Carnival will not pay for Coast Guard Assistance

[ib4cruzn]

I think part of the argument would be that the CG was rescuing US taxpayers on board those ships. Having said that I would not have a problem with Carnival occurring some of the expenses for these mishaps.

 

I think all cruisers should be rescued by their respective country's Coast Guard.

[SPKEMO]

I'm so confused. Was Carnival invoiced? Nope! How can they pay for something that cannot be billed?

[jonbgd]

This what the USCG gets paid for from our taxes. They float around in their little boats and wait to help people(and bust drug runners)

[Seavoyage]

Iraq had nothing to do with 911 you know. What happened in Iraq was many times worse than the horror in nyc etc. Perhaps the US should be billed.:)

 

Well this certainly does not have anything to do with cruising but here goes...ok I'm going to take the high road here and restrain comment on your ignorance about NYC and the horrifying events that occurred on 9/11. You would not feel that way if it happened in your neighborhood - to people you know...

 

So World Citizen you think Saddam Hussein should have remained in power to terrorize the Iraqi people and continue his quest to promote terrorism throughout the World? WOW- really?

 

Regarding your misinformed and arrogant comment about billing the United States..

 

Don't despair - The US pays dearly. The United States gives Billions upon Billions upon Billions of our hard earned tax dollars in undeserved Foreign Aid to undeserved countries like Iraq...and why, so we can protect ourselves against individuals that want to destroy what our Forefathers fought for- Freedom and Liberty!

 

Look it up...

Foreignassistance.gov

 

Warning to US Citizens - disgusting website alert!

 

You must be real joy to be around at dinner parties World Citizen..

 

"Don't Tread On Me!"

 

This board is certainly not a platform for politics and therefore I apologize to the monitors - but the post by World Citizen deserved a response. Seavoyage Out...

[expat1948]

Comparing what happens in your town when you need to call out the emergency services is, really, quite irrelevant here.

 

It has not only been the tradition going back to the medieval sea codes, but also, in more recent times, a requirement enshrined in international law and various treaties, that any ship at sea will render aid to any other ship that is in distress and that any ship in distress can expect other ships in proximity to come to her aid. About the only exemption is that a ship is not expected to put itself in jeopardy when aiding another ship in distress. Even in times of war, this tradition was and is adhered to.

 

Aiding another ship is just something that is morally right and something that is just done. In fact, here in the UK there is an organisation called the Royal National Lifeboat Institution which operates over 400 rescue boats around the coast of Britain and Ireland. The RNLI has been in existence since 1824 and the vast majority of people who man the lifeboats are volunteers. They will and do go out in some of the worst weather conditions you can imagine to rescue those "souls in peril on the sea".

 

Just to make a final point, this is a tradition that politicians should not try to make mileage out of just to further their own agenda

[world~citizen]

...This board is certainly not a platform for politics and therefore I apologize to the monitors - but the post by World Citizen deserved a response. Seavoyage Out...

 

I agree, this is not a forum for politics.

 

I have lived in NYC for many years and have many friends there.:)

 

As to your observations, they are not new.

 

I am going to read a newspaper now, then a book. You should give it a try.

 

Smooth sailing...

[firerunner]

Unfortunately what Carnival AND ALL CRUISE LINES do when needing Coast Guard assistance is legal. It is NO DIFFERENT then big corp getting out of paying taxes because of legal loopholes in the tax code. People complained about Romneys tax situation BUT he utilized the tax code as written just like cruise lines utilize the maritime law as written..

 

 

It is the law..it needs changed..until then...right or wrong...they are doing what is allowed.

 

So I am not sure why this is even being debated until the laws change..it is irrelevant.

[Sargent_Schultz]

If Carnival did pay, it would just be another tax deduction. :p:p:p

[okgirl]

The fire department in my city does not charge because they are supported by my tax dollars. They don't service outside areas unless there is a massive fire, in which case there are reciprocal agreements with all area fire departments- they don't agree to help those that don't help them.

 

 

Therefore, I would feel better about Carnival not paying for services if they paid a bit more in taxes, but rather, like every other corporation, they use every legal means possible to avoid that; but still accept all the services the taxes should be paying for.

 

There is no such thing as a good corporate citizen anymore.

 

There is simply no capability for Carnival or any other cruiseline or sea going vessel that needs assistance from the Coast Guard to pay for those services. The Senator even admitted that the Congress would have to pass laws to make that possible.

 

So the whole taxpaying community has to subsidize the few among them who cruise?

 

No, they have to subsidize all who are in need of rescue within the coastal waterways that the CG is responsible for and required by current law to serve.

