5 ms·
U.S. to suspend the Jones Act in a bid to curb oil prices
- Kim_Bruning 8mo agohttps://archive.ph/AKZ9G https://archive.ph/AKZ9G
- nubg 8mo agoGod's work. Page literally jumped away from me with an ad/paywall.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 8mo agoIt takes Congress to repeal a law. This is likely only temporary to not enforce it.
- brewcejener 8mo agoAbsolutely wonderful news for Hawaii.
- aeternum 8mo agoAmazing, never thought it would happen. Ridiculous to have laws that unfairly protect dead industries. Dockworkers next please so we can have automated container unloading.
- htrp 8mo agowhat do you mean here? are dock workers legally protected from automarion?
- levinb 8mo agoThe ILWU controls labor at all west coast ports, including LALB, which is responsible for a majority of consumer imports from the Pacific. It has bargained effectively to block developing container handling automation systems.
- BenFranklin100 8mo ago“Bargained effectively”? Union boss Harold Daggett extorted the US public by threatening to “cripple the US economy’ if his demands were not met.
- Moomoomoo309 8mo agoThat is the leverage unions have. Do you expect them not to use it? The union isn't there to protect the economy, it's to protect its members.
- BenFranklin100 8mo agoPlease provide me examples where the CEO of a major company threatened to cripple the US economy if his/her demands were not met.
- _DeadFred_ 8mo agoAs opposed to businesses which never use their leverage for the busnisses benefit over the nation as a whole?
- levinb 8mo agoI am trying to use more neutral language when I comment, so that the underlying assertion of facts are more likely to resonate with someone who may disagree with me. I agree with your characterization, but I just wanted the parent comment to look up the ILWU, where they would probably see some of those facts for themselves and be more likely to understand my position. As the human internet dies, I feel like it's more important for those of us that want some of it to survive to participate constructively.
- BenFranklin100 8mo agoFair enough.
- aeternum 8mo agoYes, some directly via the LHWCA fed law and some indirect via labor union contracts with port associations that rent from the gov port authorities. Ultimately it's such a powerful union that often US presidents take part in the negotiations. The recently negotiated (nation-wide) deal: In the deal, the union holds on to existing contract language that protects against certain types of automation, and has won guaranteed jobs where partial automation is put in place. Port employers will still be blocked from implementing “fully automated” port technology: the employers cannot implement equipment that is “devoid of human interaction.” And the union and the employers have to agree on implementing any new technology; if they cannot agree, the question gets sent to arbitration. This language prevents East and Gulf Coast port employers from implementing the more extreme forms of automation seen in other parts of the world, including the Long Beach Container Terminal, in Southern California, where autonomous trucks and cranes entirely replace human operators.
- mapt 8mo agoThese ports could buy the union's vote if it was important to them by giving existing workers some equity in the system that is intended to replace them.
- BenFranklin100 8mo agoWhat’s to stop an enterprising, well funded startup from opening a fully automated port?
- aeternum 8mo agoThe Jones Act
- BenFranklin100 8mo agoI don’t know the legal protections around automation, but the unions virulently fight efforts to automate the industry. You should listen to Harold Deggett, the dockworkers union boss who threatened to cripple the US economy if automation was introduced: https://ijr.com/union-boss-willing-to-cripple-america-made-more-than-900000-last-year/ https://ijr.com/union-boss-willing-to-cripple-america-made-m... He also lives in a 70,000 sqft mansion: https://nypost.com/2024/10/02/business/harold-daggetts-sprawling-nj-mansion-has-bentley-5-car-garage-and-guest-house/ https://nypost.com/2024/10/02/business/harold-daggetts-spraw...
- 8note 8mo agoif it works, will they keep it suspend even after?
- _doctor_love 8mo agoThat's the goal. The Jones Act guarantees a lot of American jobs and those workers are expensive. This allows US port-to-port shipping at much lower prices. Good for the bottom line, bad for the worker.
- baggy_trough 8mo agoIt destroys far more American jobs in favor of a special interest group.
- JumpCrisscross 8mo ago> Good for the bottom line, bad for the worker Bad for most workers. Good for a cabal. The Jones Act directly lead to the failure of American shipbuilding.
