8 ms·

'We Currently Have No Container Ships,' Seattle Port Says

232 points by pseudolus 2y ago

ljf 2y ago
Looks like this needs updating now https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chinese-cargo-seattle-tariffs/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chinese-cargo-seattle-tari...
- BJones12 2y ago
  No, the original claim was "as of April 29, 2025", which was false and will always be false. Perhaps they should make another page for the newest claims. But again, the situation is very different than this article's headline.
- tokai 2y ago
  Seems like they are debunking that port is empty, while the article of this thread states that there are no container ships. Lots of cargo isn't moved by container ships.
- kristjansson 2y ago
  > In fact, the Northwest Seaport Alliance … said it was so far seeing more vessels call into port in 2025 than in 2024, with three more calls in the first quarter of 2025 than during the same period in 2024. > However, the ships calling into port were arriving with unpredictable volumes of cargo — sometimes 30% less than anticipated And Snopes felt comfortable rating “mostly false” to the top level claim? I get that they’re trying to navigating treacherous waters, but “there’s still ships, they’re just 1/3 empty” is as much support for the top level claim as it is contradiction
  - echoangle 2y ago
    Not really, the claim was „the port is empty“, not „the ships arriving are empty“. If there are still ships arriving, the claim is false.
    - kristjansson 2y ago
      Most of what comprises a port is infrastructure for handling containers and bulk cargo. If cargo volumes are down, some fraction of that infrastructure is disused, or used below its capacity. That a ship was at berth is cold comfort to the longshoremen, truck drivers, etc. who expected to work that cargo, nevermind to the people that expected to, y’know, purchase and consume those goods. Is 30% underutilized / partially disused tantamount to empty? Maybe not. But it’s in the ballpark in a way the snopes rating undersells.
      - lurk2 2y ago
        > But it’s in the ballpark It is not remotely in the ballpark. The word “empty” is not understood to mean “70% full” anywhere in the English-speaking world.
        michaelt 2y ago
        There are websites that provide tracking for a lot of ships. For comparison here's Tilbury, near London in the UK: https://www.vesselfinder.com/?p=GBTIL001 https://www.vesselfinder.com/?p=GBTIL001 you'll note that big cargo vessels are shown in yellow. And here's the port of Seattle: https://www.vesselfinder.com/?p=USSEA001 https://www.vesselfinder.com/?p=USSEA001 You'll note a distinct lack of yellow. If you zoom out a bit you can find some 'bulk carriers' but those aren't container ships. So when the article quotes the Seattle port commissioner who says "we currently have no container ships at berth" that might be literally true right now at that specific port. Other US ports seem to be doing better - Perhaps Seattle is badly located or expensive, and has taken a disproportionate fraction of the 30% drop in volumes? There are certainly larger ports on the same coast https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Top_container_ports_by_TEUs.webp https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Top_container_ports_...
        kristjansson 2y ago
        One sets off for a morning drive on Thanksgiving. Upon entering the freeway, they find the normally traffic-congested road smooth and free-flowing. The journey takes a little more than half the time it usually would. They exclaim "Wow, the roads are empty this morning!" I'm playing a bit of devils advocate, but it's not inconsistent to observe a typically congested resource X operating at a fraction of its capacity, and note the observation with "wow, X is _empty_".
  - lowbloodsugar 2y ago
    Snopes has been pwnd. It now adheres to the standard of literal truth with a political bias. So if someone posts “Bernie Sanders has 30,000 at a rally” (true) but the image is of a different (also true) rally but on a different date, then Snopes just says “it’s false”. Not “true, but the image is wrong”. Not informative, like “Bernie did have 30,000 people attend but this image is from XYZ”. Just says FALSE! Same here.
    - mikem170 2y ago
      They've always seemed informative and do a good job of showing their sources. How big a deal is the single-word true/false judgement for an ambiguous claim if all the relevant details are summarized?
      - lowbloodsugar 1y ago
        They weren’t.
        mikem170 1y ago
        Is this [0] the Snopes article you were talking about, on the Bernie Sander rally? They rate it "mostly true" and in the summary mentioned the true attendance and the false photo, just like you said they should have. I don't get what you are saying. They seem on the ball. [0] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/27000-people-came-to-a-bernie-sanders-rally-in-california/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/27000-people-came-to-a-ber...
  - mtillman 2y ago
    Perfect use of treacherous waters. Kudos.
  - lurk2 2y ago
    If I drink 30% of a glass of water, is the glass of water empty?
    - plopz 2y ago
      its closer to empty than before you drank
    - Retric 2y ago
      These aren’t static systems. Keep removing 1 cup of water and add 2/3 cups and eventually it goes to zero. For a port that very well may be sending people home early on an ‘empty’ port. Even if tomorrow brings in new ships for now it looks like a ghost town. And then at one port on one day zero cargo ships showed up.
      - lurk2 2y ago
        > These aren’t static systems. That is irrelevant.
    - gamblor956 2y ago
      No, but if the claim is that the glass no longer has any boba it's irrelevant how much liquid you drink. The specific claim was that the port no longer had any container ships on that specific day. And that claim was true. Yes, there were other ships in the port. But that's irrelevant. A container ship is a specific kind of cargo ship used for international cargo shipments. In an article about international shipments, that distinctions matters.
    - ok_dad 2y ago
      If I drink 30% less water overall, I’d be pretty unhealthy.
      - lurk2 2y ago
        That is irrelevant. The question was weather or not the ports can be considered empty if some ships are up to 30% empty, which is not the case. Emptiness can be more encompassing than 0% (there is still some residual water in an “empty” glass of water), but it isn’t so expansive as to range from >0% to 70%.
