually it is a lot simpler than that; The cost of a pair of shoes at Walmart is not set by what it cost to produce them, profit for the manufacturer (+ any middleman) transport cost, or any other expenses.
It is set by what Walmart thinks the consumer (aka the suckers) will accept.
2 Likes
The typical markup of retail consumer goods is about 5 to 7 times the cost to manufacture.
If it costs $5 to make something, (after all the middlemen, transport, and so forth, its probably going to retail for $25 to $35. Most of the markup is at the retail level. That’s why started stores still make money on 50% off sales. If a store is selling consumer goods for $50, they probably didn’t pay over $15 for it.
Transport from Asia to the store shelf is less than 8% of wholesale cost. It’s no more than 2% to 3% of retail cost to the consumer. Probably half of that transport cost is US stevedoring, warehousing, and trucking.
In other words, if US Government policy required 25% of US imports to be carried on US flag ships, the justifiable increase in consumer retail costs as a result would be almost nothing. That said, I don’t doubt that some retailers would use the “high cost” of transport on US ships as an excuse to price gouge, at least for awhile.
1 Like
Actually it’s even more simple still…if it’s up to businesses in a pure capitalistic model, they will choose the option that offers the highest return PERIOD. And of course that will exclude US ships and mariners in 99% of the cases.
That’s why it’s up to governments to enact policy that’s in the best interests (preferably long term best interests) of the country’s CITIZENS which in many cases won’t be in the best interests of business.
The trick is the transition…we have gotten used to cheap, disposable, CRAP and trying to convince those addicted to that model to change is tough. But we have to realize that it’s nothing but a downward spiral…quest for cheaper goods leads to loss of US based jobs and lowering of wages and importation of people who are willing to work for ever lowering wages/standard of living…what’s the endgame?
3 Likes
Love this. A way to get the ball rolling would be to allow a carrier to start their service with a foreign built ship and US mariners as long as they signed a binding agreement with a US shipyard to build the replacement vessel. I think you’d be hard pressed to get a shipper to start the process by shelling out 300M+ to build a ship first especially since they won’t see that ship for 2 years. Allow them to establish the liner service and get through the startup kinks with the foreign hull until the US bottoms can be built.
Could offer a long term charter to that carrier to alleviate their fears of never getting their ROI on that US built vessel.
This Christmas think twice about what kind of toys you buy.
What is better: over-hyped, advertised on TV, high cost plastic , battery powered , mass manufactured , stuff made in China and sold at Walmart that will be broken in a few days, or
good old fashioned wooden toys made in America by small shops and sold in local stores that will last for the next generation?
Be smart. Don’t act like a brain dead, programmed by TV, Walmart shopper wasting their welfare check on the cheapest or most trendy disposable crap made in China, that will be broken and forgotten in two weeks.
Give high quality gifts made by American craftsmen.
2 Likes
US flag ships engaged in foreign trade can be, and are, foreign built.
Only the Jones Act trade (carrying goods between US ports) must be US built.
The way to revitalize US flag shipping is to reserve a percentage of US imports and exports for US flag ships.
The best way to get rebuild the US fleet quickly at reasonable cost, is to fund the purchase and reflagging of bankrupt large foreign flag carriers that already have established service and customers in the US. Essentialy, MARAD should become a vulture investor in foreign flag shipping.
1 Like
Correct. I misread your post…I thought you proposed to require 25% carriage on US BUILT ships.
But I’d support this too. More good paying jobs for US citizens is always a good thing.
Might as well. They’ve been picking taxpayers pockets for years
Meanwhile Canada is getting its act together:
so to bring this thread back to life, if the DoD will not cease using foreign ships to carry their cargoes, why doesn’t an industry association (or better still, a group of such associations) file suit in Federal Court against the Administration just as I have hoped OMSA would file a suit to stop the legal abuses of foreign ships in the GoM? Yes, lawsuits cost money to file but there is so much evidence available to build a suit on that there will be a strong chance of victory plus just the embarrassment of putting the government in a position where it must defend their own violations will be very damaging.
One thing I hope to do starting next year is to reach out to my Congressional Representative, Rick Larsen, who is a high level member of the House Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Subcommittee in the hope he will allow me a chance to sit down with him to lay out all these abuses of the law that are taking place in the hope it might spark some action. Maybe it won’t help but just sitting here wringing hands and moaning is not doing a damned thing other than to see things get worse. I do not know how willing Larsen is to call for hearings but I do believe that John Garamendi who will take over as chairman of the subcommittee will want them so will also copy his office with what I send.
When completed, my letters will be posted here for others to comment on and maybe even join me in cosigning?
6 Likes