Wow - MARAD Chief - strong words on the jones act

The one thing I don’t understand is why the Europeans are so hostile to the Jones Act? It’s not like we have many ships and shipyards left to protect. Plus many EU countries have cabotage laws.

Plus we’ve been handing out waivers like candy the last ten years. Plus the fact we have rather liberal policies offshore (e.g. reflagging all seismic vessels and continued visa waivers offshore).

Not to mention the fact wwe have completely deregulated cruise ships (apart from Hawaii).

so why all the hostility??

(I asked a couple of Brits this question and they din’t have any good answer. All were quick to point the finger at Bush but dropped the argument knee I pointed out how Bush was no friend to the act and the fact that this hostility predates Bush.)

[QUOTE=tugsailor;168510]It’s typical of Europeans to “forget” that the U.S. Ever did anything of significance for them. We financed all of them during the war. Finland is the only country that repaid its war debts to the U.S. After the war, we paid substantial sums to help rebuild Europe. NATO is a one way alliance in which the U.S. has guaranteed European security and freedom for 70 years without getting much support in return.

Without the U.S., all of Europe would have been under German rule by 1945. Without the U.S., from the 1945 through the present, most of Europe would have fallen under Russian rule.

But of course, the U.S. did nothing for Europe, it was only the Norwegian Merchant Navy that defeated Hitler, and held off the Russians for the last 70 years.[/QUOTE]

Sorry to burst your bubble but your memory is almost as bad as the Brits’ :wink:

The US has worked to hold off both the Germans and Communists since 1917 (Not 1945!).

1917 is too far back for me. I’m not that old.

Some of my family did not wait for the U.S. to get into the war. They went to Europe with Canadian Forces in 1939. Then again, some of the family didn’t come to America from Europe until after the war.

An uncle in the U.S. Merchant Marine had one ship torpedoed out from under him and he made port in France on another ship with a big hole through the side.

Without the U.S. Merchant Marine, the Norwegians (except those that came to America) would all be speaking German or Russian today.

[QUOTE=tugsailor;168518]1917 is too far back for me. I’m not that old.

Some of my family did not wait for the U.S. to get into the war. They went to Europe with Canadian Forces in 1939. Then again, some of the family didn’t come to America from Europe until after the war.

An uncle in the U.S. Merchant Marine had one ship torpedoed out from under him and he made port in France on another ship with a big hole through the side.

Without the U.S. Merchant Marine, the Norwegians (except those that came to America) would all be speaking German or Russian today.[/QUOTE]

Fair enough but is March 2015 too far back for you? Because that’s the date of the lastest British debt payment from WW1! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30306579

(And these are private bond payments, I believe some WW1 debt to the US is still outstanding.)

I’m in London without my external hard drove but I saved a financial document that showed US debt. When was the last time the US was debt free? 1917! I don’t remember the details but the document showed that much of our currnet debt can be traced to our myriad of efforts to stabilize Europe since 1917.

And what Chip said was MARAD’s biggest problem today was difficulty accessing capital for long term projects. Why can’t the government access capital? Because congress wants to reduce our debt.

Wait, does’t MARAD have it’s own money? Nope and I’ll let Mastoid explain why: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/01/federal-loans-bank-of-america-113920?o=0

P.S. if you still don’t think 1917 matter let’s stick to today… what are European nations fighting amongst each other about this month? Who is paying the cost of refugees! And how many European refugees via Ellis Island has the US supported, trained and assimilated since 1917? And who spent Trillions trying to stabilize the iraq in an attempt to prevent a militant organization like ISIS from destabilizing the region? And did European help or hinder those efforts?

And when did the middle east first start to destabilize? according to the British the problem can be traced back to… ding ding… 1917: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25299553

I don’t really care about ISIS and global threats in the context of this thread but I do very much care about the date 1917 because the 1920 Jones Act was first discussed in congress when? In 1917!!! That date is important.