  - anigbrowl 2y ago
    Not the first time their headline has been at odds with their content. I've never really been a fan of this particular outlet, even in their early days I found their self-absorbed writing style insufferable. They strike me as pedantic rather than informative.
- danesparza 2y ago
  The slopes article was about a claim in April. This article was written in May, and directly quotes Seattle port commissioner Ryan Calkins.
- TheBozzCL 2y ago
  Absolutely off-topic, but I started browsing Snopes’ tracking consent options and they use an insane amount of vendors. It took me longer to scroll through the list than reading the article itself.
snozolli 2y ago
I find it odd that recent articles are always about the Port of Seattle. From a quick Google search, it looks like the busiest US ports are Los Angeles, Long Beach, Port of New York, Port of Savannah, then Port of Seattle. As of 2018, the Port of Los Angeles alone was almost 3x busier than the Port of Seattle. Not that it isn't worth noting, but I'm much more interested in overall volume across all of the nation's ports, and especially the West Coast ports.
- tokai 2y ago
  I don't follow you. You can find numerous articles about cargo rates falling for those ports as well.
  - snozolli 2y ago
    I don't follow you What's not to follow? Numerous articles have been published with sensational headlines like "the Port of Seattle is empty". It's the smallest port on the West Coast. As others have posted, LA is down 35%. That's useful information, not "this much smaller port is empty!"
- marcosdumay 2y ago
  I have been looking for an explanation to the US empty ports news. The best one I came with is that ships have been switching their destination ports to some that they could reach before the tariffs or some that have available tariff-free storage where the cargo can stay until Trump backpedals. The total cargo volume seems to be falling only now, what still may be just noise.
  - foobarian 2y ago
    Right, be interesting to see if the departure volume also dropped or how long it lags behind arrivals.
  - gamblor956 2y ago
    The simple explanation is that many (but not all) exporters simply stopped exporting things in April (as those shipments would have arrived in May, after the tariffs took effect). And many of the factories overseas have cut back on production, especially of low-value goods most affected by tariffs. Smaller ports like Seattle generally handle the overflow from the bigger ports, so they're the first to be affected by the reduction in cargo traffic. Even if tariffs are reduced/eliminated, there will still be a lag of 3-6 weeks before destination-port cargo traffic picks up again, assuming that there is product overseas ready to be shipped.
BJones12 2y ago
As is tradition, I'll plug the latest episode of What's Going On With Shipping: https://youtu.be/QCyB-Ym0ryk?t=947 https://youtu.be/QCyB-Ym0ryk?t=947 (the timestamp links to the "May 2025 Estimate" chapter)
- cableshaft 2y ago
  Youtube just suggested that to me recently and it's quite an interesting channel with lots of charts and data if you're curious about this stuff.
  - mmazing 2y ago
    Yeah, it is a far better source of information than literally anywhere else I have seen for getting commentary on the tariff's actual impact on trade.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
neuroelectron 2y ago
This article first published 2 days ago. Here's one from April 30: https://www.fox13seattle.com/news/rumors-claim-seattle-ports-dead https://www.fox13seattle.com/news/rumors-claim-seattle-ports... April 29: https://www.king5.com/article/news/verify/what-we-can-verify-about-port-of-seattle-ghost-town-rumors/281-4c678f85-0987-4929-a62d-8fc27ab397b3 https://www.king5.com/article/news/verify/what-we-can-verify... April 28: https://seemorerocks.substack.com/p/port-of-seattle-empty-zero-inbound https://seemorerocks.substack.com/p/port-of-seattle-empty-ze... April 27: https://mishtalk.com/economics/shipping-collapse-port-workers-and-truckers-wait-for-the-ships-to-come-in/ https://mishtalk.com/economics/shipping-collapse-port-worker... April 25: https://www.seattletimes.com/business/tariff-tit-for-tat-has-seattle-waiting-for-the-ships-to-come-in/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/tariff-tit-for-tat-has... Seattle/Tacoma Seaport schedule: https://www.nwseaportalliance.com/cargo-operations/vessel-schedules-and-calendar https://www.nwseaportalliance.com/cargo-operations/vessel-sc... This article from Dec, '24 says port volume is expected to be lower than pandemic levels until 2029. A lot of chatter around the issue centers on local politics and leaders: https://www.postalley.org/2024/12/26/seattles-port-faces-a-cargo-slump/ https://www.postalley.org/2024/12/26/seattles-port-faces-a-c...
- m3047 2y ago
  A chunk of the Post Alley article is spent on the observation that a single stevedoring company controls operations at all terminals in Seattle, but not in Tacoma; yet they're both part of the same port alliance.
mattskr 2y ago
I've been watching What's Going on With Shipping (https://www.youtube.com/@wgowshipping https://www.youtube.com/@wgowshipping). He's a professor and a former merchant mariner. More importantly, he's super sober about the facts of the situation and frankly has a better overall understanding of logistics than a random journalist. I'm tired of the sensationalism of every damn thing, and at least this guy's channel gives a more realistic perspective. Highly recommend watching his stuff if "shipping" is your new sudden "expertise" because it's the hot new thing the media cycle wants you to focus on.
- danesparza 2y ago
  I've been watching that channel, too. Good stuff. But calling this "a random journalist" when the article directly quotes Seattle port commissioner Ryan Calkins is minimizing the truth. From the article: "I can see it right over my shoulder here, I'm looking out at the Port of Seattle right now, and we currently have no container ships at berth," Seattle port commissioner Ryan Calkins told CNN on Wednesday. "That happens every once in a while at normal times, but it's pretty rare," he added. "And so to see it tonight is I think a stark reminder that the impacts of the tariffs have real implications."
  - firesteelrain 2y ago
    "That happens every once in a while..." Are we looking at this moment as one of those times? It sounds like he is unsure if it is truly tariff impacts or not if he has seen it before.
