Trump and the Panama Canal

 Trump says that he wants to take back the Panama Canal because the Canal Authority is "charging American shipping too much".  

As usual with Trump's irredentist ravings, this is nonsense.  But let's unpack it.  

The first question you have to ask is "what American shipping"?  The American merchant marine is not what it was at the end of WWII, when we had the largest merchant marine in the world.  

Disclaimer: I own shares in some of these corporations, and they have made me a lot of money. 

This is a list of the world's largest container ship lines. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_container_shipping_companies

You don't find an American line until you get to Matson at number 28, with 0.2% of world container capacity.  

This is a list of dry bulk shipping lines.  

https://www.marineinsight.com/know-more/biggest-bulk-shipping-companies/ 

You don't find an American dry bulk company until you get to Genco at number 10 with only 43 ships. 

This is a list of tanker ship companies.  

https://www.marineinsight.com/types-of-ships/top-12-tanker-shipping-companies-in-the-world/

You don't find an American tanker ship company until you get to Overseas Shipholding Group at number 12.  (I own shares in them. They aren't a good performer, but they're based in Tampa Bay, so it was a sentimental purchase. Fortunately, their stock is cheap.)  

There is a lot of crossover among these companies, with none of them concentrating on a single sector.  They are all transnational corporations.  

So again I ask, "what American shipping"?  

Looking at the Canal itself, fortunately, the Canal Authority publishes statistics for Canal transits.  

https://pancanal.com/en/statistics/

Selecting for laden transits by flag, the largest single flag is Liberia.  No surprise there, because Liberia is the most popular open registry, so it is the flag of convenience for a lot of the world's shipping.  United States flagged vessels are number 15 on that list.  

Again I ask, "what American shipping"?  

If you look at the graph by route, the number one route is between the US east coast and Asia.  

88,428,454 of the total 210,306,847 long tons transiting the Canal are between Asia and US east coast ports, or a little over 42%.  But again, considering this freight is almost all on non-US carriers, is it really "American" shipping?  

Then there is the question of how much the Canal Authority is charging for transit.  The Panama Canal Tariff Schedule is complex, and is available here: 

https://pancanal.com/en/maritime-services/maritime-tariff/

Needless to say, shipping companies have professionals to wade through this mess.  

The font of all knowledge, Google, says

"According to available information, the average cost per ton to transit the Panama Canal is not a fixed number, but varies depending on the ship's size and type, with estimates ranging around $2- $3 per ton; however, the exact cost is calculated based on a complex system considering the vessel's length, beam, and Panama Canal Universal Measurement System (PC/UMS) tonnage, making it difficult to give a single "average" cost per ton."  

The Canal Authority Tariff Schedule puts the cost per container at $30-45 per twenty foot equivalent container.  Considering that the cost for transporting that container will already be anywhere from $2000 to $10,000 depending on a number of factors, the $45 tariff is pocket change.  

For bulk freight, the Tariff Schedule puts the cost at around $1.50 per long ton.  A large bulker would pay a fee for the ship, and an additional fee for the freight.  A bulker exporting, say, 60,000 tons of wheat would pay about $90,000 for the freight and another $60-100,000 for the vessel.  But again, the cost of shipping dry bulk freight is already $23-27 per ton, so the additional $3-4 per ton is only a slightly larger cost.  

If you're interested enough then you can calculate the full fee using the tariff estimator here: 

https://www.wilhelmsen.com/tollcalculators/panama-toll-calculator/

The whole point of the Canal is that going through it saves time, fuel, and ultimately money.  Yes, going through the Canal costs a lot of money.  For a Panamax class container ship the tariff may be over a million dollars.  But that passage may save several million dollars worth of fuel and under way time, not to mention weeks in sailing time.  

Also consider that a container ship may be carrying cargo worth billions.  Literally several times the value of the ship itself.  At that point the cost of the Canal passage amortizes pretty quickly, in addition to the savings on fuel.  

Looking at all of this, there is one important thing to consider: Ships don't have to go through the Canal.  The problem is that the options are not good.  One option is to go around Cape Horn, through the Straights of Magellan, which is about 8000 miles longer, and subject to violent weather.  The shortest route from Asia to the US east coast is actually the Arctic Sea Route, but that is only available for a few weeks in the summer, and requires an ice strengthened hull.  Another option is the Atlantic route through the Suez Canal, but because of the geopolitical situation in the middle east that can be problematic.  The final option is to go around the Cape of Good Hope on the southern tip of Africa.  Any way you slice it, the Panama Canal is the best option.  Being good capitalists, they charge accordingly.  Despite the tolls, ships still save millions over going other routes. 

This doesn't touch the fact that operating and maintaining the Canal is expensive.  The operating budget for the Canal is $5.7 Billion per year.  That budget comes entirely from tolls. 

In summary, Trump's claim that the Panama Canal Authority is overcharging American shipping is entirely irredentist nonsense from hat to boots. 

Deportations in perspective.

 When Trumpublicans talk about "deporting all illegal immigrants" I don't think they realize just what a large number they're talking about.  

Assuming their number of 11 million undocumented immigrants is correct, let's put that into perspective.  

For those in the Northeast Corridor, that's like the population of New York City plus the population of Philadelphia.  

For those in the North, that's like the population of Wisconsin plus the population of Minnesota.  

For those in the Rust Belt, that's like the population of Ohio.  

For those in the South, that's like the population of Georgia.  

For those in the far west that would be the population of Arizona, New Mexico, and most of Utah. 

