I keep hearing people say this and it's really not the whole truth. In the 70's there was a slump in the industry and American companies sold out. The companies that stayed in were from Great Britain, Denmark, China and Singapore. They slogged along making low profits in the US, but they also had a good market opening in Asia that they took advantage of and then there was an upturn in the US and now they are cashing in. Dubai started out small in their own port, but through a good location and good management they quickly became a centerpiece for commerce in the Middle East and they cashed in on profit, too.
Now, it's nearly impossible for an American company to get in because the bids for port deals are just too large and the cost of running the terminals after you attain the lease is large. But the main factor is that it's nearly impossible to get the bid on the lease in the first place. You can't blame China, Singapore and Dubai for conducting business in a normal business enviroment. You can't blame American government. The only people you can really blame for the US not being up there with the big boys in the port terminal business are the American companies that pulled out way back when.
Thank you for shedding more light on that aspect of things. I'm sorry that I'm wrong but glad to be corrected. It still leaves us with the question; "what can the government do to make American companies take this deal?" If American companies dropped out of this business on their own that's freedom of choice. If the suggestion is that taxpayers subsidize this industry, which is obviously bigger money than bailing out Chrysler, I'm deadset against that. I'd rather see foreign companies offer a good service at a competitive price. We regulate the security and I'm satisified with that.
Perhaps with the uproar over this, and the limelight being shed on what companies are currently in the ports, Congress will take a look at these things.
I hope they will. I am not a Bush basher, and I was more concerned about all the foreign countries in our ports than just this one deal. I know from here about port protection, however in my mind it should be fundamental that Americans are the overwhelming majority in any management of the ports.
In the long run, I do not believe that this will hurt our ties with Dubai. I firmly believe that our forefathers would be aghast with the current situation in our nation's ports.
There are many civil service jobs on the state level that require you to live in the city/town that the position is open in. I can't imagine any reasonable U.S. citizen or foreign head of state finding that an unreasonable requirement when it relates to our ports and hubs of commerce.