    - refulgentis 2y ago
      Idk the whole discussion is hard for me to parse. - Any one-off data point could be just random decrease or tariff impacts and we do not have a forward-looking time machine to accumulate more data - It doesn't really shed any light at all if volumes are less or more: both outcomes can be spun as a success (if they're less, great, American Juche continues unimpeded, if they're more, great, then we just debate if the manufacturers ("China") are "paying for" the tariffs by decreasing list prices to the importer enough that the importer can maintain the same price for customers) ("China" cannot literally pay for the tariffs, they are paid for by the US company or individual accepting the shipment from the dock) It's sort of like if it was February 2020, Wuhan was overrun and Italy was exploding, and people spent a lot of time in the nuances of if the US double digit case was up more this week than it was last week or two weeks ago
ncr100 2y ago
[flagged]
- electrondood 2y ago
  And then the courts are like "no, you don't get to do that." What kind of master negotiator creates a deadline that only applies to himself?
  - 9283409232 2y ago
    Trump has been ignoring the courts. Why would he stop now?
    - mmazing 2y ago
      He found the loophole that courts hate!
    - daemin 2y ago
      Trump can afford to do that because the highest court in the land said anything he does as President in official duties he cannot be tried for. So now he doesn't care what any court says.
      - throwawayqqq11 2y ago
        I guess in his mind immunity does imply neglect of court rulings. Fun times ahead when he is no longer president (hopefully).
perihelions 2y ago
Related thread, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43844708 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43844708 ("Port of Los Angeles says shipping volume will plummet 35% next week (cnbc.com)" — 657 comments)
shepherdjerred 2y ago
> "That happens every once in a while at normal times, but it's pretty rare,"
banku_brougham 2y ago
Huge amount of discussion in this thread neglects the idea that a massive increase in tariffs will throttle trade shipments. Its the obvious expected effect.
- fallingknife 2y ago
  That's obvious. I think the question is more one of how long will they be throttled for? Even if there was a domestic or foreign nontariffed supplier for 100% of the goods in question it would still take significant lead time for the new orders to be filled and even more for cases where capacity needs to be increased.
  - theturtletalks 2y ago
    No one knows, it’s a game of chicken. Will the suppliers eat the tariff cost if they start losing market share? Will consumers just pay the extra cost if they really need the item? If the latter happens, will a domestic company come in and undercut the international sellers?
    - pan69 2y ago
      If the suppliers decide that it's not worth the risk of letting the consumer to decide to pay the passed on tariff then there simply is no consumer choice. There needs to exist a domestic supplier to be able to fill the gap. My guess is that for many products, there simply isn't one.
      - habinero 2y ago
        Yeah, standing up a new factory will take five years and hundreds of millions of dollars. Larger businesses like Apple will cut deals. Smaller businesses will just fold.
    - lurkshark 2y ago
      The on-again-off-again of the tariffs throws another wrench in there. It would be a big gamble to start building a domestic factory right now because you don’t know if the tariffs are going to stick around long enough to make it worth it. Plus you still have the issue of tariffs on imported materials cutting away at any potential margin.
notorandit 2y ago
[flagged]
- chris_wot 2y ago
  I have Jack Karlson in my head "Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest!". Only this is not amusing. Are you feeling great yet, Americans?
lvl155 2y ago
Think you want to look at Vancouver traffic as well. I believe some companies are shipping it there and waiting it out. This admin will fold faster than a cheap $2…
- AlotOfReading 2y ago
  I wonder how long that can last. Quite a bit of Vancouver traffic diverts to Seattle and Tacoma to avoid capacity issues, and there's finite warehouse capacity to hold containers that haven't gone through customs.
  - sfifs 2y ago
    Wouldn't such capacity be relatively easy to build quickly if needed. Paved lots with a cranes?
    - AlotOfReading 2y ago
      Take a look at where Vancouver's port facilities are. They're shoved up against steep mountains, a major city, and a major suburb. That makes it some of the most expensive land in the world. You'll also need to register that land with the government to operate as a bonded warehouse and invest at least a little in security to meet the requirements. For its part, the Canadian government isn't terribly incentivized to help you acquire that land so you can explicitly avoid paying any import duties.
      - Yeul 1y ago
        The Netherlands fixed the lack of land for container and oil terminals by creating artificial land in the 1960s. If you look on Google maps you can see that the "port of Rotterdam" is actually located off the coast. Singapore and other cities followed this example.
        AlotOfReading 1y ago
        Vancouver is in a fjord. Building artificial land is expensive because the water is deep and the currents are strong. They're aware of how to do it, because Seattle's port is mostly built on top of one of the world's largest artificial islands (harbor island). The depth of the fjord is actually a strength to Vancouver, because it means they're not limited on ship draft. Seattle is.
ccorcos 2y ago
Can we talk about how many tiny/hidden x’s I had to find to read this article?!
- AStonesThrow 1y ago
  Pixel Hunt https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PixelHunt https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PixelHunt
watwut 2y ago
So, the headline is direct quote from what port director says. He The article content talks about 35 percent drop. People in this discussion here argue that article was written by bad lying journalist, because other sources say there is 35 percent drop in shipment and ports rarely have empty port. Like, ok.
hintymad 2y ago
