Jump to content

BlerkOne

Members
  • Content Count

    3,628
  • Joined

About BlerkOne

  • Rank
    3,000+ Club

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Here is a legal Alaska cruise - no Canada or PSVA exemption needed.
  2. Well, nobody would cruise to Alaska now even if they could but there are still cruises you can book starting in May. If you wait until May to look for workarounds, you might as well cancel the season. Alaska cruises don't have to leave from Seattle - they could leave from a few ports in California. There is a port in Oregon that might work. They could leave from Canada and then the whole archaic PSVA discussion would be moot.
  3. Of course Sola is an unqualified political appointee by an equally unqualified prior administration but is a commissioner nonetheless.
  4. FMC Commissioner Sola Calls for Exemption for 2021 Alaska Cruises https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/fmc-commissioner-sola-calls-for-exemption-for-2021-alaska-cruises The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) is the independent federal agency responsible for regulating the U.S. international ocean transportation system for the benefit of U.S. exporters, importers, and the U.S. consumer.
  5. Condescending much? NCLH had very high turnover. You aren't disputing that. But according to you PSVA makes all boats safe. Now they are unsafe? Wearing a life jacket works wonders.
  6. It is AN EXAMPLE and TEMPORARY. The Alaska cruising season can be SAVED. All that is needed is for lawmakers to not be narrow minded and to think outside the box. I was embarrassed to quote CATO but for once they made sense. NCLH has staffing issues because of high turnover - issues non-US flagged ships don't have. We both know US FLAGGED DUCK BOATS sink and kill people.
  7. Exceptions have been made before - another window could be opened up https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CRPT-107srpt47/html/CRPT-107srpt47.htm
  8. February 12, 2021 10:46AM Archaic Protectionism Is Set to Sink Alaska Cruises https://www.cato.org/blog/archaic-protectionism-set-sink-alaska-cruises
  9. I only needed one example, partial or otherwise. The sky did not fall. US jobs ARE in the interest of National Security. I am convinced that if the world ended tomorrow, with your last breath you would scream that PVSA must survive!
  10. I doubt a temporary cruise ban costs more than loss of a long term project to export more oil to the US, but other pipelines are already expanding to make up the difference. The billions invested in Keystone are going to be a hit to a pocketbook somewhere.
  11. You continue to defend the obsolete archaic law to the death, twisting what others post, not to mention taking the thread further off topic. I am quite aware PVSA is not just for large, mass market cruise ships. Poof - there goes much of your argument. Congress HAS granted at least one waiver from PVSA in the past for cruise ships, so poof, there goes that argument. Alaska is not asking for a repeal, but a very limited, temporary, waiver. Not for all boats but for large cruise ships.The cruise lines, cruise ships, and cruise dates are known. They could be listed in the waiver and
  12. No doubt, but I'm pretty sure Alberta isn't pleased.
  13. Oh please. The only reason it was going forward was because of an executive order. The ban was set to expire today, but was extended after the pipeline was killed. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not.
  14. I'm not blaming Canada, but it is their fault. I can't help but think some of it is in retaliation over cancellation over a poorly planned and antiquated pipeline.
×
×
  • Create New...