In article <1191819498.356639.106320@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, NWLB
wrote:
> The point being, it is ironic they are ostensibly fighting to keep
> cruise ships coming to Manhattan, by protecting facilities the real
> world and industry has passed by. Much as they fight any PVSA and or
> Jones Act reform, and in doing so, actually hurt themselves more than
> adapting would help them. In both cases, they make a big public deal
> about fighting for a handful of jobs, while possibly denying
> themselves far more.
It is your opinion that more jobs would be created by reforming or
repealing the PSA. That list against modifying it includes many major
US corporations. They believe not. Ironically the cruise lines don't
think more jobs would be created either by repealing or modifying the
PSA either. Read their position below.
http://www.iccl.org/policies/psa.cfm
Notice they state no changes to operations or itineraries if the act
was reformed nor do they support changing it.
Bringing the PSA or Jones Act up is a superfluous attack on the ILA and
has nothing to do with the Manhattan piers. Obviously closing the pier
would directly effect ILA jobs and that is why they want to save them.
There is no irony involved.
--
Charles |