I really hope that capitalism works this time: we bring back our key manufacturing. One may argue that toys are not key manufacturing, but I think that argument misses the point. The point is, a truly industrialized country can produce anything en mass, if needed. Without light industry, we simply can't achieve that. Worse, we become the Soviet Union, letting heavy industry break the country's back. The recent India-Pkistan conflict is a good example. During the India-Pakistan conflict on May 7, 2025, Pakistan claimed that it used a J-10C fighter jet to shoot down an Indian Rafale jet. The possible reasons below for the Rafale being shot down are quite a read. I listed some below. And I'm not sure how many people realized this: each J-10 sold for only 50M, while each Rafale sold for north of 200M. And when a dark factory in China churns out a thousand PL-15s a day like the US used to be able to do, how do we even fight that if there is indeed a war? All the technologies list below used to be the envy of China, yet now China can make them. They may not as good as the western, but good enough with cheap enough will win, right? What's even more sad is that we seemed content that we can export lots of agriculture products and raw materials to China. I thought that used to be what a colony did: Britains mandated that colonies couldn't produce advanced products and could only export raw materials. And our founding fathers fought a war so we didn't have to be a colonized country. Well, history is full of irony. Now some technical stuff about J-10 vs Rafale: Radar Performance Gap: The J-10C is equipped with the KLJ-7A active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, which uses gallium nitride (GaN) technology and includes over 1,200 T/R modules. It can detect a 5 m² target at a range of up to 220 km. In contrast, the Rafale’s RBE2-AA radar uses only 836 gallium arsenide (GaAs) modules, with a detection range of about 150 km and weaker resistance to jamming. This allows the J-10C to lock onto the Rafale first, putting the Indian aircraft at a disadvantage. Missile Range Advantage: The J-10C can carry the PL-15 ultra-long-range air-to-air missile, with a range exceeding 200 km, enabling it to engage targets from a distance. The Rafale is armed with MICA air-to-air missiles, which have a range of less than 100 km. Even when fitted with Meteor missiles, the range is only about 150 km, clearly inferior in comparison. Electronic Warfare Capability Gap: The J-10C can carry advanced electronic warfare pods such as the RKL-700A, which can disrupt the Rafale's radar and communication systems. Moreover, the J-10C operates in coordination with the ZDK-03 early warning aircraft, which can penetrate cloud cover to locate targets and transmit encrypted coordinates to the J-10C via a jam-resistant data link, enabling a “silent kill.” On the other hand, the Indian Rafale, due to its diverse sourcing and poor data link compatibility, is at a disadvantage in electronic warfare.
pella 2y ago
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-121.6/centery:48.0/zoom:8 https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-121.6/cen...
insane_dreamer 2y ago
> "And that's hundreds of jobs right here in our region and across the country," he said, adding that his port had not witnessed such a significant downturn in activity since the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. So much for "creating jobs for Americans", which is supposedly what this is all about. Shocking to me that some people actually believe Trump when he says that.
hintymad 2y ago
A funny thing is the US could easily sanction any country in the 90s because it controlled so much manufacturing. Nowadays we can’t even sanction Houthis since they can get everything from China. Judging by the port situation, soon China can sanction us, easily.
- arvigeus 2y ago
  The general idea is to restore that order, and decouple from China. The problem is such things will require serious leadership, not mafia style extortion.
  - valianteffort 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - lantry 2y ago
      It's too bad this administration is taking it's stand very incompetently, by ostracizing all our allies and smashing our govt capacity
      - throwawaymaths 2y ago
        you're right but opponents of trump would have far more ground to stand on anything if they started by saying "well we agree with XYZ that trump wants to do, let's offer other strategies he can try if what hes doing now doesnt work". that is not happening.
        cman1444 2y ago
        I think there's plenty of ground for his critics to stand on. We already had another strategy, and it was called the trans pacific partnership. Trump pulled the US out of that in his first term.
        heylook 1y ago
        Nope. Wholehearted rejection of literally every policy, executive order, layoff, lawsuit, impoundment, appointment that this technofascist wannabe tries to pull. The constitution spells out how he can accomplish his goals, and everything he's trying to do requires an act of congress, and there's been literally nothing. If he's so popular and such a visionary dealmaker, why can't he get literally any actual laws passed through a congress completely controlled by his party?
andrewstuart 2y ago
Looks to me like a mighty crash is coming. Haul in the sails.
jaybrendansmith 1y ago
why are we assuming this is just stupid trade policy? Why are we not understanding that this policy mirrors moves by historical leaders who used economic disruption and nationalism to justify consolidation of power? It follows a pattern: Create crisis > identify scapegoats > offer strongman solutions > dismantle democratic norms. Imposing drastic tariffs that severely harm the economy could create widespread instability (job losses, inflation, business closures.) He would then exploit this chaos to justify emergency powers or override normal constitutional constraints. Read your history.
- nopelynopington 1y ago
  That assumes a level of competence that Trump and his people do not possess. They're talking about some positive discussions and major trade resets with China already. None of that lends itself to setting up scapegoats. My prediction is they'll announce some great deal negotiated and a huge win for America which will in fact be double speak for just standing down the tariffs. Also, if they really did want to find a scapegoat and introduce emergency powers, they'd be manufacturing some sort of illegal alien 9/11, rather than an obviously self inflicted recession
  - jaybrendansmith 1y ago
    I truly hope you are correct. The recent drop seems to confirm Stupidity > Evil.
throwaway529573 1y ago
[dead]

