A federal judge has blocked the state of Hawaii from enforcing a recently enacted ban on firearms on its prized beaches and in other areas including banks, bars and parks, citing last year's landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling expanding gun rights.

A federal judge has blocked the state of Hawaii from enforcing a recently enacted ban on firearms on its prized beaches and in other areas including banks, bars and parks, citing last year’s landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling expanding gun rights.

  • Zaktor@lemmy.world
    1·
    1 year ago

    Wild. And the unions who argue against free-tradeism are the bad guys?

    Labor is almost always the largest contributor to any business’s costs and offshoring it is very popular with capital, so waving away the 75% American crew requirement as “not about the workers” is wrong. From a DOT study, in 2010 an American crew costs 5x what a foreign crew does.

    I live in Hawaii and while I don’t like paying more to subsidize US domestic shipbuilding (if the government wants to subsidize our shipyards, they should do it themselves), but when the major voices advocating for this (in Hawaii) are Republicans, libertarians, and business-oriented Democrats like Ed Case (one can argue those aren’t really three separate categories), I get wary. Because this sure looks like every other time capital wanted to stop having to pay so many expensive Americans with their benefits and labor protections when they could instead offload to foreign workers without any of that. And they pinky swear promise they’ll give us cheaper stuff in return rather than just pocketing the difference.

      • Zaktor@lemmy.world
        11·
        1 year ago

        You can talk all you want about an international brotherhood, but these are people’s livelihoods you’re dismissing as unimportant.

        And requiring American labor IS stipulating working conditions, because there is a very real difference between the working conditions of Americans and foreign sailors. This sounds like all you ever engage in is theory, while capital favors foreign workers because they don’t have the same power (and expense) that American workers have.

        Much of the American owned fishing fleet is entirely staffed by much cheaper foreign labor unable to leave their ships because their American company can get away with not applying for work visas. They didn’t just happen to end up with foreign crews effectively held captive during port calls, they do it because they’re cheaper and unable to easily challenge their bosses on conditions.

        https://www.ap.org/explore/seafood-from-slaves/hawaiian-seafood-caught-foreign-crews-confined-boats.html

        This isn’t a case of an open labor market where everyone is on an equal footing and Americans simply choose not to do this work. Americans simply can’t work for 70 cents an hour and bosses prize workers that don’t have worker protections and can’t demand more.

        For many boat owners, the fishermen are a bargain: Bait and ice can cost more than crew salaries. Some of the foreign workers in Hawaii earn less than $5,000 for a full year. By contrast, the average pay for an American deckhand nationwide last year was $28,000, sometimes for jobs that last just a few months, according to government statistics. Experienced American crew members working in Alaska can make up to $80,000 a year.

        An American crew has recourse and the force of law when an employer just refuses to pay their workers.

        U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Coast Guard routinely inspect the Hawaiian boats. At times, fishermen complain they’re not getting paid and officers say they tell owners to honor the contracts. But neither agency has any authority over actual wages.

        When your labor solidarity philosophy leads you to support and defend the position of capital, a position known to depower workers and empower abuse, it feels like that’s the point where you should be thinking about what the whole point is.

          • Zaktor@lemmy.world
            11·
            1 year ago

            What? This response is incoherent. American crews cost more, significantly more than foreign crews, and that has a significant impact on costs. Labor is 2/3 of the operating cost for domestic shipping and 1/3 for foreign shipping. Domestic workers costing more and offshoring being cheaper aren’t some new theory, they’re the bedrock motivation for global free trade. Are you a real person?

            And why do you ignore that your philosophy just happens to align with capital? This just read like a neoliberal screed about supporting the global south through deregulation.

              • Zaktor@lemmy.world
                11·
                1 year ago

                I see you’ve again ignored that your anti-protectionist political philosophy lines up exactly with the desires of capital and against that of organized labor.

                I’ve read this philosophy before, from proud neoliberals. That’s why I question your authenticity.

                  • Zaktor@lemmy.world
                    1·
                    1 year ago

                    Organized labor sure thinks it is. And it’s not like these free-trade jobs are going to organized labor elsewhere, it’s going to people being exploited with no recourse.

                    And yes, I think it’s very likely labor is a major component of shipping cost increase from the Jones Act, and would love to see you provide literally any proof otherwise, because I’ve shown you a study of costs that directly compares them. I am notably not saying it’s only cost, but it is almost certainly a major driver, for the simple fact that labor is almost always the major cost in a business and why capital is so desperate to offshore or replace it.

                    I’ve answered your question. Why is your position aligned with capital?