171–180 of 205 posts
I'm not from the US, but I don't even understand the basic premise. If these companies avoid paying taxes by not being registered/incorporated in the US, how could they possibly be eligible for help from the US government? That just seems like a contradiction, like a huge case of having your cake and eating it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
in reality is the opposite, the footprint is huge in terms of environmental impact, the cruises pollute the air of the city. Also, cruise visitors use the city's facilities (roads, trash collection, beaches, etc) but don't leave much money behind to compensate. Sure we maximize the amount of people that get to visit the place, but they leave locals worse off as they have to foot the bill
> the cruises pollute the air of the city Per-person? Surely anyone arriving by car, aeroplane or even bus is causing a lot more pollution, just on the sheer physics of how much more efficient sea transport is. > Also, cruise visitors use the city's facilities (roads, trash collection, beaches, etc) but don't leave much money behind to compensate. Surely that can be balanced with appropriate taxation - I believe a lo…
[0] https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/ask-mr-green/which-better-...
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2006/dec/20/cruises.green
[2] https://grist.org/living/you-thought-planes-burned-a-lot-of-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a bit unfair, when you fly somehwere you sleep there, you eat there, you spend there. Whereas on a cruise ship the tourist is spending 99% of their money on the ship, and 1% in the city that they're flooding
Not true. Cruise passengers practically run the economy of many cities around the world including US. For example, a lot of towns in Alaska basically live off of cruise ship docking there. If they stop, many of them flat out collapse. I don't have actual data but my anecdata from several cruise ship regulars is that they spend at least as much on "excursions" and touring the ports as on cruise ship ticket.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In times of crisis, that's not what we care about, we care about uninterrupted supply chain. Yes, I agree the system should not be that fragile, but for now it is.
In this case, I'd say we'd be better off letting that fragility run its course. Very few (if any) Americans depend on the existence of the cruise industry to make a living or otherwise survive in our society. For the ones who do, it'd be cheaper to give them individual "bailouts". Cruise ships contribute jack all to the national or global supply chain except as consumers of it; letting cruise lines fail means more ca…
Trade imbalances aren't good for economies and eventually lead to wars 100% of the time. Read about the Opium Wars if you want a textbook example of this.
I'm not from the US, but I don't even understand the basic premise. If these companies avoid paying taxes by not being registered/incorporated in the US, how could they possibly be eligible for help from the US government? That just seems like a contradiction, like a huge case of having your cake and eating it.
They'll likely get it because they can pay politicians to vote in favor, or said politicians own a stake in those companies - probably indirectly to avoid an apparent conflict of interest, but who will find out? Actually they did, see Panama Papers. So many higher-ups turned out to have a lot of money stashed away abroad. Politicians are corrupt. I mean take Trump; while he 'officially' renounced control / ownership…
But Carnival cruises, who cares if they go under? another one will prop up with a better business model that is sustainable.
Every company should be able to weather a couple of months if they rode the bull for the best 11 years of stock rise in history. If your executives fucked it up, too bad. You can get a low interest loan, but no free bailout money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're being a bit naive. All the ships will still exist. All that will happen is that investors will snap up the ships and 'brands' at bargain prices, set up new cruise companies and the ships will be back in business in a matter of a few months, probably with the same crews and the same company names. The only thing that will change is the ownership.
All the more reason not to bail them out. Let the market do its thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Carnival Cruises is headquartered in Miami. They register their ships in other countries for various reasons. One of which is taxes. But the company itself is based in the US.
Headquartered in Miami, but incorporated in Panama.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Carnival Cruises is headquartered in Miami. They register their ships in other countries for various reasons. One of which is taxes. But the company itself is based in the US.
The pay no taxes. Carnival Corp and Norwegian both posted negative income tax expenses — that is, they received more in refunds or deductions than they paid or set aside for taxes — with Carnival reporting an income tax expense of $71 million and Norwegian reporting an $18.9 million tax benefit. They don’t contribute to the public fisc in good times, they should have no call on it when times are tough.