232 points by pseudolus 2y ago

ljf 2y ago

Looks like this needs updating now https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chinese-cargo-seattle-tariffs/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chinese-cargo-seattle-tari...

BJones12 2y ago
No, the original claim was "as of April 29, 2025", which was false and will always be false. Perhaps they should make another page for the newest claims. But again, the situation is very different than this article's headline.
tokai 2y ago
Seems like they are debunking that port is empty, while the article of this thread states that there are no container ships. Lots of cargo isn't moved by container ships.
kristjansson 2y ago
> In fact, the Northwest Seaport Alliance … said it was so far seeing more vessels call into port in 2025 than in 2024, with three more calls in the first quarter of 2025 than during the same period in 2024. > However, the ships calling into port were arriving with unpredictable volumes of cargo — sometimes 30% less than anticipated And Snopes felt comfortable rating “mostly false” to the top level claim? I get that they’re trying to navigating treacherous waters, but “there’s still ships, they’re just 1/3 empty” is as much support for the top level claim as it is contradiction
- echoangle 2y ago
  Not really, the claim was „the port is empty“, not „the ships arriving are empty“. If there are still ships arriving, the claim is false.
  - kristjansson 2y ago
    Most of what comprises a port is infrastructure for handling containers and bulk cargo. If cargo volumes are down, some fraction of that infrastructure is disused, or used below its capacity. That a ship was at berth is cold comfort to the longshoremen, truck drivers, etc. who expected to work that cargo, nevermind to the people that expected to, y’know, purchase and consume those goods. Is 30% underutilized / partially disused tantamount to empty? Maybe not. But it’s in the ballpark in a way the snopes rating undersells.
    - lurk2 2y ago
      > But it’s in the ballpark It is not remotely in the ballpark. The word “empty” is not understood to mean “70% full” anywhere in the English-speaking world.
      - michaelt 2y ago
        There are websites that provide tracking for a lot of ships. For comparison here's Tilbury, near London in the UK: https://www.vesselfinder.com/?p=GBTIL001 https://www.vesselfinder.com/?p=GBTIL001 you'll note that big cargo vessels are shown in yellow. And here's the port of Seattle: https://www.vesselfinder.com/?p=USSEA001 https://www.vesselfinder.com/?p=USSEA001 You'll note a distinct lack of yellow. If you zoom out a bit you can find some 'bulk carriers' but those aren't container ships. So when the article quotes the Seattle port commissioner who says "we currently have no container ships at berth" that might be literally true right now at that specific port. Other US ports seem to be doing better - Perhaps Seattle is badly located or expensive, and has taken a disproportionate fraction of the 30% drop in volumes? There are certainly larger ports on the same coast https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Top_container_ports_by_TEUs.webp https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Top_container_ports_...
      - kristjansson 2y ago
        One sets off for a morning drive on Thanksgiving. Upon entering the freeway, they find the normally traffic-congested road smooth and free-flowing. The journey takes a little more than half the time it usually would. They exclaim "Wow, the roads are empty this morning!" I'm playing a bit of devils advocate, but it's not inconsistent to observe a typically congested resource X operating at a fraction of its capacity, and note the observation with "wow, X is _empty_".
- lowbloodsugar 2y ago
  Snopes has been pwnd. It now adheres to the standard of literal truth with a political bias. So if someone posts “Bernie Sanders has 30,000 at a rally” (true) but the image is of a different (also true) rally but on a different date, then Snopes just says “it’s false”. Not “true, but the image is wrong”. Not informative, like “Bernie did have 30,000 people attend but this image is from XYZ”. Just says FALSE! Same here.
  - mikem170 2y ago
    They've always seemed informative and do a good job of showing their sources. How big a deal is the single-word true/false judgement for an ambiguous claim if all the relevant details are summarized?
    - lowbloodsugar 1y ago
      They weren’t.
      - mikem170 1y ago
        Is this [0] the Snopes article you were talking about, on the Bernie Sander rally? They rate it "mostly true" and in the summary mentioned the true attendance and the false photo, just like you said they should have. I don't get what you are saying. They seem on the ball. [0] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/27000-people-came-to-a-bernie-sanders-rally-in-california/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/27000-people-came-to-a-ber...
- mtillman 2y ago
  Perfect use of treacherous waters. Kudos.
- lurk2 2y ago
  If I drink 30% of a glass of water, is the glass of water empty?
  - plopz 2y ago
    its closer to empty than before you drank
  - Retric 2y ago
    These aren’t static systems. Keep removing 1 cup of water and add 2/3 cups and eventually it goes to zero. For a port that very well may be sending people home early on an ‘empty’ port. Even if tomorrow brings in new ships for now it looks like a ghost town. And then at one port on one day zero cargo ships showed up.
    - lurk2 2y ago
      > These aren’t static systems. That is irrelevant.
  - gamblor956 2y ago
    No, but if the claim is that the glass no longer has any boba it's irrelevant how much liquid you drink. The specific claim was that the port no longer had any container ships on that specific day. And that claim was true. Yes, there were other ships in the port. But that's irrelevant. A container ship is a specific kind of cargo ship used for international cargo shipments. In an article about international shipments, that distinctions matters.
  - ok_dad 2y ago
    If I drink 30% less water overall, I’d be pretty unhealthy.
    - lurk2 2y ago
      That is irrelevant. The question was weather or not the ports can be considered empty if some ships are up to 30% empty, which is not the case. Emptiness can be more encompassing than 0% (there is still some residual water in an “empty” glass of water), but it isn’t so expansive as to range from >0% to 70%.
- anigbrowl 2y ago
  Not the first time their headline has been at odds with their content. I've never really been a fan of this particular outlet, even in their early days I found their self-absorbed writing style insufferable. They strike me as pedantic rather than informative.
danesparza 2y ago
The slopes article was about a claim in April. This article was written in May, and directly quotes Seattle port commissioner Ryan Calkins.
TheBozzCL 2y ago
Absolutely off-topic, but I started browsing Snopes’ tracking consent options and they use an insane amount of vendors. It took me longer to scroll through the list than reading the article itself.