[Talex831]

New letters from Carnival Corporation to Senator Jay Rockefeller indicate that the cruise line has no intent to reimburse the U.S. Coast Guard and Navy for assistance in the recent Carnival Triumph accident, the 2010 Carnival Splendor incidents, or any future problem where they require help from the U.S. government to aid a distressed vessel.

The senator from West Virginia penned a letter March 14 to Carnival CEO Micky Arison alleging that the U.S. Coast Guard responded to 90 “serious events” involving Carnival ships over five years, and that the Coast Guard and Navy had shelled out $4.2 million to cover the Carnival Triumph and Carnival Splendor incidents. The senator asked whether Carnival, since it pays “little or nothing in federal taxes,” will reimburse the Coast Guard and Navy.

90 serious events over 5 years.....don't pay taxes to fund the Coast Guard. Coast Guard (funded by Homeland Security) and Navy (funded by DOD) spent $4.2 million on 2 incidents in the last couple months.

 

Why shouldn't Carnival need to pay something for this?

 

And who pays for Homeland and DOD? Are they not federal agencies? Agencies that rely on federal tax dollars to survive? I am sick of paying for all of the crap the government blows our money on. I say, too bad, so sad, you actually had to spend some money on our own citizens. Get a grip Washington!

[lovesublime]

Iraq had nothing to do with 911 you know. What happened in Iraq was many times worse than the horror in nyc etc. Perhaps the US should be billed.:)

 

 

 

 

I'm speechless. WOW!!!

[SuiteTraveler]

What I would like to know is the following:

 

1. The article says that the Coast Guard has had to respond to 90 serious incidents involving Carnival ships in the last 5 years. How does that compare to other cruise lines? Just to make the comparison as fair as possible, I'd like to know the actual statistics based on number of ships within the cruiseline and number of passengers and/or crew rescued.

 

2. Precidence: Have any other cruiselines or shipping lines ever reimbursed the US Coast Guard or any other country's Coast Guard for rescues?

 

3. Would the right place to put this type of charge would be as some sort of tax for using a US port. Do we have a tax like that already or not?

[world~citizen]

And who pays for Homeland and DOD? Are they not federal agencies? Agencies that rely on federal tax dollars to survive? I am sick of paying for all of the crap the government blows our money on. I say, too bad, so sad, you actually had to spend some money on our own citizens. Get a grip Washington!

 

Public finances are at that state. As noted in the thread, public service costs are being charged back wherever possible in a number of jurisdictions world wide - and we may reasonably expect this trend to continue.

 

Perhaps legislation should be considered to charge back coast guard services to cruise ships should circumstances demonstrate negligence on the part of the carrier. Would that actually be unreasonable?

 

I am quite alarmed at the state of world finance. These things are coming. Fairness, whatever we perceive that to be, won't enter into it.

[Carnivaluver]

Unfortunately what Carnival AND ALL CRUISE LINES do when needing Coast Guard assistance is legal. It is NO DIFFERENT then big corp getting out of paying taxes because of legal loopholes in the tax code. People complained about Romneys tax situation BUT he utilized the tax code as written just like cruise lines utilize the maritime law as written..

 

 

It is the law..it needs changed..until then...right or wrong...they are doing what is allowed.

 

So I am not sure why this is even being debated until the laws change..it is irrelevant.

 

I guess it is a matter of corporate responsibility that is being argued. If you get injured on a Carnival ship and have no trip/medical coverage you are responsible for the bill and Carnival is not going to come to your financial aid.

 

When Carnival ships have a problem they seem to have no problem seeking Coast Guard help but are unwilling to pay for those services even though the problem was with the ship itself.

 

It seems to me if you stretch these arguments to an absurd level then some people are saying that BP should have not had to pay for anything to do with the Gulf oil spill just because they had a problem with one of their wells. We should have cleaned it up for them because they pay a lot of taxes to the government and it is the least we can do.

 

Others are saying that BP should pay for the spill just like Carnival should pay for services when something goes wrong with one of it's ships. :cool:

[world~citizen]

I'm speechless. WOW!!!

 

I am actually interested, do you believe Iraq organized or was otherwise implicated in the 911 horror?

[big_duck]

What I would like to know is the following:

 

1. The article says that the Coast Guard has had to respond to 90 serious incidents involving Carnival ships in the last 5 years. How does that compare to other cruise lines? Just to make the comparison as fair as possible, I'd like to know the actual statistics based on number of ships within the cruiseline and number of passengers and/or crew rescued.