You're talking about 4 out of every 100 people across the entire US population.  Think about the logistics of what that would take.  Not to mention the expense.  Then there are the government structures needed to find them, detain them, process them, and give them the constitutional due process to which they are entitled.  

Good luck.  

Better carry your papers.

Republican rejectionism

The problem with today's Republican Party is not the rejection of Democratic ideals, but the rejection of democratic ideals.  In short, the rejection of democracy, and even of the idea of a constitutional democratic republic.  With the election of Donald Trump, and the most anti-democratic government in our history, we may well have just had the last free and fair election in our history.  

As one who is registered Republican, I've thought about intentionally voting for candidates so extreme that even Republicans would reject them.  Unfortunately, every time I plumb the depths of Republican extremism those depths seem to have no bottom. Republicans seem determined to vote away not only everyone else's rights, but their own as well. Somehow they manage to do this in the name of "freedom".  It's a feat of ideological contortionism that I just can't understand.

Your 15 Minute Zone

 Today's urbanists like the 15 minute city concept in which everything a resident needs for daily life can be accessed by a 15 minute walk, a 15 minute bike ride, or a short trip on mass transit.  Somehow, the idea has permeated through the conspiracy theory network that the 15 minute city concept includes fees, tolls, or fines for residents leaving their 15 minute zones.  As usual with this crowd, there is little if any documentary support for this, but that has never stopped them.  

As usual, they have it backwards.  What we have in most of North America today is "the other 15 minute city", in which everything residents want to do is preceded and followed by a 15 minute car trip.  This situation already imposes a fee to leave your zone, only we're so accustomed to paying this fee that it has become invisible.  

When everything you need to do in your everyday life requires a car then you have to pay the fee consisting of all the expenses involved in car dependency.  Residents of the other 15 minute city pay this fee every day in the tens of thousands of dollars needed to buy cars, tens of thousands more to finance, insure, register, fuel, and maintain them, and tens of thousands yet more in the taxes needed to build and maintain the infrastructure for them.  These are the direct expenses of the other 15 minute city. 

The fee involves a lot more than just the direct expenses of car ownership.  There are other, less obvious fees involved in the other 15 minute city, such as the expense of building and maintaining vast parking lots, which are needed because everyone has to drive absolutely everywhere.  Further, because of these vast parking lots, all of the potential destinations are so spread out from each other that residents have no choice but to drive.  All of these costs are hidden in the prices of the goods and services residents need, so they become invisible. 

 

A further toll on leaving your zone in the other 15 minute city is the horrific carnage among pedestrians, bicyclists, and even other car drivers.  The medical expenses from this toll of deaths and injuries drives up medical expenses for everyone, not just in the other 15 minute city, but everywhere.  

All of these tolls are mandatory in the other 15 minute city.  Over the past century all of these tolls have come to be taken as a normal part of everyday life.  Next to these tolls, the supposed fees associated with the actual 15 minute city pale in comparison.  

This does not touch the fact that the supposed fees for "leaving your zone" do not exist in any of the written material proposals for the 15 minute city, and exist entirely in the imagination of the people protesting the 15 minute city concept.  The fees in the car dependent "other 15 minute city", however, are pervasive, inescapable, and invisible. 

Trump military engagements

 Trumpublicans like to claim America had no wars under Trump.   

Let's see... 

Google://US military engagements 2017-2020.  

Afghanistan, 2001-2021. 

Cameroon, 2015-present. 

Shayrat missile strike, 2017. 

Damascus missile strikes, April 2018. 

Operation Sentinel, 2019. 

Kataeb Hezbollah attack and response, 31 Dec 2019, 2 Jan 2020. 

So remind me again how we didn't have any wars under Trump?  

That doesn't even begin to address his promises of "fire and fury".  

Retreating into isolationism isn't a way to "make America great again", it's a way to make America irrelevant again.  

EVs lost in the market at the beginning of the 20th century

 Yes.  Electric vehicles couldn't compete with internal combustion at the turn of the 20th century.  

But the entire world has changed since then.  

At the turn of the 20th century electricity in the home was a luxury for wealthy people, and for those in a very few major cities.  The grid as we know it today, a century and a quarter later, did not exist.  The first rudimentary interconnects would not exist for another 2 decades.  The fundamentals for the continent spanning grid we know today would not exist until the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1934, and the Rural Electrification Program of the New Deal.  

Prior to the creation of the grid, if someone wanted electricity in their house then they would have to build their own generating station, or they would have to be fortunate enough to live in one of the few areas served by local electric companies.  

In that context, of _course_ internal combustion took over the market.  

Add to this the problem that, at the turn of the 20th century, the state of the art battery technology was nickel-iron, which is problematic at best for electric vehicles.  Of _course_ electric vehicles failed in that market.  

I understand this may be a difficult concept for ICE fans to grasp, but the entire world has changed in the past century and a quarter.  The pieces have only come together in the past few years for electric vehicles to take over the market.  

When internal combustion vehicles became widely affordable in the early 20th century, in 20 years they almost completely displaced horses from transportation.  We are now only about a decade into the market context for electric vehicles to displace internal combustion.  Electric vehicles will continue to improve.  In another two decades electric power will displace almost all internal combustion from the market, with the exception of a very few specialty applications.  

Anti-EV nabobs are lying about EV fires

 https://www.autoinsuranceez.com/gas-vs-electric-car-fires/

And Facefuck gave me a spam strike for posting this.