"The domestic shipping industry is an economic behemoth in Florida, contributing 52,140 maritime jobs and $9.6 billion to Florida’s economy, according to a 2014 study by PricewaterhouseCoopers. The Port of Jacksonville is the nation’s hub for Jones Act shipping to Puerto Rico, and Florida ranks second among all states in jobs affected by the domestic maritime industry."
> "The domestic shipping industry is an economic behemoth in Florida, contributing 52,140 maritime jobs and $9.6 billion to Florida’s economy, according to a 2014 study by PricewaterhouseCoopers. The Port of Jacksonville is the nation’s hub for Jones Act shipping to Puerto Rico, and Florida ranks second among all states in jobs affected by the domestic maritime industry."
While that's true, that's not the reason that Democrats specifically are unwilling to touch the Jones Act. Florida is a pretty purple state, and Democratic senators from other states don't care as much about the shipping industry in Florida. Furthermore, Marco Rubio (a Republican) represents Florida, but he was actually a strong advocate of waiving (though not repealing) the Jones Act after Hurricane Maria.
The reason Democrats in particular are unwilling to touch the Jones Act is because the AFL-CIO lobbies for it very, very heavily. The AFL-CIO lobbies for the Jones Act in general because it boosts the demand for jobs in unions that they control. In addition, the AFL-CIO also has a "complicated" relationship with Puerto Rico, which is why they so specifically opposed temporarily waiving the Jones Act for Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria hit, even though they've begrudgingly accepted temporary waivers for US cities hit by other recent hurricanes (like Harvey in Houston).
> The reason Democrats in particular are unwilling to touch the Jones Act is because the AFL-CIO lobbies for it very, very heavily.
Plenty of Democrats, especislly since Bill Clinton’s Presidency, have been on the side of corporations against the AFL-CIO and organized labor generally on lots of issues of central importance.
> Plenty of Democrats, especislly since Bill Clinton’s Presidency, have been on the side of corporations against the AFL-CIO and organized labor generally on lots of issues of central importance.
First of all, the AFL-CIO is a corporation, so this isn't really a meaningful dichotomy.
But moreover, I'm not sure why this comment is at all relevant? Sure, sometimes Democrats might not always vote the way the AFL-CIO wants, but that doesn't change the fact that the AFL-CIO are major influencers of the Democratic party platform, and it's not at all debatable that the AFL-CIO has lobbied incredibly heavily in favor of the Jones Act.
Yeah. That's precisely the idea behind "freedom of speech", that even if you're restricted in doing a lot of things, the restrictions on talking about is as little as possible.
Talking about it influences opinions, and when critical mass is reached, even autocratic governments sometimes are forced to abide by the consensus of their people.
Noone's claiming that China is a better or more progressive country btw, just that in this very specific regard, US is worse than China.
People always say this, but nobody can ever point to a solid example. Do you have hard numbers that government social programs are less efficient than charity?
Just because one branch/department is wasteful doesn't mean others are. Trim that military budget and you'll start seeing efficiencies simply because they don't have that extra trillion to spunk up the wall.
Your payment processor tacks on sales tax. Just list where you have nexus. You get a number at the end of the quarter that you pay when you file taxes.
With VAT, you have to keep careful track of input VAT and sometimes later claim repayment from various governments.
There is a lot of obligatory registration and document submission.
The velocity of legislative change is high, especially when summed across member states.
Small entities have an incentive to underreport. Thus, a lot of enforcement activity is targeted at small entities.
