5 ms·

> There was a rule in the Port of Los Angeles saying you could only stack shipping containers two containers high. This is incorrect. There was a zoning rule w

> There was a rule in the Port of Los Angeles saying you could only stack shipping containers two containers high. This is incorrect. There was a zoning rule which affected truck yards in Long Beach and Los Angeles. Truck yards. Not the port itself. As stated in the linked tweets actually. But if you don't believe that you can just google an image of the Port of Los Angeles from let's say 2019 and count how high the container piles go. Here is a randomly selected image from 2019 where 5 high piles can be clearly counted: https://www.joc.com/sites/default/files/field_feature_image/Port%20of%20Los%20Angeles%20trucks%20Jan.%202019%20FIT.jpg https://www.joc.com/sites/default/files/field_feature_image/... Accuracy is important. I'm not an expert on logistics, or zoning laws. But how could I trust the article's author when they clearly unable to parse their own sources? > Normally one would settle this by changing prices, but for various reasons we won’t get into price mechanisms aren’t working properly to fix supply shortages. It's nice that the article is not going into that. Instead it hammers on that politicians regulate where and how many containers can you plop down. That is not the real issue. If you are moving containers into an area, and you are not moving an equal amount out then you are going to run out of space to store the containers. It is that simple. You can tweak rules to make a bit more space, for example by stacking them higher in the truck yards. But the real question is: why are the people who own these containers incentivised to move them back to where they want them to be filled? If you solve that the problem solves itself. If you can't solve that piles of containers will fill up what little more space you won by tweaking. So the very point the article decides to "not go into" is the only one worth going into.

daveslash 5y ago
I agree with everything you said. Anecdote: I was driving into San Pedro in 2019, and I didn't have a smart phone at the time (so no map/gps). I took the wrong exit off of the 710 and ended up on Terminal Island. That was the most visually overwhelming place I have ever been... the scale of the ships, the height of the stacked containers (more than 2), the abundance of trains... the cranes... visually, overwhelming. And then there was all the road work, construction, detours, one-ways down wrong-way streets.... I was a hell of a morning as I tried to get to my presentation....
jlkuester7 5y ago
> is the only one worth going into Sure, when your critical system goes down an RCA is hugely important and ultimately you have to apply a fix that addresses the core issue to avoid it happening again in the future. But, at the time that the system is actually down it seems like the most important first step (once you understand the problem) is to get the system running again ASAP. This can give you the runway to fix the actual problem.
- gkop 5y ago
  Counterpoint, sometimes it's better to let the system burn, or else the root cause will never be addressed. Treating the symptoms can take the pressure off solving the root cause.
  - hbosch 5y ago
    Correct! If we simply let the person die of cancer, we can properly investigate the tumor when they are dead.
    - gkop 5y ago
      I should have given more context. In cases where incentives are deeply, structurally misaligned, and it will take heroic effort and significant luck to yield an order of magnitude improvement over the status quo, we should consider "letting it burn" as an option, and recognize the total cost of treating the symptoms. The global logistics quagmire may be a candidate for nuclear-ish options. Agree with you on the cancer patient scenario.
      - labster 5y ago
        Let the global supply chain burn? By Jove, let’s have a great depression!
        gkop 5y ago
        Let the containers on the streets piss people off to build pressure to align incentives, rather than prolonging the problem with a temporary stacking improvement. This is just a tool in our toolbox that we should not ignore, I'm not saying it's the right tool. But there is a cost of papering over the root cause, that's not free. BTW I don't live in LA/Long Beach. I recognize that LA doesn't deserve the quality of life degradation, that's an externality. We have tools to resolve externalities. I could imagine living in an affected neighborhood in LA and being super grateful for the container stacking "quick fix".
dmingod666 5y ago
Yea, that stood out to me too the stacking limit was not at the port..
lowbloodsugar 5y ago
Indeed. Given the "balance" of trade, surely most of the empty containers need to go back on a ship so China can fill them up again? The problem is not the size of the buffer but the fact that we aren't emptying the buffer.
elzbardico 5y ago
Ok, a fair point. But in the end is the same thing: stupid public worker bureaucrats exerting their petty, ignorant power like the Gods they think they are.
- mek6800d2 5y ago
 Unrelated to the trailer issue, but everyday we should thank our lucky stars that there's no such thing as "stupid private sector bureaucrats exerting their petty, ignorant power like the Gods they think they are."
 - ncmncm 5y ago
 You appear to be unfamiliar with the phenomenon of oil companies. Or power utilities. PGE is considered directly responsible for >$40B in fire damage in California.
 - no-s 5y ago
 PGE is considered directly responsible for >$40B in fire damage in California. That (officially sanctioned) conclusion was in complete disregard of the state and federal gov’t contribution. But I would agree with you that it’s an example of similar phenomena. Probably not for the same reasons. IMHO regulation, the phenomena of regulatory capture, and the implementation of regulatory compliance bureaucracy within PG&E resulted in private sector bureaucrats drunk on power imposing government-supported misfeasance with unintended consequence...With a organization like PG&E it’s difficult to discern the boundary between the state and the corporation. Modern government enthusiasts dream of ways to impose more perfect order using the power of government, not realizing the emergent imperfection is a consequence of such aggrandizement.
 - ncmncm 5y ago
 Regulatory capture operates to eliminate the power of government to enforce responsible behavior in regulated industries. Pretending otherwise is libertarian fantasy absolutely opposite to the objective facts.

