cb:
Use fees/industry fees/ etc. call them anything you want - when the Government collects monies not on the basis of a direct fee for service but rather from an industry or a consumer via an industry surcharge be it an fee on every airline ticket we buy, or a fee on frieght flowing through a port, a fee per gallon of gas I buy etc. - I call that a tax. Even if the collected revenues go into something like the Aviation Improvement Fund; are intended to defray the cost of Government operting checkpoints at Airports rather than industry doing so as was done prior to 9/11; or to support and counter-balance FHWA Construction Grants. If it looks like a duck and acts like a duck - it's probaby a duck.
I intentionally tried to stay away from overly pointed language that might be construed as intended to politicize the discussion, sorry if you feel I missed the mark.
Before I go towards the most recent points you state that might be misconstrued by the less informed - in addition to Webb Institue if your Son has the grades, etc and is set on looking at education opportunities in the NY Metro, don't forget The Copper Union, like Webb its fully funded by a private endowmentestablished by an individual and one of the absolute best undergrad schools in the Nation for engineering. You probably knew that but others further outside of NY might not. Note though Webb Institute and Cooper Union do NOT in any way shape or form get funding because some rule or law requires the industries, any consortia thereof or companies that graduates go to work for repay either forward or after hiring for that education. They are privately endowed. Granted their graduates and the companies that employ them usually out of gratitude return th gift and opportunity they were given in a reasonable fashion - as do graduate from many other fine institutions as well as all the Service Academies - including USMMA.
So now in your last post you said:
"If the KP grad goes active duty, the DOD should pay the freight."
You may or may not know this, but that is NOT the case. There is no movement (e.g. MIPR) of funds, etc from DoD Budget Elements to the elements that pay for and support USMMA or any State Maritime Academy when a graduate chooses to go active duty. Personally, I'm fine with that, it would just be an additional administrative to make happen AND to make sure happened during DoD finacial audits to ensure Federal funds were moved from the right pocket to the left pocket.
I am simply saying that the USMMA mids who have no plans to go active duty military are getting the best deal imaginable in college education. And I don't begrudge them. Even full rides at the nation's best colleges and universities still have to go out, look for a job and compete against a much wider and deeper pool of competitors than KP grads.
Folks looking at USMMA should make NO mistake whe you graduate you may or may NOT have a job waiting for you. The top folks in each class will likely have them, like at any other top rated college. Others will have to look for them. They will also have to look for them pretty hard and for some reasonable amount of time in a manner constrained by their obligation before they can even hope to apply and successfully recieve a waiver from MARAD for a non-sailing or otherwise non-qualifying position.
The status the USMMA and other State Maritime Academy graduates are enjoying now vis' a vis' post graduate employment is no different than any other college graduate with a mjor that is either currently in demand or whose supply and demand in the marketplace is balanced. Of course you'll probably see that as further evidence why the industry should reimburse or pay additional fees or taxes or whatever you want call them to provide for the operation of USMMA as well as I assume the State Maritime Academies. I will again point out the industry and it's customers already pay a pretty hefty amount of fees and taxes that are greater than many other Western Maritime Nations require their private operators to pay. Probably should just agree to disagree here - I know that's my feeling now - I will never convince you of the wrong headedness of your thinking on this item ;-)
I get it you are fine with Government paying your sons to go to college because they have a definate ACTIVE DUTY commitment - but do they - is the one already in college on a full ROTC ride as well or will he be in the Army Reserve and only pay for what he's gotten from the Government with Reserve Duty?
I ask because in case folks reading this thread now might not understand USMMA is one of the largest Regiments of Navy Reserve Midshipmen in the NROTC program. They end up not with AD Commissions and unrestriced line designators - unless they petition and apply for them nor while they are at USMMA are they subject to UCMJ or many of the privleges of being on Active Duty - DoD Healthcare, monthly pay, etc. That is exactly because neither the Navy or any other DoD service foots their bill.