snozolli 2y ago

I find it odd that recent articles are always about the Port of Seattle. From a quick Google search, it looks like the busiest US ports are Los Angeles, Long Beach, Port of New York, Port of Savannah, then Port of Seattle. As of 2018, the Port of Los Angeles alone was almost 3x busier than the Port of Seattle. Not that it isn't worth noting, but I'm much more interested in overall volume across all of the nation's ports, and especially the West Coast ports.

tokai 2y ago
I don't follow you. You can find numerous articles about cargo rates falling for those ports as well.
- snozolli 2y ago
  I don't follow you What's not to follow? Numerous articles have been published with sensational headlines like "the Port of Seattle is empty". It's the smallest port on the West Coast. As others have posted, LA is down 35%. That's useful information, not "this much smaller port is empty!"
marcosdumay 2y ago
I have been looking for an explanation to the US empty ports news. The best one I came with is that ships have been switching their destination ports to some that they could reach before the tariffs or some that have available tariff-free storage where the cargo can stay until Trump backpedals. The total cargo volume seems to be falling only now, what still may be just noise.
- foobarian 2y ago
  Right, be interesting to see if the departure volume also dropped or how long it lags behind arrivals.
- gamblor956 2y ago
  The simple explanation is that many (but not all) exporters simply stopped exporting things in April (as those shipments would have arrived in May, after the tariffs took effect). And many of the factories overseas have cut back on production, especially of low-value goods most affected by tariffs. Smaller ports like Seattle generally handle the overflow from the bigger ports, so they're the first to be affected by the reduction in cargo traffic. Even if tariffs are reduced/eliminated, there will still be a lag of 3-6 weeks before destination-port cargo traffic picks up again, assuming that there is product overseas ready to be shipped.

BJones12 2y ago

As is tradition, I'll plug the latest episode of What's Going On With Shipping: https://youtu.be/QCyB-Ym0ryk?t=947 https://youtu.be/QCyB-Ym0ryk?t=947 (the timestamp links to the "May 2025 Estimate" chapter)

cableshaft 2y ago
Youtube just suggested that to me recently and it's quite an interesting channel with lots of charts and data if you're curious about this stuff.
- mmazing 2y ago
  Yeah, it is a far better source of information than literally anywhere else I have seen for getting commentary on the tariff's actual impact on trade.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

neuroelectron 2y ago

This article first published 2 days ago. Here's one from April 30: https://www.fox13seattle.com/news/rumors-claim-seattle-ports-dead https://www.fox13seattle.com/news/rumors-claim-seattle-ports... April 29: https://www.king5.com/article/news/verify/what-we-can-verify-about-port-of-seattle-ghost-town-rumors/281-4c678f85-0987-4929-a62d-8fc27ab397b3 https://www.king5.com/article/news/verify/what-we-can-verify... April 28: https://seemorerocks.substack.com/p/port-of-seattle-empty-zero-inbound https://seemorerocks.substack.com/p/port-of-seattle-empty-ze... April 27: https://mishtalk.com/economics/shipping-collapse-port-workers-and-truckers-wait-for-the-ships-to-come-in/ https://mishtalk.com/economics/shipping-collapse-port-worker... April 25: https://www.seattletimes.com/business/tariff-tit-for-tat-has-seattle-waiting-for-the-ships-to-come-in/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/tariff-tit-for-tat-has... Seattle/Tacoma Seaport schedule: https://www.nwseaportalliance.com/cargo-operations/vessel-schedules-and-calendar https://www.nwseaportalliance.com/cargo-operations/vessel-sc... This article from Dec, '24 says port volume is expected to be lower than pandemic levels until 2029. A lot of chatter around the issue centers on local politics and leaders: https://www.postalley.org/2024/12/26/seattles-port-faces-a-cargo-slump/ https://www.postalley.org/2024/12/26/seattles-port-faces-a-c...

m3047 2y ago
A chunk of the Post Alley article is spent on the observation that a single stevedoring company controls operations at all terminals in Seattle, but not in Tacoma; yet they're both part of the same port alliance.

mattskr 2y ago

I've been watching What's Going on With Shipping (https://www.youtube.com/@wgowshipping https://www.youtube.com/@wgowshipping). He's a professor and a former merchant mariner. More importantly, he's super sober about the facts of the situation and frankly has a better overall understanding of logistics than a random journalist. I'm tired of the sensationalism of every damn thing, and at least this guy's channel gives a more realistic perspective. Highly recommend watching his stuff if "shipping" is your new sudden "expertise" because it's the hot new thing the media cycle wants you to focus on.