 

2. Precidence: Have any other cruiselines or shipping lines ever reimbursed the US Coast Guard or any other country's Coast Guard for rescues?

 

3. Would the right place to put this type of charge would be as some sort of tax for using a US port. Do we have a tax like that already or not?

 

1. Actually the article didn't say 90 serious incidents it said 90 incidents. Arrison said that only 7 were serious, and that is over all Carnival lines.

 

2. Not that I am aware of (environmental cleanups aside).

 

3. Cruise ships are charged a tax and or fee every time they tie up anywhere.

[jonbgd]

2. Precidence: Have any other cruiselines or shipping lines ever reimbursed the US Coast Guard or any other country's Coast Guard for rescues?

 

 

No that is what they get paid to do

[SuiteTraveler]

1. There is more than one article and they apparently say differnt things. The one I read said this:

 

"Carnival (CCL -1.58%), the world's largest cruise operator, has rejected a request from a powerful U.S. senator that it reimburse the U.S. government for the costs it incurs for rescuing the company's ships when they become disabled.

 

According to Senator Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., the U.S. Coast Guard has responded to 90 "serious events" involving Carnival ships over the past five years, including the rescue of the Carnival Triumph (pictured) in February and the 2010 operation to assist the Carnival Splendor.

 

http://money.msn.com/now/post.aspx?post=a4f3dad9-39f2-4a01-9ea6-a2149da30f48

 

Apparently Sen. Rockefeller said the incidents were serious. I'd say if the Coast Guard had to be called, then the incident WAS likely serious. Coast Guard is usually called for overboards, heli-med-evac, stranded ships, sinking ships, not for things like a skinned knee or broken arm. It's not like calling an ambulance or even the fire department. There are specific criteria that the ships personnel would have to believe were met before making such a call. Given, you cannot blame a cruiseline for a passenger suffering a sudden medical crisis in most cases, which is why I would like to see the statistics for all cruiselines on how many incidents they have had the Coast Guard respond to in the past 5 years. I'd like to see the incidents classified by type and statistically equalized to show if Carnival has more incidents than other cruiselines or not.

 

I'm not against any specific cruiseline, but as a consumer, I'd like to have these facts when I choose which cruiseline to cruise on next.

 

2. When you think about the environmental cleanups, that is somewhat equivalent to rescues if the cruiseline knew the ship had problems, yet sent it out anyway. What if an airline sent out an airplane that maintenance knew had a serious problem but thought it could hold off on the repair until the plane got to its next destination? Would the airline bear any liability for that? Should they have to pay anything if the plane crashes or makes an emergency landing?

 

3. I am now wondering if the Senate or Congress will come up with a new bill to charge cruises companies who have had incidents extra tax at US ports. I can't imagine that Carnival would totally pull out of all US ports.

 

1. Actually the article didn't say 90 serious incidents it said 90 incidents. Arrison said that only 7 were serious, and that is over all Carnival lines.

 

2. Not that I am aware of (environmental cleanups aside).

 

3. Cruise ships are charged a tax and or fee every time they tie up anywhere.

[airmj2123]

The services the USCG rendered were more than funded by the fees that CCL pays to use US ports to home port.

 

 

If you believe that CCL should pay more taxes, fix congress.

[Troller's]

The Coast Guard is not there to help and protect Carnival Cruise Lines or any other company. They are there to protect human lives and our enviroment. The Coast Guard did not tow the Triumph, a private tug company did. The Coast Guard did not repair the ship or get it into the dock. Carnival paid someone else for that. The Coast Guard provided coordination and assistance during the tow to ensure the safety of all the tax paying American passengers on board. They removed the sick and injured from the ship and brought supplies that would promote human life on board during the crisis. This is what I expect to get for my taxes. I am fine with this. Everyone is home safe and the Coast Guard did one hell of a job.

 

Do we reimburse the cop that stops when our car breaks down on the side of the highway? Some one posted that this is not the same thing. I strongly disagree. this is not about Carnival this is about all those people that were on board and had to go thru that. It's a shame that people would think it's right to charge those in distress for providing assistance and compassion during a time of crisis.

 

Bottom line is the Coast Guard did their job. They protected the lives of the passengers. They are home and safe. As for the Coast Guard, they have already been paid for by the tax payers that they protect. As for the poor Carnival Triumph, it's still playing bumper boats down in Mobile and I'm sure Carnival will have to pay for that.

[airmj2123]

1.

