Skip to comments.
Panama Canal Expansion Could Help US Cargo Flow
Latin Business Chronicle ^
| September 26, 2006
| staff
Posted on 10/01/2006 2:38:15 PM PDT by kellynla
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
1
posted on
10/01/2006 2:38:17 PM PDT
by
kellynla
To: kellynla
The Panama Canal must be widened, without question. The question is who should be made to pay for it. Perhaps they could finance it with a toll of some sort.
2
posted on
10/01/2006 2:39:39 PM PDT
by
Jaysun
(Idiot Muslims. They're just dying to have sex orgies.)
To: Jaysun
use jimmy carter's pension
3
posted on
10/01/2006 2:46:51 PM PDT
by
stylin19a
(I'm not just long, I'm Lama long !)
To: Jaysun
The Panama Canal must be widened, without question.It isn't our problem anymore, it is Panama's and China's problem, thanks to Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. The best solution to the Panama canal problem is to construct a sea-level canal at Lake Nicaragua. Look at a map of Central America to see how little actual digging would need to be done.
4
posted on
10/01/2006 2:48:54 PM PDT
by
webheart
To: kellynla
The roads to the west coast in the early 1800s were seen as the direct route to Asia. The Lewis and Clark expedition was one of the scouting missions to find a route to the west coast, that one being a hoped for water route. The railroads were supposed to be capable of handling the trade with China. At the time New Orleans was not US territory and the Mississippi was not possible as a trade route. The west coast ports should be sufficient for China trade now.
5
posted on
10/01/2006 2:53:14 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
To: RightWhale
"The west coast ports should be sufficient for China trade now?"
Geraldine Knatz, executive director of the Port of Los Angeles, "I can look out ahead to a time when the West Coast is not going to be able to handle all of the volume," Knatz said, noting that the Port of Los Angeles, the nation's busiest container facility, would reach capacity between 2020 and 2025.
6
posted on
10/01/2006 3:00:56 PM PDT
by
kellynla
(Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
To: webheart
It isn't our problem anymore, it is Panama's and China's problem, thanks to Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. The best solution to the Panama canal problem is to construct a sea-level canal at Lake Nicaragua. Look at a map of Central America to see how little actual digging would need to be done.
And I've heard that Nicaragua has made such a proposal. Very well with me. Let them start digging.
7
posted on
10/01/2006 3:02:02 PM PDT
by
Jaysun
(Idiot Muslims. They're just dying to have sex orgies.)
To: kellynla
LA is not the only port. As far as reaching capacity at LA, what is the bottleneck?
8
posted on
10/01/2006 3:04:49 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
To: webheart
The best solution to the Panama canal problem is to construct a sea-level canal at Lake Nicaragua. Look at a map of Central America to see how little actual digging would need to be done. I bet if the Nicaraguans build a sea-level canal, the Panamaninans won't just sit around only taking Panamax size and smaller ships. Competitive routes between the oceans would be good for the whole world.
To: kellynla
Busting the unions so we can modernize our West Coast ports would probably be a more effective and cheaper solution.
10
posted on
10/01/2006 3:06:26 PM PDT
by
Tribune7
To: RightWhale
As far as reaching capacity at LA, what is the bottleneck?
The unions.
11
posted on
10/01/2006 3:07:03 PM PDT
by
kingu
(No, I don't use sarcasm tags - it confuses people.)
To: RightWhale
Hey, Whale, I'm not the authority, Knatz is. LOL
And according to her, "I can look out ahead to a time when the West Coast is not going to be able to handle all of the volume."
12
posted on
10/01/2006 3:08:20 PM PDT
by
kellynla
(Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
To: kingu
Oh. That would be a problem. Maybe if their pay were doubled to $280 an hour they could handle more ships.
13
posted on
10/01/2006 3:09:08 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
To: kellynla
MagLev is the answer. What was the question?
14
posted on
10/01/2006 3:10:15 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
To: webheart
"The best solution to the Panama canal problem is to construct a sea-level canal at Lake Nicaragua."
In the 1950s there were proposals to do just that -- using H-Bombs to do the digging. Really.
15
posted on
10/01/2006 3:10:50 PM PDT
by
No Truce With Kings
(The opinions expressed are mine! Mine! MINE! All Mine!)
To: Tribune7
have you been to our ports recently?
16
posted on
10/01/2006 3:11:06 PM PDT
by
kellynla
(Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
To: kellynla
17
posted on
10/01/2006 3:18:20 PM PDT
by
Tribune7
To: Tribune7
18
posted on
10/01/2006 3:20:15 PM PDT
by
kellynla
(Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
To: RightWhale
Oh. That would be a problem. Maybe if their pay were doubled to $280 an hour they could handle more ships.
Perhaps; basically the union wants a) expansion and modernization while keeping everyone in their existing jobs, even actual pencil pushers who I guess would be doodling all day, and b) expansion of employment while assuring that every union benefit continues for the life of every union employee and that new hires are paid the same as present union employees while existing union employees get a raise.
Once the union bottleneck is destroyed, the infrastructure needs to be examined. Cargo transport out of the urban sprawl of Los Angeles is highly limited, easily disabled by accidents or other acts, with limited connections outside of the sprawl. Redundancy is almost nil, so if significant problems occur, cargo sits and waits.
Poor design and execution has always been the hallmark of cargo transport in California. How the system continues to operate at any level remains a mystery to me.
19
posted on
10/01/2006 3:20:45 PM PDT
by
kingu
(No, I don't use sarcasm tags - it confuses people.)
To: kingu
Why do I think this Canal bit is just a desire for an American presence along with the bucks that go with it??
20
posted on
10/01/2006 3:26:46 PM PDT
by
Sacajaweau
(God Bless Our Troops!!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson