Administration to Dismantle U.S. Merchant Marine?

Okay Jasper. I won't list the things I did or didn't say and I won't discuss my political philosophy. Most important, I intend no disrespect to anyone. 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.

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.

If the KP grad goes active duty, the DOD should pay the freight. If he/she doesn't go active duty, the mid and/or the industry should pay the freight. Do whatever the state maritime academies do. That's it! Nothing more nothing less.

My "tax" as you call it is simply paying for the training of those they will employ. 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.

The Webb Institute does it just fine. No tuition, no commitment. Jobs await the grads in the industries which support the school.

I couldn't get the DS's interested in Webb either.

KPEngineer, would you help me out here please!
 
Last edited:
Okay Jasper. I won't list the things I did or didn't say and I won't discuss my political philosophy. Most important, I intend no disrespect to anyone. 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.

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.

If the KP grad goes active duty, the DOD should pay the freight. If he/she doesn't go active duty, the mid and/or the industry should pay the freight. Do whatever the state maritime academies do. That's it! Nothing more nothing less.

My "tax" as you call it is simply paying for the training of those they will employ. 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.

The Webb Institute does it just fine. No tuition, no commitment. Jobs await the grads in the industries which support the school.

I couldn't get the DS's interested in Webb either.

KPEngineer, would you help me out here please!


First Webb Institute is free because of an endowment from its founder, which has an extremely small student body. Plus the endowment doesn't pay for everything. The industry does not support the school like you claim it does and use as an example like how Kings Point should be supported by the industry.

Second Kings Point grads are required to go to sea unlike their state maritime academy counterparts. They are fulfilling their obligation to the "tax" payer.
The "service obligation" is a much better deal to the tax payer than an ROTC grad or other academy grad. Think of it as this, Kings Pointers. go straight into an industry supporting the transportation and economic needs of the US by not only their work but as a tax payer. Once they graduate they become a contributing member of tax revenue to the federal government. By the time they complete their service obligation they have paid back their tuition through the taxes that they paid.
As a tax payer and an individual who pays a lot in taxes ROTC and the other academies are a huge drain of tax revenue. Let's be honest a $200,000 college education then followed by other military training, then 4-5 years of employment plus benefits all at the tax payers expense is the real deal. Also add on any addition training such as flight school, medical training, law school, grad school, and a host of other benefits. Also why should the tax payer be forced to subsidize a ROTC education in communications, journalism, music or a host of other college majors. It's not cost effective and isn't the best use of the money for a ROTC scholarship. Also individuals then have the chance at a civilian government job or lucrative defense contractor job, all payed for by the private individual. When does that individual start to really contribute to the tax base or stop taking from the tax base? Now I know your going to say they pay taxes, but in reality they don't. Getting paid by the federal government every month and then giving a portion back to the federal government isn't really paying taxes. The DoD is not and should not be a jobs program.
 
Last edited:
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...
 
Last edited:
You know folks this is an interesting thread- but it really doesn't support what should be the focus of the USMMA forum- namely informing those interested in attending the US Merchant Marine Academy about nominations, appointments and life at the Academy. I'm not the moderator for this forum or else I would just move this thread, but I would suggest that you let this one go or else start again in the off topic forum and leave this forum to provide information about KP itself.
 
KPEngineer, would you help me out here please!
Don't look at me you're doing just fine losing the argument all on your own. I'm with Jasper and TC on this one.

I think its a very germane thread. One of the quirks of USMMA compared to the other SAs is that you get a fair number of kids going to the school who really don't know much about the industry they are training to join. I think a little education for the prospective mids in that regard is a good thing.
 
One of the quirks of USMMA compared to the other SAs is that you get a fair number of kids going to the school who really don't know much about the industry they are training to join.

You did help me after all. All I am asking is that the industry and/or the mid pay the freight of those who train for the industry. Training for service in the military is something different and the gov should pay for that.

TC, William Webb made his fortune in shipbuilding. Ergo the industry pays the tuition of Webb students, all of whom study naval architecture and ocean engineering. The Cooper Union was endowed the same way. A wealthy industrialist endowed a school to train engineers to work in industry.

BTW. TC, you are the one who was bragging about the utility of KP based on the great pay and hours the graduates receive. My original post on this thread even quoted you.

Again I have nothing but the greatest respect for what KP and the State Maritimes do. I understand why we should subsidize a US flagged merchant fleet. I wish I had had the math skills to handle a KP education and I wish my math-skilled DS's shared the old man's love of the sea.
 
Last edited:
This thread has been going on for awhile now. Just my two cents. My DS recently returned from his required time at sea and the experience was extremely valuable.
 