- stackskipton 8mo agoSay what? Jones Act didn't kill American Shipbuilding, cost of American worker did. However, whole reason for Jones Act is attempt to protect the American Merchant Marine. If you can't move things via water in wartime, you don't have an empire.
- JumpCrisscross 8mo ago> Jones Act didn't kill American Shipbuilding, cost of American worker did This has been studied to death. European shipyards have similar labor costs to a lot of America. They still build cheaper ships faster than we do. Same for Korea. > If you can't move things via water in wartime, you don't have an empire And yet here we are, entirely dependent on foreign shipyards for basically any meaningful production. The Jones Act killed American shipping. It makes our shipyards uncompetitive. And it makes our waterways too expensive to ply because the only things one can legally float on them are uncompetitive, expensive ships.
- nozzlegear 8mo agoThis is literally the meme of "worst guy you know made a great point" playing out in real time.
- nubg 8mo agoWhat do you mean? Can you elaborate?
- nozzlegear 8mo agoSure, this is the meme I was referencing: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/worst-person-you-know-made-a-great-point https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/worst-person-you-know-made-a-... In this case, Trump is the "worst person you know," but he's doing something that a lot of people across the left [¹] and right [²] political spectrums have wanted to do for years by repealing (edit: suspending) the Jones Act. [¹] Free trade dems, Clintonite think tankers, third-way corporatists, the self-styled "neoliberal" dems, abundance dems, etc. Not all dems support doing away with it because in theory that hurts the maritime unions. [²] Much broader support on the right because it maps onto the free market and anti-regulation ideologies.
- SllX 8mo ago*suspending Not repealed. But yes.
- nozzlegear 8mo agoWoops, good catch!
- throawayonthe 8mo agoi'm confused by your footnotes, because in the first one you clarify you mean right-wingers and "free market" fanatics and then seemingly restating it in your second footnote while presenting it as a separate group haha
- 8mo ago
- npmanor 8mo agoWith deference to What’s Going on With Shipping[1], the Jones Act isn’t really the problem. The entire incentive structure and industry crumbled well after it was enacted. [1] https://youtu.be/qWKz3psejb0?si=5QJd5HQ3W1IrSJ7F https://youtu.be/qWKz3psejb0?si=5QJd5HQ3W1IrSJ7F
- xrd 8mo agoReally crazy to think that starting a war across the world is the best way to break a union. Never imagined that.
- jmccaf 8mo agoI think this is bad strategic precedent for the USA, to save few bucks now. I believe in the Jones Acts original purpose, to protect the US Merchant Marine , for that industry's necessity during wartime
- mmonaghan 8mo agoI did not expect there to be any bright spots but I hope this turns into one of those things (like the 2002 AUMF) that just lasts so long we see benefits from it and eventually kill the underlying blockers.
- pinkmuffinere 8mo ago> On Wednesday, the administration announced it would release 172 million barrels of crude from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The total reserve is 415 M barrels [1], so this is 41% of the reserve!! And refineries use about 16.5 M barrels per day [2], so if refineries used _only_ this reserve oil, it would keep them busy for 11 days. Of course they aren't _only_ using the reserve oil. I'm sure it will still have an effect, but I think it's a shorter-term solution than it first appears. I don't think this will ease prices for more than a couple months. Would be happy to be corrected if I'm mistaken about some of this. Edit: I guess that's why they're suspending the jones act, as a longer-term solution. But the article says the Jones act will only save "pennies per gallon, not dimes per gallon", so that also doesn't seem to really do much :/ [1] https://www.spr.doe.gov/dir/dir.html https://www.spr.doe.gov/dir/dir.html [2] https://www.afpm.org/newsroom/blog/how-much-oil-does-united-states-import-and-why https://www.afpm.org/newsroom/blog/how-much-oil-does-united-...
- stopbulying 8mo agoMerchant Marine Act of 1920 ("Jones Act") https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920 > Section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act is known as the Jones Act and deals with cabotage (coastwise trade). It requires that all goods transported by water between U.S. ports be carried on ships that have been constructed in the United States and that fly the U.S. flag, are owned by U.S. citizens, and are crewed by U.S. citizens and U.S. permanent residents
- mapt 8mo agoReplacing the Jones Act permanently with aggressive subsidies for US shipyards is one of the most important policy interventions available for multiple coastal economic concerns, and has been for decades. Basically everyone agrees that it is completely broken.