Despite joining forces with Hillary, Xenophobic Princess, Sean Hannity and Congress have not succeeded in Americanizing our ports. In fact, doing what they are advocating would be stupid. Here is the gist from the Washington Post, but I am sure Sean will ignore it and say he is the only intellectually honest person around, and brag about how he is persecuted, while his rude staff hangs up on people, and what should be a talk show with callers turns into "the Me Hour by Sean Hannity, and how I am perfect and everyone else is not." Sean, that is why you will always be no. 2.
But foreign firms remain deeply embedded in nearly every major port in the country. And transferring ownership of those operations to U.S. companies could cause serious problems in an industry in which nearly all of the shipping is controlled by foreign interests. An immense amount of capital from those foreigners will be required to expand the nation's port system in coming years as global commerce continues to burgeon.
So much for helping that situation, right Sean? So much for helping improve the infrastructure in the ports by having an actual efficient company take control. Nope, it is far better to let the Longshoremen continue to get free rides for doing little than muddle paperwork and getting paid 30+ dollars an hour. Yeah, that is so free trade of you, Sean and co. Continuing on:
Theoretically, such arrangements involve security risks. Terrorist operatives might infiltrate Inchcape or Maersk and send strategic information about ship or fleet movements to enemy forces. Many maritime security experts consider those risks small, especially compared with the lack of reliable policing at dozens of ports in poor countries that send goods to the United States.
But whatever the security ramifications, foreign ownership dominates the maritime industry, including the U.S. facilities where giant ships dock and unload thousands of containers filled with products for U.S. consumers.
So, see, you have done nothing to "improve security," Sean and Co., as you claim to have been concerned about. Nope, all you have done is alienated a tenuous ally and proven to some in the Islamic world that we are self-serving xenophobes. Congratulations. More fact over xenophobia:
There is an important reason why terminals are usually managed by foreigners: The shipping companies themselves are largely foreign, and they have generally sought to control terminals so that they can be certain of having the most reliable, efficient facilities possible for loading and unloading their vessels quickly to reduce costly time in port. That arrangement has suited local port authorities; they want to ensure that their ports will draw enough traffic to generate revenue and employment.
"Why are there so many foreign terminal operators? There are no global American liner companies anymore -- that's really the crux of it," said Peter Shaerf, managing director of AMA Capital Partners LLC, a merchant bank that specializes in transportation.
That development goes back to the 1970s and 1980s, when U.S. shipping firms struggled to compete with foreign lines that employed low-wage crews and were subject to looser regulations concerning safety, crew training and other issues. In the 1990s, much of the once-mighty U.S. merchant marine fleet was bought by foreigners, as Singapore's Neptune Orient Lines snapped up APL (better known as American President Lines) and Maersk purchased Sea-Land from CSX Corp.
See, the longshoremen and Dems are now whining about there being no large American lines anymore, but they are the ones who caused this state of affairs by kowtowing to Unions and making the Longshoremen so powerful. And Sean Hannity joins their anti-competitive, xenophobic chorus! So much for that intellectual honesty, Sean....
But keeping the foreign-owned companies in the ports may be essential for another reason: the nation's need for financing to increase port capacity. Foreign shipping companies, eager to increase their business, will presumably be willing to provide the funding; it is unclear whether enough money can be obtained domestically.
So, Sean and Congress, you may have damaged our ability to compete because of this nonsense. Pat yourselves on the back, well done! I am sure China and other nations are licking their lips. Congrats, really!
In Virginia, for example, the port authority has estimated that it will need about $10 billion to expand its ports over the next few years, Flynn said.
"If you do this as a state enterprise, you have to go to the good people of Virginia and say, 'We need $10 billion.' How is that going to work, with all the needs to deal with traffic jams and education?" he said. "Or you can turn to a U.S. company. Well, this is a very capital-intensive industry. . . . If we want to own all the infrastructure, I'm not sure where that capital comes from. Americans don't want to save. And they don't want to pay taxes."
So, are the enemies of the US going to suffer? No. IS DPW? No. The American consumer? You betcha. The American taxpayer? Most likely.
Thanks again, Sean. Maybe our three hours a day could be better spent.