Last edited:
I 2nd Bruno's opinion.

This discussion belongs on the GCaptain forums, not here.
 
You did help me after all. All I am asking is that the industry and/or the mid pay the freight of those who train for the industry. Training for service in the military is something different and the gov should pay for that.

TC, William Webb made his fortune in shipbuilding. Ergo the industry pays the tuition of Webb students, all of whom study naval architecture and ocean engineering. The Cooper Union was endowed the same way. A wealthy industrialist endowed a school to train engineers to work in industry.

BTW. TC, you are the one who was bragging about the utility of KP based on the great pay and hours the graduates receive. My original post on this thread even quoted you.

Again I have nothing but the greatest respect for what KP and the State Maritimes do. I understand why we should subsidize a US flagged merchant fleet. I wish I had had the math skills to handle a KP education and I wish my math-skilled DS's shared the old man's love of the sea.
A deep sea maritime industry supports the military's ability to project power overseas. The government is paying as much to have civilian mariners that it can get its hands on through the Navy Reserve as for anything else. The government may not actually use the civlian maritime fleet or its mariners but it is happy to pay for that capability should the need arise.

Bruno and Bugsy ... and how exactly would you know what is and is not a useful discussion for a prospective members of the maritime industry? No one is forcing you to read this thread, why are you even trolling throgh this USMMA forum? Oh right ... the cold weather, your Chair Force golf courses aren't open yet.
 
Last edited:
Bruno and Bugsy ... and how exactly would you know what is and is not a useful discussion for a prospective members of the maritime industry? No one is forcing you to read this thread, why are you even trolling throgh this USMMA forum? Oh right ... the cold weather, your Chair Force golf courses aren't open yet.

There are no limitations on who can comment and be involved in any discussion on this board as long as you remain respectful.

In case you didn't notice, Bruno is a moderator and his comment was designed to help keep the discussion on track. This is what moderators do here, and that role needs to be respected.

The purpose of this forum is to help candidates. Bickering among grown-ups doesn't do that.

If you have any questions about this, please feel free to ask. Otherwise, remain respectful of everyone and keep the comments civil.

Stealth_81
 
There are no limitations on who can comment and be involved in any discussion on this board as long as you remain respectful.

In case you didn't notice, Bruno is a moderator and his comment was designed to help keep the discussion on track. This is what moderators do here, and that role needs to be respected.

The purpose of this forum is to help candidates. Bickering among grown-ups doesn't do that.

If you have any questions about this, please feel free to ask. Otherwise, remain respectful of everyone and keep the comments civil.

Stealth_81
The discussion was on track, they just didn't think it was relevant. My point is that determining relevance requires a certain knowledge base which zoomies (a term of endearment and not meant pejorativley) don't necessarily have. I would not expect to be able to post in the other SA threads and remain unchallenged, neither should anyone without a demonstrable knowledge of the maritime industry expect to do so here.
 
RE: Admin to dismantle US Maritime

My apologies if my post offended anyone. I was the one that started this thread. As part of my due diligence and researching the maritime industry for my DS (which I know nothing about) I subscribe to Maritime Executive. Upon reading the editorial by Tony Munoz I was slightly worried when he said the US Maritime industry (not USMMA) was systematically being dismantled by this current admin, and mentioned the Jones Act and all that.

KP Enginneer and others posted some good information that experienced mariners will still be needed and others posted information about the great salaries some mariners get. Someone said the future would be in inland navigation which sounds interesting.

If this was the 1960s and my DS wanted to go into steel smelting I think it might have been a good idea to inquire with the big Pittsburgh steel mills to check their future prospects so that he would not waste training and gaining valuable skills on a declining sector where jobs would be hard to come by.

In closing, I think my thread was relative and I thank everyone for posting but I will say this. Some of the divisive back and forth posts coupled with technical information that neophytes like myself don't understand, in my opinion do not serve the interests of the board. I have been to Kings Point and have spoken to many wonderful and helpful alumni. I think that a Kings Point graduation is a proud and noble tradition which my DS would be proud of if he gets accepted. I just want to get all the information so that he can make the right choice.

Sincerely Bill
 
To prospective parents and students. After DS returned from his USMMA sponsored sea tour he was excited about future prospects as merchant mariner, like any profession some things frustrated him.

The thing I was most proud of was to see the maturity KP developed in him with the ability to weed thru the issues present in any industry or military service as he searches to find his own brass ring.
 