daveslash 5y ago

I agree with everything you said. Anecdote: I was driving into San Pedro in 2019, and I didn't have a smart phone at the time (so no map/gps). I took the wrong exit off of the 710 and ended up on Terminal Island. That was the most visually overwhelming place I have ever been... the scale of the ships, the height of the stacked containers (more than 2), the abundance of trains... the cranes... visually, overwhelming. And then there was all the road work, construction, detours, one-ways down wrong-way streets.... I was a hell of a morning as I tried to get to my presentation....

jlkuester7 5y ago

> is the only one worth going into Sure, when your critical system goes down an RCA is hugely important and ultimately you have to apply a fix that addresses the core issue to avoid it happening again in the future. But, at the time that the system is actually down it seems like the most important first step (once you understand the problem) is to get the system running again ASAP. This can give you the runway to fix the actual problem.

gkop 5y ago
Counterpoint, sometimes it's better to let the system burn, or else the root cause will never be addressed. Treating the symptoms can take the pressure off solving the root cause.
- hbosch 5y ago
  Correct! If we simply let the person die of cancer, we can properly investigate the tumor when they are dead.
  - gkop 5y ago
    I should have given more context. In cases where incentives are deeply, structurally misaligned, and it will take heroic effort and significant luck to yield an order of magnitude improvement over the status quo, we should consider "letting it burn" as an option, and recognize the total cost of treating the symptoms. The global logistics quagmire may be a candidate for nuclear-ish options. Agree with you on the cancer patient scenario.
    - labster 5y ago
      Let the global supply chain burn? By Jove, let’s have a great depression!
      - gkop 5y ago
        Let the containers on the streets piss people off to build pressure to align incentives, rather than prolonging the problem with a temporary stacking improvement. This is just a tool in our toolbox that we should not ignore, I'm not saying it's the right tool. But there is a cost of papering over the root cause, that's not free. BTW I don't live in LA/Long Beach. I recognize that LA doesn't deserve the quality of life degradation, that's an externality. We have tools to resolve externalities. I could imagine living in an affected neighborhood in LA and being super grateful for the container stacking "quick fix".

dmingod666 5y ago

Yea, that stood out to me too the stacking limit was not at the port..

lowbloodsugar 5y ago

Indeed. Given the "balance" of trade, surely most of the empty containers need to go back on a ship so China can fill them up again? The problem is not the size of the buffer but the fact that we aren't emptying the buffer.

elzbardico 5y ago

Ok, a fair point. But in the end is the same thing: stupid public worker bureaucrats exerting their petty, ignorant power like the Gods they think they are.

mek6800d2 5y ago
Unrelated to the trailer issue, but everyday we should thank our lucky stars that there's no such thing as "stupid private sector bureaucrats exerting their petty, ignorant power like the Gods they think they are."
- ncmncm 5y ago
 You appear to be unfamiliar with the phenomenon of oil companies. Or power utilities. PGE is considered directly responsible for >$40B in fire damage in California.
 - no-s 5y ago
 PGE is considered directly responsible for >$40B in fire damage in California. That (officially sanctioned) conclusion was in complete disregard of the state and federal gov’t contribution. But I would agree with you that it’s an example of similar phenomena. Probably not for the same reasons. IMHO regulation, the phenomena of regulatory capture, and the implementation of regulatory compliance bureaucracy within PG&E resulted in private sector bureaucrats drunk on power imposing government-supported misfeasance with unintended consequence...With a organization like PG&E it’s difficult to discern the boundary between the state and the corporation. Modern government enthusiasts dream of ways to impose more perfect order using the power of government, not realizing the emergent imperfection is a consequence of such aggrandizement.
 - ncmncm 5y ago
 Regulatory capture operates to eliminate the power of government to enforce responsible behavior in regulated industries. Pretending otherwise is libertarian fantasy absolutely opposite to the objective facts.