If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New York Daily News)   Ship not allowed to deliver 40,000 tons of much needed road salt to New Jersey because A) The ship can't dock because of the weather, B) Nobody will unload it because of a dock worker strike, or C) The ship isn't carrying an American flag   (nydailynews.com) divider line 33
    More: Stupid, New Jersey, road salt, car drivers, U.S. flag, Egg Harbor Township  
•       •       •

9798 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Feb 2014 at 5:31 AM (22 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-02-18 12:38:42 AM
8 votes:
Okay, who here actually doesn't know what "an American-flagged ship" means and who's just playing stupid for comedic effect?

I'm asking the Daily News article writer, too.
2014-02-18 01:31:12 AM
6 votes:

mamoru: So... if they really can't/won't break this law, can't someone simply run a flag out to the ship real quick and solve the problem? Or are conditions too bad for other boats and/or helicopters to do so?


The writer has almost certainly confused flying a physical flag with the notion of a ship's flag state- the country under which a ship is registered, licensed, and regulated.

This is more likely a regulatory dispute over the ship or it's cargo not being up to US standards.
2014-02-18 01:33:44 AM
4 votes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920

Wikipedia says that this law requires goods shipped between US ports be shipped on a US-flag vessel. I'm guessing this is most likely the problem, considering that the US produces a lot of salt.
2014-02-18 06:58:11 AM
3 votes:
There was a time when the American merchant marine was second to none.  Even at the height of Pax Britannica at the end of the 19th century, the world's shipping was just as robust under the Stars and Stripes as the Union Jack.  But things changed in the late 20th century.  American merchant shipping declined significantly in the 1970s and 1980s, at the same time as the rest of American manufacturing started to disappear.

The Merchant Marine Act of 1920 - which you've seen referred to above as the "Jones Act" - was designed to protect the American merchant marine at a time immediately after World War I when Congress was concerned that the state of international shipping could potentially threaten the health of the American shipping industry (it doesn't just cover requirements about internal maritime trade; the Act covers a number of protections for individual seamen). The Act proved invaluable in the 1980s, because it was a long-standing piece of maritime law that both parties broadly supported, even the Goldwater Republicans.  If it weren't for the Act, we may have completely lost the American merchant marine industry in the 1980s when so many companies began registering their ships under Liberian or Panamanian flags (much like companies actively sought to move their corporate offices to states or countries with the lowest taxes and fewest regulations, it was sort of race to the bottom).

And even to this day, the Act has a lot of support on both sides of the aisle.  Many corporate Republicans still support the Act because it's a rare case of protectionism benefitting their donors' interests.  There  aresome conservatives out there arguing for its repeal - you'll see an article once in a blue moon out of Cato or Heritage saying we need to repeal the Jones Act in order to "remain competitive" or whatever their specious argument latches on to for a buzzword.
2014-02-18 06:31:49 AM
3 votes:
I wonder if it's that simple.  Can you temporarily re-flag a ship to fly under another country's flag without stepping on other maritime laws?  I don't think it's the actual physical flag they're talking about.

Imagine if ship's could just literally make it a "flag of convenience."   If the Captain wants special treatment when docking in the UK, he simply hoists their flag up.  When the ship returns to US waters, raise the US flag.  Somehow, I don't think that would conform to maritime law, but I'm certainly not an expert.

Just give them the goddammed waiver.


Re flagging a vessel is possible, but very expensive, and I have never heard a of a ship being re flagged to US flag.  To be US flagged, the vessel has to be built in the US, and crewed by US citizens.  The only time I have heard of vessels being re flagged were off shore barges, and even then, couldn't be used for coastal trade.  Could be wrong on that though.

Typically waivers are only granted in the case of a major disaster.  This might qualify.  Either way, the company trying to move the salt should have ensured the waiver was granted before securing the bottom.
2014-02-18 05:45:17 AM
3 votes:
My response was "well, get a waiver", but apparently they've already applied for one and are awaiting approval.

So the problem's actually already essentially solved, and the article is only written as it is because the author is  hilariously stupid and is taking "the flag the ship sails under" to mean a  literal piece of cloth attached to the ship somewhere.

