Lost ID and cruise is Saturday

[sparks1093]

26 minutes ago, donaldsc said:

 

I guess that I would be a very bad 1st responder then.

 

DON

It isn't for everyone.

[grumpyjr88]

On 8/19/2021 at 7:25 PM, Flatbush Flyer said:

Good point!!! So true.
And here we have yet another perfect example of why anyone who wants to (or does) travel a lot should have a passport as well as a Driver’s License. 

My passport was lost 4 days before one of my cruises. I only took it out to pack and it disappeared never to be found again. So, yeah... Having both didn't help me at all. 

[grumpyjr88]

On 8/22/2021 at 4:57 PM, sparks1093 said:

It could be obtained for most of course,, but many may not be interested in paying money just to have redundancy.

Some ppl can't really afford a passport either. 

[rkacruiser]

18 hours ago, grumpyjr88 said:

Some ppl can't really afford a passport either. 

 

😲       If so, then is it the best use of their financial resources to be cruising? 

[sparks1093]

5 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

 

😲       If so, then is it the best use of their financial resources to be cruising? 

Not my call. If that is what they want to do then at least the odds are as much in their favor as they are for someone who has decided not to get a passport for another reason.

Edited August 30, 2021 by sparks1093

[rkacruiser]

10 minutes ago, sparks1093 said:

Not my call. If that is what they want to do then at least the odds are as much in their favor as they are for someone who has decided not to get a passport for another reason.

 

Agree.  

[grumpyjr88]

5 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

 

😲       If so, then is it the best use of their financial resources to be cruising? 

Why is it your business how people spend their money? 💁‍♀️

[Flatbush Flyer]

1 hour ago, grumpyjr88 said:

Why is it your business how people spend their money? 💁‍♀️

Excellent question.

FWIW: As someone else perhaps suggested in their post, some folks do have certain financial priorities (often recreational/non-essential) that, while they may not be in their own or their family’s best interests, may ultimately impact others when it comes to who is paying the lion’s share of graduated income taxes necessary to support government programs focused on public financial assistance.

Please understand that my comment is not made as a political statement. Rather, it’s just a dose of reality about the opinions (warranted or not) of many upper middle class taxpayers. 

[MamaFej]

On 8/27/2021 at 1:01 PM, donaldsc said:

As an example, if you go out hiking in a bad place or you are not prepared, don't expect first responders to go out and rescue you.

 

DON

Where on earth did you get that idea? Certainly not from an actual first responder. 

 

As my father and husband often said, "If it weren't for dumbasses, I'd have to go get another job." 

You might be amazed at the high percentage of stupid calls police, fire, and EMTs respond to, including many in the wilderness. Heck, Hubby's department bought a drone specifically to be able to drop supplies to fools in the wildlands waiting to be rescued. It also helps with charting paths for the rescuers. 

 

Like health care workers, first responders are consummate professionals who value human life, even stupid human life. 

[donaldsc]

44 minutes ago, MamaFej said:

Where on earth did you get that idea? Certainly not from an actual first responder. 

 

As my father and husband often said, "If it weren't for dumbasses, I'd have to go get another job." 

You might be amazed at the high percentage of stupid calls police, fire, and EMTs respond to, including many in the wilderness. Heck, Hubby's department bought a drone specifically to be able to drop supplies to fools in the wildlands waiting to be rescued. It also helps with charting paths for the rescuers. 

 

Like health care workers, first responders are consummate professionals who value human life, even stupid human life. 

 

I never said that 1st responders were  not professionals - they most certainly are and I respect what they do.  I also respect that they risk their own lives to rescue people who get into difficulties because they do stupid things and in my opinion perhaps don't deserve to be rescued..   We need them.

 

My point was that you also need a certain mindset to be a 1st responder and I just don't have that mindset.  Society is just lucky that some people do have that mindset and we are lucky to have them.

 

DON

[MamaFej]

11 minutes ago, donaldsc said:

 

I never said that 1st responders were  not professionals - they most certainly are and I respect what they do.  I also respect that they risk their own lives to rescue people who get into difficulties because they do stupid things and in my opinion perhaps don't deserve to be rescued..   We need them.