Bill: You have correctly called into question the derisive posts. They have endeavored to expose the thinly veiled predilection for provocation by some posters through a sustained line of inquiry which oft-times regarded very minute aspects of the maritime industry. Although in this instant you may doubt the value of the adequate retort, answers frequently required and therefore justified the engagement of highly technical information...inclusive of that which may be difficult for the layman to comprehend.

Your title for the original thread was certainly an eye-catcher. It also served as a magnet for those detractors who elected to expose an uninformed and disconcerted predisposition of the maritime industry in general as well as upon the USMMA in particular.

Good luck to your DS and best wishes as you assist him to discover a foretaste on every avenue of potential opportunity.
 
Last edited:
Jasper you are welcome to go onto the USCGA thread anytime you want and ask if the U.S. really needs a Coast Guard. I'm sure you're not the only one asking that. I also would agree that the Coast Guard is stretched far too thin and some of it's statutory missions suffer.

That said, it's MUCH easier for me to justify the existence of the Coast Guard Academy. It's not easy for me to justify the existence of a the Merchant Marine Academy, which apparently feeds a decentralized private industry while providing plenty of Navy Reserve officers....

I say that as supporter of the Merchant Marine Academy.

I like the institution. I have plenty of friends who are KPers. But as far as justifying the costs to run the place, while people can (and often do) ask about the justifications of funding the institutions, USMMA has the hardest time making that argument. And yes, before you accuse me of ignoring the USCGA's need to justify it, I know they do it, as does USMA, USNA and USAFA.

Sorry, that's just how it is. Maybe it shouldn't be that way, but that's the political environment we're in these days.
 
Last edited:
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!")


No no Jasper, that's OK. I think it's pretty clear who's crying the the thread and it aint the "USCG graduate". I'm just happy I didn't say anything about TWIC (because that's when the real crying begins, often directed at the USCG when it should be directed at TSA).

Remember, I'm not regulating the "maritime industry" now, and when I was in, I wasn't regulating commercial ships. So, sure I'm probably not the best person to talk about a industry that's "declining" and an academy that apparently has no real connection to that private industry. Then I think about those goofy merchant marine uniforms and I get even more confused.

If we were talking fishery boardings or migrants, sure, I got my hands dirty in that stuff. But the merchant fleet stuff was handled by sector folks.
 
... But as far as justifying the costs to run the place, while people can (and often do) ask about the justifications of funding the institutions, USMMA has the hardest time making that argument. And yes, before you accuse me of ignoring the USCGA's need to justify it, I know they do it, as does USMA, USNA and USAFA.

Sorry, that's just how it is. Maybe it shouldn't be that way, but that's the political environment we're in these days.

Okay on these points we do indeed agree - it is the environment we live in - everything Government does and pays for is being revisited and debated in what thanks to partisan politics rapidly seems, at least to me, to become stupidly so. We can further agree that because it's not easily shown in a direct causaul effect relationship, USMMA has a harder time doing this than any of the other four Federal Service Academies.

I don't go over and particpate in the other forums here because of two things: 1) They have more than enough informed and educated participants both alumni, parents and prospective candidates, and whenever I'm tempted to post someone else usually has done so with a very close comment on what I would say. 2) I'm not an active member of those communities "in the real world" so doing so here in cyberspace just doesn't make sense to me, since as pointed out the real purpose of these forums is to supply information (hopefully relevant and accurate) to those thinking of joining or just becoming part of these communities.

The only thing I'll add on this point is in the case of USCGA and it's justification, based on what we saw in the USMMA community dilution and spread of mission, while possibly initially helping a little, in the longer run (over the past 18 years) those tides have hurt USMMA in it's justification for funding. As I think I might be the one the OP alluded to in getting too technical, etc. and my posts here have been pretty longwinded if you or anyone else like SamAca10 want details and specifics just PM me.
 
Last edited:
... I'm just happy I didn't say anything about TWIC (because that's when the real crying begins, often directed at the USCG when it should be directed at TSA).

Remember, I'm not regulating the "maritime industry" now, and when I was in, I wasn't regulating commercial ships. So, sure I'm probably not the best person to talk about a industry that's "declining" and an academy that apparently has no real connection to that private industry. Then I think about those goofy merchant marine uniforms and I get even more confused.

If we were talking fishery boardings or migrants, sure, I got my hands dirty in that stuff. But the merchant fleet stuff was handled by sector folks.