Why is 1917 important? Because it was the year America first realized it needed to support Europe… And to support Europe you need ships!!

Therefor the whole point of the Jones Act, the reason it was written, was not to protect your job… it was written specifically to help Europe. And it has gone unchanged not because it helps you find a job but because it has served (effectively!) to protect Europe since 1917.

This is long winded but I wanted to provide context to my question… Why do Brits get pissy about the Jones Act? More specifically, why do they get pissy about an act specifically written to help them!?

[QUOTE=lm1883;168523]It comes from the corporate level. It means billions in revenue and elevated share prices. It is all about money, the primary driver of the industry.[/QUOTE]

ok, I can see how the act will cost the US TAX PAYER tens of millions of dollars… but please explain how repealing it would increase British corporate profits by billions with B.

If the US offshore industry and US cruise industry where protected by the Jones Act then I could maybe see your point as those are multi-billon dollar money segments. But the jones act does’t protect many of them… it protect domestic shipping which generates much less revenue.

And let’s not forget that we are the country that invented the concept of modern open registries. And why did we invent them?
To help the British!
https://www.register-iri.com/index.cfm?action=page&page=158

[QUOTE=tugsailor;168510]It’s typical of Europeans to “forget” that the U.S. Ever did anything of significance for them. We financed all of them during the war. Finland is the only country that repaid its war debts to the U.S. After the war, we paid substantial sums to help rebuild Europe. NATO is a one way alliance in which the U.S. has guaranteed European security and freedom for 70 years without getting much support in return.

Without the U.S., all of Europe would have been under German rule by 1945. Without the U.S., from the 1945 through the present, most of Europe would have fallen under Russian rule.

But of course, the U.S. did nothing for Europe, it was only the Norwegian Merchant Navy that defeated Hitler, and held off the Russians for the last 70 years.[/QUOTE]

And how did that happen? You do know that Finland fought on the side of Nazi-Germany during World War II?

I love how you go all high and mighty on the biggest money grab in world history. USA is still making money on the industrial military complex.

And what debt do Norway owe USA? Need numbers and a source.

[QUOTE=tugsailor;168510]

Without the U.S., all of Europe would have been under German rule by 1945. Without the U.S., from the 1945 through the present, most of Europe would have fallen under Russian rule.[/QUOTE]

Without the U.S. Stalin would be nothing but a footnote, millions of Russians would have been spared, and America could have spent its treasury on something besides fattening the “defense” industry and generations of political parasites who fattened off the “cold war” and its current spinoffs.

[QUOTE=john;168524]

Therefor the whole point of the Jones Act, the reason it was written, was not to protect your job… it was written specifically to help Europe. And it has gone unchanged not because it helps you find a job but because it has served (effectively!) to protect Europe since 1917.

This is long winded but I wanted to provide context to my question… Why do Brits get pissy about the Jones Act? More specifically, why do they get pissy about an act specifically written to help them!?[/QUOTE]

WTF???

The Merchant Marine Act of 1920 is a cabotage law, it prevents any ship other than one flying an American flag from trading between American ports. How in the world is that supposed to “help” Europeans?

From what evil fate is the Act protecting Europeans pray tell?

" You do know that Finland fought on the side of Nazi-Germany during World War II?"

No I don’t. The Finns were “co-belligerents” against Stalin’s Russia, not allies with the Nazis. There’s a difference. And the Finns had a decent excuse for it anyway. Read up on the “The Winter War”.

[QUOTE=john;168527]ok, I can see how the act will cost the US TAX PAYER tens of millions of dollars… but please explain how repealing it would increase British corporate profits by billions with B.

If the US offshore industry and US cruise industry where protected by the Jones Act then I could maybe see your point as those are multi-billon dollar money segments. But the jones act does’t protect many of them… it protect domestic shipping which generates much less revenue.[/QUOTE]

I don’t know necessarily if its even primarily European-driven but I would think foreign business interests want it gone badly. The aviation industry might be a good analogy, there is something akin to cabotage in domestic routes. I understand big foreign airlines (notably Emirates) is pushing hard to break the US domestic market. I’m sure Ryanair would love a piece of us too.