 

My point was that you also need a certain mindset to be a 1st responder and I just don't have that mindset.  Society is just lucky that some people do have that mindset and we are lucky to have them.

 

DON

Okay.

 

I definitely did not get that from "As an example, if you go out hiking in a bad place or you are not prepared, don't expect first responders to go out and rescue you." 

 

Thanks for clarifying.

[sparks1093]

8 hours ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Excellent question.

FWIW: As someone else perhaps suggested in their post, some folks do have certain financial priorities (often recreational/non-essential) that, while they may not be in their own or their family’s best interests, may ultimately impact others when it comes to who is paying the lion’s share of graduated income taxes necessary to support government programs focused on public financial assistance.

Please understand that my comment is not made as a political statement. Rather, it’s just a dose of reality about the opinions (warranted or not) of many upper middle class taxpayers. 

Unwarranted (in the opinion of this upper middle class taxpayer, anyway). Your assumption seems to be (and I apologize in advance if I am misreading your post) that people on public assistance wouldn't be on public assistance if they just knew how to manage money and of course the issue is much more complex than that. You have articulated what resources people should have in order to travel and while it would be enviable to have those resources at hand the fact remains that most of us just make do with what we have. 

[Flatbush Flyer]

1 hour ago, sparks1093 said:

Unwarranted (in the opinion of this upper middle class taxpayer, anyway). Your assumption seems to be (and I apologize in advance if I am misreading your post) that people on public assistance wouldn't be on public assistance if they just knew how to manage money and of course the issue is much more complex than that. You have articulated what resources people should have in order to travel and while it would be enviable to have those resources at hand the fact remains that most of us just make do with what we have. 

Of course not ALL people on public assistance are there because of poor money management. The perfect example is dealing with natural disasters (or catastrophic health circumstances). But, there are plenty of folks whose freely made (and occasionally poor) life choices negatively impact others such that government services need to be increased and paid for via a patently unfair graduated income tax.

Are you not familiar with the Bank of Dad (telephone number 1-800-I TOLD YOU SO)?

[sparks1093]

1 hour ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Of course not ALL people on public assistance are there because of poor money management. The perfect example is dealing with natural disasters (or catastrophic health circumstances). But, there are plenty of folks whose freely made (and occasionally poor) life choices negatively impact others such that government services need to be increased and paid for via a patently unfair graduated income tax.

Are you not familiar with the Bank of Dad (telephone number 1-800-I TOLD YOU SO)?

I have 5 sons and am very familiar with the Bank of Dad (and use it as a learning tool as often as possible). But I'm not going to assume that just because someone is making the choice to travel without a passport that they are making a poor life choice or that they are bad money managers. All a passport does (on a closed loop cruise) is it possibly reduces delay in returning home. It doesn't reduce the cost of lodging, flights, food, medical care. There may be circumstances where a traveler might need to spend an extra night in a port while arrangements are made to get them home, but again, all of this is a better case for having good travel insurance then for having a passport. 

[Elaine5715]

On 8/26/2021 at 6:00 AM, sparks1093 said:

I know that I, personally, have never fallen on any type of flooring or terrain in 63 years to the extent that I needed medical attention. In any event these types of things are a better argument for having travel insurance, to cover those "what ifs" because if someone gets hurt they will be better served by that then by having a passport. It must be remembered that the regulations that give us the close loop exceptions also contain provisions for the waiver of the passport requirement for emergencies and for humanitarian reasons, so if something happens and someone does have to fly back from one of the ports it can be done without a passport. 

No, they can't.  

[njhorseman]

39 minutes ago, Elaine5715 said:

No, they can't.  

Yes they can. The State Department can issue an authorization for a US citizen not having a passport to fly back to the US in the event of an emergency. 