Apparently Sen. Rockefeller said the incidents were serious. I'd say if the Coast Guard had to be called, then the incident WAS likely serious. Coast Guard is usually called for overboards, heli-med-evac, stranded ships, sinking ships, not for things like a skinned knee or broken arm. It's not like calling an ambulance or even the fire department. There are specific criteria that the ships personnel would have to believe were met before making such a call. Given, you cannot blame a cruiseline for a passenger suffering a sudden medical crisis in most cases, which is why I would like to see the statistics for all cruiselines on how many incidents they have had the Coast Guard respond to in the past 5 years. I'd like to see the incidents classified by type and statistically equalized to show if Carnival has more incidents than other cruiselines or not.

 

I'm not against any specific cruiseline, but as a consumer, I'd like to have these facts when I choose which cruiseline to cruise on next.

 

2. When you think about the environmental cleanups, that is somewhat equivalent to rescues if the cruiseline knew the ship had problems, yet sent it out anyway. What if an airline sent out an airplane that maintenance knew had a serious problem but thought it could hold off on the repair until the plane got to its next destination? Would the airline bear any liability for that? Should they have to pay anything if the plane crashes or makes an emergency landing?

 

3. I am now wondering if the Senate or Congress will come up with a new bill to charge cruises companies who have had incidents extra tax at US ports. I can't imagine that Carnival would totally pull out of all US ports.

 

1) Overboards and Medivacs are not included in the 90 figure... All incidents involving fire, allision (hitting something), and any sort of mechanical issue are reported... The report from the USCG highlighting CCL's 90 incidents didn't have many incidents listed for other cruise lines (the 90 are for Carnival Corp. and only when a ship is operating from the US, the majority of which were very minor in nature). Cruise ships are required to report these incidents to the coast guard.

 

3) If Carnival pulled out of US ports, the economy would hurt a lot more than the money for services rendered.

[expat1948]

"Hello Titanic here. Is that the Carpathian? Can you help us, we are sinking fast?"

 

"Yes Titanic, Carpathian here. We can come to your aid. But, before we do, could you please let us know who your insurance carrier is? If you don't currently have insurance, can you please supply credit card details"

 

"Titanic, Carpathian here. We are still waiting for the information. Hello, Titanic, are you there? Hello......"

 

Seriously, is this the road that we want to go down? To me, this would be wrong on just about any level of what is right and wrong

[Troller's]

Hopefully Senator Jay Rockefeller is reading this post because I would like to say something to him as a citizen of the United States that he has sworn to work for and serve.

 

PLEASE STOP WASTING YOUR TIME WITH THIS WITCH HUNT! We have greater needs in this country and we can't be wasting tax payers dollars on bullying a Cruise Line about unfortunate situations plaguing their operations. This will not cost the Cruise Lines or our Government. It will cost all of us tax payers so I ask that you please end this now!

[ItsAllAboutTheSass]

As a US Citizen I differ with you WC. The US was indeed invited - the moment the terrorists decided to take over and plow our US planes into our World Trade Centers, our Pentagon and killed our people on our soil...we were invited on September 11, 2001.

 

And I also think Carnival should reimburse our US Coast Guard...the Carnival ships are not registered in the US and they avoid many corporate taxes that would typically be paid by a US registered corporation - so the argument that they should bill a Cuban refugee is pretty far off IMHO. The refugee is not a for profit corporation - there is a difference here...

 

Corporations don't pay taxes. Individuals do. Any taxes assessed to a corporation are passed onto their customers in the form or price increases.

[Warm Breezes]

The Coast Guard is not there to help and protect Carnival Cruise Lines or any other company. They are there to protect human lives and our enviroment. The Coast Guard did not tow the Triumph' date=' a private tug company did. The Coast Guard did not repair the ship or get it into the dock. Carnival paid someone else for that. The Coast Guard provided coordination and assistance during the tow to ensure the safety of all the tax paying American passengers on board. They removed the sick and injured from the ship and brought supplies that would promote human life on board during the crisis. This is what I expect to get for my taxes. I am fine with this. Everyone is home safe and the Coast Guard did one hell of a job.

 

Do we reimburse the cop that stops when our car breaks down on the side of the highway? Some one posted that this is not the same thing. I strongly disagree. this is not about Carnival this is about all those people that were on board and had to go thru that. It's a shame that people would think it's right to charge those in distress for providing assistance and compassion during a time of crisis.

 

Bottom line is the Coast Guard did their job. They protected the lives of the passengers. They are home and safe. As for the Coast Guard, they have already been paid for by the tax payers that they protect. As for the poor Carnival Triumph, it's still playing bumper boats down in Mobile and I'm sure Carnival will have to pay for that.[/quote']

 

Like:)