When you use the word tariff rather than fee, that means it applies to all ports not just yours. It appears that the words being placed in your mouth are from your own inaccurate statements.
You have now clarified that you don’t care how it’s paid for; thus we can have free trade with zero tariffs, and as long as the fees charged by your local port covers the costs of importing you’re happy with that. Correct?
I said "tariff OR container fees" (emphasis added) as a examples of alternative methods for funding such infrastructure improvements. There are numerous other methods of funding that might be applied-- I did not state a preference for anything other than eliminating the inherent subsidy that we have today. Excerpt of my original post:
...the taxpayers that get to pick up the tab for port improvements, road maintenance, environmental effects, etc. Heaven forbid that some of that might be relieved by one of those awful tariffs or container fees!
You have now clarified that you don’t care how it’s paid for; thus we can have free trade with zero tariffs, and as long as the fees charged by your local port covers the costs of importing you’re happy with that. Correct?
NO. I already said that while that is mostly true, I would not make such a broad brush declaration. There may indeed be a time where a tariff would be appropriate.