danesparza 2y ago
I've been watching that channel, too. Good stuff. But calling this "a random journalist" when the article directly quotes Seattle port commissioner Ryan Calkins is minimizing the truth. From the article: "I can see it right over my shoulder here, I'm looking out at the Port of Seattle right now, and we currently have no container ships at berth," Seattle port commissioner Ryan Calkins told CNN on Wednesday. "That happens every once in a while at normal times, but it's pretty rare," he added. "And so to see it tonight is I think a stark reminder that the impacts of the tariffs have real implications."
- firesteelrain 2y ago
  "That happens every once in a while..." Are we looking at this moment as one of those times? It sounds like he is unsure if it is truly tariff impacts or not if he has seen it before.
  - refulgentis 2y ago
    Idk the whole discussion is hard for me to parse. - Any one-off data point could be just random decrease or tariff impacts and we do not have a forward-looking time machine to accumulate more data - It doesn't really shed any light at all if volumes are less or more: both outcomes can be spun as a success (if they're less, great, American Juche continues unimpeded, if they're more, great, then we just debate if the manufacturers ("China") are "paying for" the tariffs by decreasing list prices to the importer enough that the importer can maintain the same price for customers) ("China" cannot literally pay for the tariffs, they are paid for by the US company or individual accepting the shipment from the dock) It's sort of like if it was February 2020, Wuhan was overrun and Italy was exploding, and people spent a lot of time in the nuances of if the US double digit case was up more this week than it was last week or two weeks ago

ncr100 2y ago

[flagged]

electrondood 2y ago
And then the courts are like "no, you don't get to do that." What kind of master negotiator creates a deadline that only applies to himself?
- 9283409232 2y ago
  Trump has been ignoring the courts. Why would he stop now?
  - mmazing 2y ago
    He found the loophole that courts hate!
  - daemin 2y ago
    Trump can afford to do that because the highest court in the land said anything he does as President in official duties he cannot be tried for. So now he doesn't care what any court says.
    - throwawayqqq11 2y ago
      I guess in his mind immunity does imply neglect of court rulings. Fun times ahead when he is no longer president (hopefully).

perihelions 2y ago

Related thread, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43844708 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43844708 ("Port of Los Angeles says shipping volume will plummet 35% next week (cnbc.com)" — 657 comments)

shepherdjerred 2y ago

> "That happens every once in a while at normal times, but it's pretty rare,"

banku_brougham 2y ago

Huge amount of discussion in this thread neglects the idea that a massive increase in tariffs will throttle trade shipments. Its the obvious expected effect.

fallingknife 2y ago
That's obvious. I think the question is more one of how long will they be throttled for? Even if there was a domestic or foreign nontariffed supplier for 100% of the goods in question it would still take significant lead time for the new orders to be filled and even more for cases where capacity needs to be increased.
- theturtletalks 2y ago
  No one knows, it’s a game of chicken. Will the suppliers eat the tariff cost if they start losing market share? Will consumers just pay the extra cost if they really need the item? If the latter happens, will a domestic company come in and undercut the international sellers?
  - pan69 2y ago
    If the suppliers decide that it's not worth the risk of letting the consumer to decide to pay the passed on tariff then there simply is no consumer choice. There needs to exist a domestic supplier to be able to fill the gap. My guess is that for many products, there simply isn't one.
    - habinero 2y ago
      Yeah, standing up a new factory will take five years and hundreds of millions of dollars. Larger businesses like Apple will cut deals. Smaller businesses will just fold.
  - lurkshark 2y ago
    The on-again-off-again of the tariffs throws another wrench in there. It would be a big gamble to start building a domestic factory right now because you don’t know if the tariffs are going to stick around long enough to make it worth it. Plus you still have the issue of tariffs on imported materials cutting away at any potential margin.

notorandit 2y ago

[flagged]

chris_wot 2y ago
I have Jack Karlson in my head "Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest!". Only this is not amusing. Are you feeling great yet, Americans?

lvl155 2y ago

Think you want to look at Vancouver traffic as well. I believe some companies are shipping it there and waiting it out. This admin will fold faster than a cheap $2…

AlotOfReading 2y ago
I wonder how long that can last. Quite a bit of Vancouver traffic diverts to Seattle and Tacoma to avoid capacity issues, and there's finite warehouse capacity to hold containers that haven't gone through customs.
- sfifs 2y ago
  Wouldn't such capacity be relatively easy to build quickly if needed. Paved lots with a cranes?
  - AlotOfReading 2y ago
    Take a look at where Vancouver's port facilities are. They're shoved up against steep mountains, a major city, and a major suburb. That makes it some of the most expensive land in the world. You'll also need to register that land with the government to operate as a bonded warehouse and invest at least a little in security to meet the requirements. For its part, the Canadian government isn't terribly incentivized to help you acquire that land so you can explicitly avoid paying any import duties.
    - Yeul 1y ago
      The Netherlands fixed the lack of land for container and oil terminals by creating artificial land in the 1960s. If you look on Google maps you can see that the "port of Rotterdam" is actually located off the coast. Singapore and other cities followed this example.
      - AlotOfReading 1y ago
        Vancouver is in a fjord. Building artificial land is expensive because the water is deep and the currents are strong. They're aware of how to do it, because Seattle's port is mostly built on top of one of the world's largest artificial islands (harbor island). The depth of the fjord is actually a strength to Vancouver, because it means they're not limited on ship draft. Seattle is.

ccorcos 2y ago

Can we talk about how many tiny/hidden x’s I had to find to read this article?!