So in order - actually in the specifics I doubt I would decry much if anything you have to say about TWIC. Most of the fruror over TWIC is because most in industry do not understand the real reason for the original rule effort - which predated 9/11, DHS or TSA. The real reason is the background check and haveing better awareness of who is working in and around our transportion industry and hubs, and having at least some database with that information in it avaialable in a proactive fashion. At least that's how I've always understood it and I've been involved with TWIC or on it's peripherary going back to just prior to 2000. Further actually I don't really blame most of the maritime industries woes and complaints with TWIC on DHS, USCG, or TSA. To me again the issues are rooted in the way DHS-TSA was led astray by the contractor who won the first prototype contract and then conducted it. Further despite that, in my view it still, delivers value to Government in regards to it's primary purpose. As I alluded it could also likely provide more value to the industry folks and companies compelled to buy and use TWIC but again I'd rather not pull this thread into an area where one has to read through technical jargon, etc as well as the whole "HSPD-12" world. They really aren't relevant to anything anyone considering attending or already participating in any of the SAs need concern themselves. I'll only conclude with this - the root of my comments here re: the original contractor (not one of my former employers LM) is that they pushed hard and got TSA involved in setting standards and technical performance requirements (very specific "how these items must work kind of things) for TWIC card readers vice just identifying and defining functional requirements (what it must do, maximum processing/wait times, and what data it must output as a minumum type of things.) That's why as cmakin noted he's"never seen a TWIC reader" that worked ... yet. It's also why so many who have to buy and maintain TWIC see no real use or benefit from doing so. As I said that really wasn't TSA or DHS' fault they hired someone and paid them a lot to help them sort things out and in this area they got very bad advice and consul, though to be fair fully compliant with the contracts statement of work.

As for the maritime industry "declining" depends on how we define it, certainly there are fewer vessels, particularly US Flag. The amount of cargo transported though hasn't declined and our Naition's need to use "Maritime" as a key and even primary shipment mode for imports and exports of virtually all key items, particulalrly commodities such as oil, has certainly not declined. Also to be fair, when I reported to USMMA for INDOC 34 1/2+ years ago, maybe, just maybe, more people understood and supported the relationship and value of the maritime industry to the nation than today - but my feeling is if that was so the difference was only slightly so. We like the current members of the Regiment of Midshipmen frequently found ourselves explaining the difference between ourselves and members of the USMC ... us: "No, no, I'm not a Marine - I'm a Merchant Marine - we operate ships." ... man on street (MIS): "Oh, I get it - so you're in some special group in the Navy! ... us: "Closer but not exactly... we do serve in the Navy Reserves but we operate commercial ships, freighters and tankers, etc. and that's what the school trains us to do." ... MIS: "Why does the Government (my taxes) pay for that?, seems like a great deal." us: [this thread] ... MIS: one of two results either a) shakes head walking away after saying "Great deal for you" or b) Buys round of beers for us at one of many local NYC Irish Bars - and if he bought us a second round we'd teach him the words to "Heave Ho" ... :wink:

No sense in going into whether or not we (Merchant Mariners) think MSO should or shouldn't be prt of or one of the current 11 missions of USCG and that's a whole nother thread if someone wanted to start it here. The whole 11 missions thing as well as MSO and Maritine Industry Regulation and frankly as a Government Policy perspective pretty pointless in my view as that ship sailed when post 9/11 DHS was formed and any sort of regulation oversight of the Transportation Industry moved to DHS from DOT (FAA vs. TSA; MARAD vs USCG MSO and/or TSA, etc.).

Finally and actually there really is no reason for those "goofy" Merchant Marine Uniforms and no requirement for them so that's probably why they are goofy to a guy who served in a service with a real, defined set of uniforms and regulations governing everything to do with them. That said they do/did help us get a free beer every once in a while and with the price of a beer in NYC and the fact we did not get paid while at school, every little helped/helps.
 
Last edited:
See now, we're agreeing on plenty.

I think it's probably important to remember that Coast Guardsmen aren't generally shouting from the mountaintops "give me more missions." It's dictated by Congress, rightly or wrongly, whether the monies there or not.

I think some missions do suffer. I also have had plenty of sector community, specifically MSO folks, who aren't happy with the way the Coast Guard moves it's folks around. How can someone inspect for 3 years, rotate into something totally unrelated for 4 years and then MAYBE get back into the more-regulatory heavy stuff? Not sure. I don't have the answer, and even if I did, I'm just a lowly Coast Guard veteran, and as I distinctly remember thinking as a AD officer, sometimes veterans can insert themselves a little too much, especially as they become less connected with the changes.

TWIC's a mess because DHS didn't roll it out correctly, and TSA absolutely tried to clean their hands of it. There were some high-level issues between the TSA and Coast Guard with the initial implementation.
 
Back
Top