Our nation's decision to fund and subsidize maritime education had nothing to do with training active duty military officers. Of course that at a time when our number one "export" became projection of military force and the services that facilitated it's projection. The Department of Transportation provides this support, which is currently within it's charter. Previously, this was administrated by Department of Commerce when MARAD was part of that Cabinet Level Department. It is done so under the authority and auspices that date back to the establishment of the US Merchant Marine Cadet Corps that was part and parcel to the Mrchant Marine Act of 1936. On the basis of that response to issues in the global industry at the time, it was decided by a plaurarlity of our Legislative Branch to raise the level of training across the board for the industry for the good of the nation. An Act that resulted ultimately in the Establishment of Federal Training Centers in three locations in 1939 - 40 and the establishment of Kings Point in 1943 as well as the making of the USMMA as a permenant Federa Service Academy by a subsequent Act of Congress in 1956. I'm not sure at this point of the thread given all the malarky, devil's advocacy, opinion that may or may not be "informed opinions", etc. that has gone on in this thread that matters to anybody involved in the discussion but I figured a year from now when some prospective candidate comes to this forum looking for information he or she understands thi whole discussion is based on a "what if" and let's throw "stuff" against a wall and see what sticks and can entertain me by a 2006 USCG graduate, rather than anything real that might have been occuring in the industry they are considering going to USMMA to be part of, or changes to the support or advocacy of the current proponent of the industry in our Government. I guess from what recent grasduates tell me though they probably should regard having their time wasted by not fully informed USCG graduates who really don't have a complete understanding of the maritime industry they are regulating, as part of their training as should they pursue a career in the martime industry it likely won't be the last time it happens. (Sorry LITS - I couldn't resist, remember - "you started it (this mess of a thread) - so please don't go crying to Mommmy!")
During the run up and consideration of each of those decisions by our Congress, this exact item - should the Federal Government provide this level of support to the maritime industry - was pretty well and fully debated. Truth be told none of the reasons that it was ultimately decided they should have materially changed too significantly since then, IMO. Further those actions, including the one that made KP a permemenant governmental institution, also provided improvements to the way and funding levels the Federal Government provided for subsidization of the State Maritime Academies.
RE: "It doesn't pick on the US fleet but is assessed on everything that every vessel. I was just throwing numbers around knowing that they were too high, in order to make the point that it wouldn't cost the industry that much. Let them create a foundation and assess their membership however they want."
I'm pretty sure I explained my points clearly here howI disagree and it does "cost the industry" enough to be significant - further it's a global industry and the margins of transportation companies are pretty much razor thin in all modes. So anything that increases costs, even a litlle, hurts them because to be competative with other global players, those costs are usually NOT something they can pass fully on to their cutomers in today's marketplace and economy. If they do so and EVERYONE doesn't do the same, they loose business and it's a volume busienss - it's also a very capital intesive business - so ROI and ROA are key to "staying alive". That's why I think it's very important that when particpating in a spitballing kind of discussion on this industry, or any one where margins are razor thin, to be useful examples the numbers have to be more closely grounded in reality. The difference in this industry between 1% and 3% can be the difference between being a rockstar and being bankrupt.
So if I understand you, the only way to really serve the nation and others you feel is doing a meanigful fashion worthy of a free education at Federal taxpayer expense is to serve on Active Duty - sorry for being so direct but that's okay right cause apparently in your profession that's how you do it. Why do I now have mental image of Jack Nichalson in "A Few Good Men."
I'm fine with you, LITS and SamAca10 (a 20 or 21 YO kid who doesn't even know what he has left to start to learn in life and who i currently living on the largess provided by you, I and every other US taxpayer) having and putting forth your opinions on this subject. That said if I believe they are wrong headed, misinformed or spout something that may lead others down some crazy thought process because they aren't based in reality and they are about my and my son's Alma Mater or my son's current professional and my former professional field, I'm going to reply. This post is likely to be a direct and blunt as I'll get. I actually write these put them aside and read them before posting so if if they in any way are something you feel is disrespectful, as with your posts that I not my intent.
RE: " In my profession, we operate in short bursts of activity using an abbreviated language. That tendency seeps into a number of my posts and even in conversations with the DW. Just ask her."
Wow - that works for you and in your house? And I thought I was married to a saint...
Be well oh yeah and live long and prosper, etc...