 

To give you one example there's been at least one occasion where a ship that was on a closed loop cruise itinerary originating a US port suffered a mechanical breakdown while in the Caribbean and had to terminate the cruise, requiring all passengers to fly back to the US. Numerous passengers did not have passports, as is permitted on that type of cruise, and the State Department in relatively little time...I think a day or at most two... issued authorization letters permitting those passengers to fly back to the US without a passport. The incident was discussed at length on Cruise Critic and at least one of the passengers posted a copy of the authorization letter here on Cruise Critic .

Edited September 1, 2021 by njhorseman

[Flatbush Flyer]

Did we ever hear back from the OP about what happened with their cruise?

[sparks1093]

8 hours ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Did we ever hear back from the OP about what happened with their cruise?

I don't believe the OP has posted again. (I just checked and OPs post count remains at 1.)

Edited September 1, 2021 by sparks1093

[sparks1093]

8 hours ago, njhorseman said:

Yes they can. The State Department can issue an authorization for a US citizen not having a passport to fly back to the US in the event of an emergency. 

 

To give you one example there's been at least one occasion where a ship that was on a closed loop cruise itinerary originating a US port suffered a mechanical breakdown while in the Caribbean and had to terminate the cruise, requiring all passengers to fly back to the US. Numerous passengers did not have passports, as is permitted on that type of cruise, and the State Department in relatively little time...I think a day or at most two... issued authorization letters permitting those passengers to fly back to the US without a passport. The incident was discussed at length on Cruise Critic and at least one of the passengers posted a copy of the authorization letter here on Cruise Critic .

I remember the letter and it was actually issued by CBP (in coordination with the State Department I believe). And what CBP/State Department can do for a ship full of passengers can be done for an individual passenger. I do understand that there are people that do not want to believe that under any circumstance, but it is true. That is fine, they can obtain a passport if they don't believe it. But the fact remains that the regulations contain provisions for waiving the passport requirement for emergencies and for humanitarian reasons. It would have been the height of folly to enact a closed loop exception without a way to return US citizens home who didn't have a passport.

Edited September 1, 2021 by sparks1093

[Elaine5715]

16 hours ago, njhorseman said:

Yes they can. The State Department can issue an authorization for a US citizen not having a passport to fly back to the US in the event of an emergency. 

 

To give you one example there's been at least one occasion where a ship that was on a closed loop cruise itinerary originating a US port suffered a mechanical breakdown while in the Caribbean and had to terminate the cruise, requiring all passengers to fly back to the US. Numerous passengers did not have passports, as is permitted on that type of cruise, and the State Department in relatively little time...I think a day or at most two... issued authorization letters permitting those passengers to fly back to the US without a passport. The incident was discussed at length on Cruise Critic and at least one of the passengers posted a copy of the authorization letter here on Cruise Critic .

That is not the same as one individual who has opted to leave the US without a passport.  Individuals who do not rate intercession of large corporations and government get to present themselves at a consulate and apply for a passport.  Such a luckless passenger will need to follow the same steps as a lost or stole passport when overseas.  https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/international-travel/emergencies/lost-stolen-passport-abroad.html

[sparks1093]

16 minutes ago, Elaine5715 said:

That is not the same as one individual who has opted to leave the US without a passport.  Individuals who do not rate intercession of large corporations and government get to present themselves at a consulate and apply for a passport.  Such a luckless passenger will need to follow the same steps as a lost or stole passport when overseas.  https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/international-travel/emergencies/lost-stolen-passport-abroad.html

That might be the rule for areas outside the WHTI, but as I stated the regulations that cover closed loop travel clearly have exceptions for emergencies and for humanitarian reasons.

 

 Federal Register :: Documents Required for Travelers Departing From or Arriving in the United States at Sea and Land Ports-of-Entry From Within the Western Hemisphere

 

(9) When the Department of State waives, pursuant to EO 13323 of December 30, 2003, Section 2, the requirement with respect to the U.S. citizen because there is an unforeseen emergency; or

(10) When the Department of State waives, pursuant to EO 13323 of December 30, 2003, Sec 2, the requirement with respect to the U.S. citizen for humanitarian or national interest reasons;