A Tone Deaf President: A Hyperventilating Opposition

MND ^ | February 22, 2006 | Will Malven

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

"The dopey Washington insiders and apologists like Rush have all said the same thing, there are no American companies that can run a terminal, so how did the USA develop the Manhattan project in WWII?"

Short answer: "cost plus fee contract."

Port operators don't get those.

The problem is that American companies start off at a disadvantage in the global market for ANYTHING because we are (I believe) the only country crazy and stupid enough to tax a company based here on ALL of its income worldwide, instead of just its domestic income.

[vetsvette]

I know several companies, off the top of my head, that could do this job with no problem -- eg Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Halliburton, Bechtel...................

Were they ever invited to bid? No idea. Have they decided for some reason not to play? No idea.

All I said was that the statement that NO American company was capable of doing this job was pure balderdash. And it is.

Perhaps having the UAE do the job is the best choice. I have no idea. But, arguing that it's the best choice because no American company is up to the job is BS. Pure and simple.

[DJ MacWoW]

The problem is that American companies start off at a disadvantage in the global market for ANYTHING because we are (I believe) the only country crazy and stupid enough to tax a company based here on ALL of its income worldwide, instead of just its domestic income.

And don't forget the regulations!

[Nasty McPhilthy]

The thought of foriegn ownership is somewhat less than palatable, isn’t it?

However, my only concern is security.

[Final Authority]

The method of obtaining revenue is not dispositive of the point. The point is not whether or not something is immediately profitable or not. I assume that since the deal is for $billions it must have both income potential and investment potential. The point is are there American companies that can operate such a venture. Apparently, many of the staff are already in place and there is a system of operation, and apparently, based on the reading of this thread, there are other companies that could operate such facilities, so, cost plus fee contract, is not the issue.

BTW, on the other point I made, would you resign yourself to defeat? Unless you could get a cost plus fee contract, I think you would.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

The regulations are the cherry on top of the sundae. The taxes alone ensure that US companies have a lower ROI.

[clawrence3]

"Impeach" on what grounds specifically - remember the Constitution states: "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

[clawrence3]

How exactly is Lockheed going to run 7 U.S. ports starting March 2nd?

[DJ MacWoW]

Hubby is a train buff. He tells me stories and I roll my eyes at the idiot regs that ruined them. Then the Govt took over and discovered the regs meant operating at a loss so they dropped a lot of them. Was there ever a more frightening statement than "I'm from the government and I'm here to help." LOL

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

"The point is are there American companies that can operate such a venture."

And they declined to submit bids, because running port operations will not generate a sufficiently high ROI to justify the expenditure of money, given the tax and regulatory climate they operate in.

"BTW, on the other point I made, would you resign yourself to defeat? Unless you could get a cost plus fee contract, I think you would."

Developing unknown technology is done under cost plus fee contracts. That's because the level of risk makes it impractical to commit to a fixed fee, because guessing wrong equals bankruptcy.

[spectre]

HALLIBURTON!!!!

CHECK AND MATE!!!!

BWAAA-HAAA-HAAA-HAAA!!!!!

You're right. It might be the only way out of this..

sw

[From many - one.]

I have read that Dubai (all the UAE, for that matter) don't recognize Israel. but don't have a link right now.

[Dark Skies]

Carrix is good, especially in their home region of the Northwest, but they do not have 6.5B in ready cash to undertake a project of this magnitude.

IIRC (and I may not in this case), DPW was putting in $200 mil (in cash or equity) and going to the markets (banks syndicates) for the rest. Of course, their (DPW's) balance sheet will be behind most of the borrowing, but no one makes a purchase of this size with cash.

At the end of the day, there will probably even be some unsecured debt issued (junk bonds).

I suspect the rationale for this kind of acquisition is economy of scale related (for the most part). DPW is already in the business and can use its existing system to cut costs. Also, there are plenty of assets that can be sold and leased-back (under a lease purchase arrangement). If I had to guess, I would say that this deal was put together by some London investment bankers...and then taken to DPW.

[clawrence3]

Joe Lieberman doesn't seem to have a problem with that.

[mdwakeup]

Well, not sure about unions, but regulations and our tax system would apply to any company doing business in the US.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

"Well, not sure about unions, but regulations and our tax system would apply to any company doing business in the US."

Except that foreign-based corporations only pay US taxes on their US revenues, while US-based corporations pay taxes on their worldwide revenue.

[clawrence3]

No need to guess - Citibank and Deutsche Bank put together the deal: http://portal.pohub.com/pls/pogprtl/docs/PAGE/POGROUP_PAGE_GROUP/NEW_POGROUP_WEBSITE/NEW_POGROUP_291105_EMBARGO_PAGE/RECOMMENDED%20CASH%20ACQUISITION%20OF%20P%26O.PDF

[Molly T.]

What's bigoted about questioning the wisdom of a decision made by a little known committee called the "Committee on Foreign Investments"?

Are you not just a wee bit dismayed that supposedly the Pres. wasn't even aware of this deal till it finally made its way up thru the ranks.Who the heck's in charge anyway? And of all things that this President DIDN'T veto, he's willing to go to bat for this, especially since the public is not happy about it. Would it not make sense to take time to let this deal be reviewed? If I were President, I think I'd be rethinking just who is running the show. The stakes are way too high, the safety of our country is at stake, something that seems to escape too many people.

I don't know about you, but it seems to me there've been more than one deal, done in secrecy. The name of the committee might hold a clue as to why it's so important for this deal to go into effect.....FOREIGN INVESTMENTS......in other words BIG BUSENESS. Isn't that what all the foot dragging on gaining control of the borders and the illegal aliens is about. Big business and corporations are the ones pulling the strings in this country, and the heck with what the citizens think about anything.

[swheats]

"First there is NO American corporation capable of operating our ports."

That statement sounds like the one for immigration. There are jobs Americans wont do.

This thing is becoming more troubling each day. Is it true that the president didn't know about the deal until recently? Yet he has staked everything on this deal going forward.

Unless this is psyops, this is crazy.

[clawrence3]

Well, to be honest, for the pay offered, there are indeed some jobs American citizens will not do.