SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Bilow who wrote (45218)9/18/2002 8:56:33 PM
From: Ilaine  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
it wouldn't pay to have US stuff brought out of "reduced" status, driven across the ocean at 30 knots (and high fuel and labor expenses) and then driven back, when the same job can be done locally with fuel efficient vessels of a more appropriate capacity and cheaper labor.

Hi Carl - do you have a link for the above assertion?

My own understanding of the situation is very different. I do know it's much cheaper to use foreign flag vessels because they can be built cheaper elsewhere, don't have to comply with Coast Guard regs, the whole bit, which is why they are called "rust buckets." But the maritime lobby is very strong, for the simple reason that the law requires that DOD use American ships.

My understanding of the heirarchy is this:

1) First use US-built vessels flying US-flags.
2) Then use US-flag vessels.
3) Then use US-owned vessels flying "flags of convenience."
4) Finally, use foreign flag vessels owned by only approved ally nationals.
5) There is no #5.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News