// My five-year-old second cousin knows this one.  Did TFAuthor never have a pirates-vs-navy phase growing up?  Because most people pick up basic shiat like this about naval law from that.  Treasure Island and so on.
2014-02-18 07:21:26 AM
2 votes:

way south: I'm fairly certain the author is confused about the flag thing, but just in a case they aren't...Most times when things get held up over little known outdated laws, its not really about the law. It's about someone forgetting to grease the appropriate palm or someone trying to pull a political favor.


I'm sure there's corruption in the shipping/hauling industries, but this isn't exactly a "little known outdated law"; this is more like manslaughter or something; EVERYONE in maritime shipping knows this one, and not just Americans.

NJ state officials, however?  Yeah, they could be that stupid.
2014-02-18 06:05:57 AM
2 votes:

gfid: I wonder if it's that simple. Can you temporarily re-flag a ship to fly under another country's flag without stepping on other maritime laws? I don't think it's the actual physical flag they're talking about.


There are fees, inspections, and regulations to worry about.  Reflagging a ship is a bit like, but much more complex than nipping over and registering your car in a different state for a single day for some strange reason.

A state with an inspection requirement and smog check, to boot.
2014-02-18 05:56:36 AM
2 votes:

mamoru: Fubini: mamoru: So... if they really can't/won't break this law, can't someone simply run a flag out to the ship real quick and solve the problem? Or are conditions too bad for other boats and/or helicopters to do so?

The writer has almost certainly confused flying a physical flag with the notion of a ship's flag state- the country under which a ship is registered, licensed, and regulated.

This is more likely a regulatory dispute over the ship or it's cargo not being up to US standards.

Ah... that makes so much more sense. I'm not really clued-in to maritime laws.

But, you gotta admit it would be a much more Fark-worthy story if the whole situation could be resolved by someone simply dropping an American flag off on the boat. ;)


I wonder if it's that simple.  Can you temporarily re-flag a ship to fly under another country's flag without stepping on other maritime laws?  I don't think it's the actual physical flag they're talking about.

Imagine if ship's could just literally make it a "flag of convenience."   If the Captain wants special treatment when docking in the UK, he simply hoists their flag up.  When the ship returns to US waters, raise the US flag.  Somehow, I don't think that would conform to maritime law, but I'm certainly not an expert.

Just give them the goddammed waiver.
2014-02-18 05:40:09 AM
2 votes:
I'm sure Christie will weigh in on this today. Or in June he'll say he never heard anything about it.
2014-02-18 12:19:54 AM
2 votes:
So... if they really can't/won't break this law, can't someone simply run a flag out to the ship real quick and solve the problem? Or are conditions too bad for other boats and/or helicopters to do so?
2014-02-18 10:33:32 AM
1 votes:

LZeitgeist: Fissile: LZeitgeist: cirby: If it's needed that much, offload and ship by railroad.

Four hundred hopper cars at 100 tons each. Break it into two or three separate trains, send them to different parts of the state (which they were probably going to do at the Jersey docks anyway).

[boourns.dynu.net image 318x200]

Um... seems like they'd have to dock the ship somewhere before they could do that.

Or does your plan include building a railroad out to the ship, since it can't dock at a US dock? Or sailing the ship to a foreign dock and shipping by rail from there? All before the next storm comes in on Tuesday?

Didn't read the story, huh? The ship IS docked at a US port....up in Maine.  If the ship had sailed directly for Port Newark, there would be no problem.  The problem is that the ship stopped at a port up in Maine first.   Now that salt has to be unloaded in Maine and placed on US flagged ships or rail cars to get it down to Jersey.

Oh, and Drudge is a blaming this law on Obama.  Apparently Barry got into his time machine again and went back to 1920 so he could fark with Christie.

Yes, I did read the story, but admittedly I missed that it was already in Maine. Consider crow being eaten.

This begs the question - why the Hell would they load it on a foreign ship in Maine to ship to another US state?


That's what I'm wondering. Even the master of that foreign-flagged ship would have known that was a no-no.
2014-02-18 09:29:51 AM
1 votes:
This is not the first time it has snowed in NJ. This is not the first time the roads have iced over. This is simply poor planning on NJ's side, nothing more, nothing less. One day Common Sense will return to the US, however some of us will not be here to see it.
2014-02-18 08:16:46 AM
1 votes:

UNC_Samurai: There was a time when the American merchant marine was second to none.  Even at the height of Pax Britannica at the end of the 19th century, the world's shipping was just as robust under the Stars and Stripes as the Union Jack.  But things changed in the late 20th century.  American merchant shipping declined significantly in the 1970s and 1980s, at the same time as the rest of American manufacturing started to disappear.