AStonesThrow 1y ago
Pixel Hunt https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PixelHunt https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PixelHunt

watwut 2y ago

So, the headline is direct quote from what port director says. He The article content talks about 35 percent drop. People in this discussion here argue that article was written by bad lying journalist, because other sources say there is 35 percent drop in shipment and ports rarely have empty port. Like, ok.

hintymad 2y ago

I really hope that capitalism works this time: we bring back our key manufacturing. One may argue that toys are not key manufacturing, but I think that argument misses the point. The point is, a truly industrialized country can produce anything en mass, if needed. Without light industry, we simply can't achieve that. Worse, we become the Soviet Union, letting heavy industry break the country's back. The recent India-Pkistan conflict is a good example. During the India-Pakistan conflict on May 7, 2025, Pakistan claimed that it used a J-10C fighter jet to shoot down an Indian Rafale jet. The possible reasons below for the Rafale being shot down are quite a read. I listed some below. And I'm not sure how many people realized this: each J-10 sold for only 50M, while each Rafale sold for north of 200M. And when a dark factory in China churns out a thousand PL-15s a day like the US used to be able to do, how do we even fight that if there is indeed a war? All the technologies list below used to be the envy of China, yet now China can make them. They may not as good as the western, but good enough with cheap enough will win, right? What's even more sad is that we seemed content that we can export lots of agriculture products and raw materials to China. I thought that used to be what a colony did: Britains mandated that colonies couldn't produce advanced products and could only export raw materials. And our founding fathers fought a war so we didn't have to be a colonized country. Well, history is full of irony. Now some technical stuff about J-10 vs Rafale: Radar Performance Gap: The J-10C is equipped with the KLJ-7A active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, which uses gallium nitride (GaN) technology and includes over 1,200 T/R modules. It can detect a 5 m² target at a range of up to 220 km. In contrast, the Rafale’s RBE2-AA radar uses only 836 gallium arsenide (GaAs) modules, with a detection range of about 150 km and weaker resistance to jamming. This allows the J-10C to lock onto the Rafale first, putting the Indian aircraft at a disadvantage. Missile Range Advantage: The J-10C can carry the PL-15 ultra-long-range air-to-air missile, with a range exceeding 200 km, enabling it to engage targets from a distance. The Rafale is armed with MICA air-to-air missiles, which have a range of less than 100 km. Even when fitted with Meteor missiles, the range is only about 150 km, clearly inferior in comparison. Electronic Warfare Capability Gap: The J-10C can carry advanced electronic warfare pods such as the RKL-700A, which can disrupt the Rafale's radar and communication systems. Moreover, the J-10C operates in coordination with the ZDK-03 early warning aircraft, which can penetrate cloud cover to locate targets and transmit encrypted coordinates to the J-10C via a jam-resistant data link, enabling a “silent kill.” On the other hand, the Indian Rafale, due to its diverse sourcing and poor data link compatibility, is at a disadvantage in electronic warfare.

pella 2y ago

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-121.6/centery:48.0/zoom:8 https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-121.6/cen...

insane_dreamer 2y ago

> "And that's hundreds of jobs right here in our region and across the country," he said, adding that his port had not witnessed such a significant downturn in activity since the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. So much for "creating jobs for Americans", which is supposedly what this is all about. Shocking to me that some people actually believe Trump when he says that.

hintymad 2y ago

A funny thing is the US could easily sanction any country in the 90s because it controlled so much manufacturing. Nowadays we can’t even sanction Houthis since they can get everything from China. Judging by the port situation, soon China can sanction us, easily.

arvigeus 2y ago
The general idea is to restore that order, and decouple from China. The problem is such things will require serious leadership, not mafia style extortion.
- valianteffort 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - lantry 2y ago
    It's too bad this administration is taking it's stand very incompetently, by ostracizing all our allies and smashing our govt capacity
    - throwawaymaths 2y ago
      you're right but opponents of trump would have far more ground to stand on anything if they started by saying "well we agree with XYZ that trump wants to do, let's offer other strategies he can try if what hes doing now doesnt work". that is not happening.
      - cman1444 2y ago
        I think there's plenty of ground for his critics to stand on. We already had another strategy, and it was called the trans pacific partnership. Trump pulled the US out of that in his first term.
      - heylook 1y ago
        Nope. Wholehearted rejection of literally every policy, executive order, layoff, lawsuit, impoundment, appointment that this technofascist wannabe tries to pull. The constitution spells out how he can accomplish his goals, and everything he's trying to do requires an act of congress, and there's been literally nothing. If he's so popular and such a visionary dealmaker, why can't he get literally any actual laws passed through a congress completely controlled by his party?

andrewstuart 2y ago

Looks to me like a mighty crash is coming. Haul in the sails.

jaybrendansmith 1y ago

why are we assuming this is just stupid trade policy? Why are we not understanding that this policy mirrors moves by historical leaders who used economic disruption and nationalism to justify consolidation of power? It follows a pattern: Create crisis > identify scapegoats > offer strongman solutions > dismantle democratic norms. Imposing drastic tariffs that severely harm the economy could create widespread instability (job losses, inflation, business closures.) He would then exploit this chaos to justify emergency powers or override normal constitutional constraints. Read your history.

nopelynopington 1y ago
That assumes a level of competence that Trump and his people do not possess. They're talking about some positive discussions and major trade resets with China already. None of that lends itself to setting up scapegoats. My prediction is they'll announce some great deal negotiated and a huge win for America which will in fact be double speak for just standing down the tariffs. Also, if they really did want to find a scapegoat and introduce emergency powers, they'd be manufacturing some sort of illegal alien 9/11, rather than an obviously self inflicted recession
- jaybrendansmith 1y ago
  I truly hope you are correct. The recent drop seems to confirm Stupidity > Evil.

throwaway529573 1y ago

[dead]