[QUOTE=Hove2;168546] The aviation industry might be a good analogy, there is something akin to cabotage in domestic routes. [/QUOTE]

If MARAD had the balls to treat shipping like the airline industry there would be very few if any FoC ships allowed anywhere near US waters.

[QUOTE=Steamer;168548]If MARAD had the balls to treat shipping like the airline industry there would be very few if any FoC ships allowed anywhere near US waters.[/QUOTE]

When Donald Trump becomes president he can nominate Max Hardberger to be Maritime Administrator and FoC ships will be everywhere! Mind you, not that Trump will be Pres but you can just imagine his support of the Act? His entire agenda will be Profits Uber Alles!

[QUOTE=Steamer;168548]If MARAD had the balls to treat shipping like the airline industry there would be very few if any FoC ships allowed anywhere near US waters.[/QUOTE]

That is so true.

[QUOTE=tugsailor;168493]Actually, the Canadians are not only nice about it, but they usually look the other way too.

The Canadians were very easy until 911 and all the oppressive Homeland Security horseshit that the US started subjecting them to. We have become a bully bad neighbor for no reason, and they have just started to give us a bit of our own medicine.

It does irk me that the US is so open to Canadians who want to live and work here, both legally or illegally, but that the Canadians make it so unnecessarily hard for an American to go the other way.[/QUOTE]

Kind of like our southern border. . . .

[QUOTE=lm1883;168552]It is globally driven. Repealing the jones act is the easiest way to open the door to remove or modify all types of “protectionism” in the worlds largest market. First ships to set legal precedent, then aviation, then rail, etc…

Think about how shipping stocks would trade if there was an announcement that the U.S. Domestic market would be open to everyone. What would KLMs stock look like if it announced a U.S. Domestic service. Maybe only a couple percent, but over years that adds up.

Keep an eye on the Trade In Service Agreement (TISA) that is being negotiated as we write this. There are rumors that these types of domestic protections will be degraded or removed.[/QUOTE]

I agree. We think in terms of the United States and Europe as separate places with differant interests but the big money guys just see the borders and governments as a nuisance. Return on captial is like a force of nature.

klm’s stock would maybe go up, but imagine what would happen to domestic airlines? Just moving money from money.

[QUOTE=Steamer;168535]WTF???

The Merchant Marine Act of 1920 is a cabotage law, it prevents any ship other than one flying an American flag from trading between American ports. How in the world is that supposed to “help” Europeans?

From what evil fate is the Act protecting Europeans pray tell?[/QUOTE]

Did you even read my post?

you can certainly disagree with my theory but I did already answer those two questions.

[QUOTE=lm1883;168552]It is globally driven. Repealing the jones act is the easiest way to open the door to remove or modify all types of “protectionism” in the worlds largest market. First ships to set legal precedent, then aviation, then rail, etc…

Think about how shipping stocks would trade if there was an announcement that the U.S. Domestic market would be open to everyone. What would KLMs stock look like if it announced a U.S. Domestic service. Maybe only a couple percent, but over years that adds up.

Keep an eye on the Trade In Service Agreement (TISA) that is being negotiated as we write this. There are rumors that these types of domestic protections will be degraded or removed.[/QUOTE]

That makes sense.

Thank you for answering the question!

Yes, and I read it literally as well as figuratively. We did not provide a cabotage law in order to ensure there was an American deep sea fleet to play guardian angel to Europeans. We did it to protect our own interests from annihilation through economic aggression by foreign flag shipowners.

you can certainly disagree with my theory but I did already answer those two questions.

I completely disagree with the theory and don’t feel the questions were answered. Verbiage to support a flawed thesis is not an answer, it is the rationalization of an incorrect assumption. The “Jones Act” is a cabotage act intended to defend a critical American industry from foreign predators.