The problem with this narrative is that US manufacturing never declined.  That's a myth, caused by two factors.  First, we became far more efficient post WW2, so less jobs were needed to produce the same value of goods.  Second, we had massive growth in other sectors, so if you look at manufacturing as a % of GDP it appears to shrink, but that's only because it wasn't growing as fast.  If you look at manufacturing in real dollars you can see that the sector has grown at a steady rate over the last century.

static2.businessinsider.com

Measured in dollars, we produce more than any other country in the world, except for China which recently passed us.  However, to produce the same amount of goods that we do, China uses over 100 million laborers, meaning our factories are over 8x as efficient.  As labor costs equalize, they will be faced with a) modernizing their plants and b) finding jobs for 90 million people, so it isn't all roses over there.

Point being, US has been and remains a powerful force in manufacturing.
2014-02-18 08:11:55 AM
1 votes:
fusillade762 [TotalFark]


CHRISTIE!

It's a federal law, but continue your derp.
2014-02-18 08:03:13 AM
1 votes:
If it's needed that much, offload and ship by railroad.

Four hundred hopper cars at 100 tons each. Break it into two or three separate trains, send them to different parts of the state (which they were probably going to do at the Jersey docks anyway).
2014-02-18 07:57:49 AM
1 votes:

SlothB77: The efficiency of big government. Just wait until these guys get a hold of health care.


Please, enlighten us with your analysis of international maritime law.
2014-02-18 07:56:55 AM
1 votes:
Here just last week and two weeks before that the south was being ridiculed for their inability to cope with winter weather which had a lot to do with lack of equipment and supplies. I have kind of a hard time getting my violin all tuned up for New Jersey.

Also, to you partisan douchebags, a 100 year old law has nothing to do with current politics. Either there are good reasons for keeping the law or it should be repealed, but if it's law then it's law. Whoever was coordinating this shipment farked up by trying to have it delivered by a vessel that couldn't legally do it.
2014-02-18 07:39:40 AM
1 votes:

Unobtanium


The issue at hand, at least in part, is one of cabotage


www.nerdyandhip.com
2014-02-18 07:34:41 AM
1 votes:

gfid: I wonder if it's that simple. Can you temporarily re-flag a ship to fly under another country's flag without stepping on other maritime laws? I don't think it's the actual physical flag they're talking about.

Imagine if ship's could just literally make it a "flag of convenience." If the Captain wants special treatment when docking in the UK, he simply hoists their flag up. When the ship returns to US waters, raise the US flag. Somehow, I don't think that would conform to maritime law, but I'm certainly not an expert.



images.amcnetworks.com
/Approves of your idea.
//And changing the name of the ship
2014-02-18 07:22:05 AM
1 votes:

KeatingFive: ReverendJasen: Yeah, god forbid we let a ship with emergency supplies dock without all the paperwork in order.  It could end civilization as we know it.

Salt. We're talking SALT here. SALT. Not emergency food, or medical supplies, or any of that. Just salt.

/"Emergency supplies". Good grief.


Don't live in a cold climate, do you?
2014-02-18 07:16:09 AM
1 votes:

Eps05: Fubini: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920

Wikipedia says that this law requires goods shipped between US ports be shipped on a US-flag vessel. I'm guessing this is most likely the problem, considering that the US produces a lot of salt.

Same line as truck driving laws that forbid non-American citizen drivers from doing a pickup and drop within the borders. No stealing your jerbs.


To be fair, there ARE some valid safety concerns with foreign-flagged vessels (and foreign trucks); shipping companies don't register supertankers in Liberia out of patriotic fervor for that grand nation.
2014-02-18 07:10:37 AM
1 votes:

UNC_Samurai: And even to this day, the Act has a lot of support on both sides of the aisle. Many corporate Republicans still support the Act because it's a rare case of protectionism benefitting their donors' interests. There aresome conservatives out there arguing for its repeal - you'll see an article once in a blue moon out of Cato or Heritage saying we need to repeal the Jones Act in order to "remain competitive" or whatever their specious argument latches on to for a buzzword.


Pure libertarians support it's repeal; conservatives tend to view it as a way to keep some ship building and crewing capabilities in the USA.
2014-02-18 07:06:39 AM
1 votes:
Can't they just go up to Canada, unload a bag of salt, and then come back down?
2014-02-18 06:50:05 AM
1 votes:

gfid: Can you temporarily re-flag a ship to fly under another country's flag without stepping on other maritime laws?


I would bet its required inspections and crew requirements aren't instantly met by a simple change of a rag on a pole.
2014-02-18 06:37:12 AM
1 votes:

dahmers love zombie: Any other situation: "OMG SOCIALEST OBAMA LETTIN NOT US-FLAGGED SHIPPS DELIVER WEFARE BABY SUPPLIES TO DEMOCRATIC STATE PORTS!  MIGHT AS WELL OPEN DOORS FOR DIRTY MUSLIMTERRRSTS

Because it's directly affecting middle and uppper-middle class white people:   OMG OBAMA WON"T  ISSUE A SIMPLE WAIVER BREAKING A US FEDERAL LAW.  WHY WON'T HE BREAK A FEDERAL LAW SO WE CAN HAVE SALT?

Fark 'em.  Six years of constantBS about every little thing he does or doesn't do.  I say -- abide by the absolute letter of the law.  Screw 'em, R OR D.


Yo, this ain't the politics tab, retard.
2014-02-18 06:28:48 AM
1 votes:
I like the pants-wetting in the other article linked in TFA.

Washington Free Beacon

Somehow this is Obama's fault.
2014-02-18 06:28:33 AM
1 votes:
So you would think that a state on the east coast, with several major international ports, would know enough to make sure the salt would be put on a ship that could make the delivery.
2014-02-18 06:25:38 AM
1 votes:

Coming on a Bicycle: Eps05: Fubini: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920

Wikipedia says that this law requires goods shipped between US ports be shipped on a US-flag vessel. I'm guessing this is most likely the problem, considering that the US produces a lot of salt.

Same line as truck driving laws that forbid non-American citizen drivers from doing a pickup and drop within the borders. No stealing your jerbs.

Or the fact the no non-American airplanes are allowed to do US-internal flights. Because nothing says 'land of free enterprise' as a good number of protective measures mixed in.


Same with cruise ships. You are not allowed to board at a US port and disembark at another US port. You can go sightsee, but you legally must get back on the ship and continue your journey.
2014-02-18 06:11:53 AM
1 votes:
2014-02-18 05:59:04 AM
1 votes:

Eps05: Fubini: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920

Wikipedia says that this law requires goods shipped between US ports be shipped on a US-flag vessel. I'm guessing this is most likely the problem, considering that the US produces a lot of salt.

Same line as truck driving laws that forbid non-American citizen drivers from doing a pickup and drop within the borders. No stealing your jerbs.


Or the fact the no non-American airplanes are allowed to do US-internal flights. Because nothing says 'land of free enterprise' as a good number of protective measures mixed in.
2014-02-18 04:43:33 AM
1 votes:

Fubini: mamoru: So... if they really can't/won't break this law, can't someone simply run a flag out to the ship real quick and solve the problem? Or are conditions too bad for other boats and/or helicopters to do so?

The writer has almost certainly confused flying a physical flag with the notion of a ship's flag state- the country under which a ship is registered, licensed, and regulated.

This is more likely a regulatory dispute over the ship or it's cargo not being up to US standards.


Ah... that makes so much more sense. I'm not really clued-in to maritime laws.

But, you gotta admit it would be a much more Fark-worthy story if the whole situation could be resolved by someone simply dropping an American flag off on the boat. ;)
2014-02-18 02:25:38 AM
1 votes:
Any other situation: "OMG SOCIALEST OBAMA LETTIN NOT US-FLAGGED SHIPPS DELIVER WEFARE BABY SUPPLIES TO DEMOCRATIC STATE PORTS!  MIGHT AS WELL OPEN DOORS FOR DIRTY MUSLIMTERRRSTS

Because it's directly affecting middle and uppper-middle class white people:   OMG OBAMA WON"T  ISSUE A SIMPLE WAIVER BREAKING A US FEDERAL LAW.  WHY WON'T HE BREAK A FEDERAL LAW SO WE CAN HAVE SALT?

Fark 'em.  Six years of constantBS about every little thing he does or doesn't do.  I say -- abide by the absolute letter of the law.  Screw 'em, R OR D.
 
Displayed 33 of 33 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report