Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So I think what has happened is that young and restless has noticed the ship will be going from Florida to New York. He inquired, why can’t I take the ship from Florida to New York and then on to Europe? NCL replied that they don’t offer a cruise from Florida to New York because that would be against the PVSA.  Then he or she came here to see if the proposed Florida to Europe via New York violates the PVSA.  It does not, but it remains that the Florida to New York route is not offered and can’t be booked.
 

I hope that Youngandrestless comes back to this board and doesn’t waste a lot of time arguing with NCL.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I opened a can of worms, Sorry about that. Here is some clarification. 

The Escape leaves Port of Canaveral on the 23rd  and arrives in New York the 25th, then leaves NY for Europe TA. 

There is not a cruise listed at this time but things might change. I have done a similar one day cruise on Princess after a 7 day cruise.

We do not plan on getting off the ship in New York if we get on in Florida.

 Thanks again and I apologize for stirring up everyone.

I was making sure that the group thought the same as I did. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Young and Restless said:

Wow, I opened a can of worms, Sorry about that. Here is some clarification. 

The Escape leaves Port of Canaveral on the 23rd  and arrives in New York the 25th, then leaves NY for Europe TA. 

There is not a cruise listed at this time but things might change. I have done a similar one day cruise on Princess after a 7 day cruise.

We do not plan on getting off the ship in New York if we get on in Florida.

 Thanks again and I apologize for stirring up everyone.

I was making sure that the group thought the same as I did. 

still details missing, as you propose, ship can't sail from FL to NY, then on to Europe.  ALso it does not appear to exit on NCL website.  Could you possibly provide a link to the cruise you are referencing?

Edited by LGW59
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Escape cannot be booked for the two days you are interested.  Sorry, that’s just not ever going to be bookable—-it’s just not going to happen.

 

They could’ve designed a cruise that started in Florida, stopped in New York, and then went on, but they must not have thought they could sell it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, LGW59 said:

still details missing, as you propose, ship can't sail from FL to NY, then on to Europe.  ALso it does not appear to exit on NCL website.  Could you possibly provide a link to the cruise you are referencing?

The cruises are listed on at 3 TA websites including V2G.  Why can't a ship sail from Florida with a port call in NY and on to Europe.  No difference than West Coast cruises that start in Long Beach and stop along the Pacific Coast ending in Vanconver BC.

NCL sails RT from Florida on a 7 day cruise then deadbeats to NY.  Then a TA to Rome.

Edited by Arizona Wildcat
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Arizona Wildcat said:

Why can't a ship sail from Florida with a port call in NY and on to Europe. 


I think what the OP is postulating are two separate cruises - the first from Florida to NY, and the second from NY across the pond. The first cruise can’t take place, it can’t be sold, because it violates the PVSA.  If these two cruises were instead one single cruise that went from Florida to the UK, with a port call in NY, it wood be bookable, but pax couldn’t disembark (for good) in NY. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kearney said:

I noticed that Senator Murkowski has introduced legislation to allow cruise ships to sale from the US mainland to Alaska without the usual required stop in another country (Canada). Does not help other states but would help get those cruises started again. Sen Murkowski press release about cruising to Alaska from US mainland

I think a newly elected Alaskan congressman did the same a couple of weeks ago, though Sen Murkowski has a lot more clout than he does, so maybe this can gain some traction.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Alakegirl said:

See this thread

 

 

Thanks and my bad, not so newly elected, he has been in congress since 1973!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if I was being repetitive... just getting back on cruise critic after many months.... starting to feel like cruising might actually happen again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, LGW59 said:

Thanks and my bad, not so newly elected, he has been in congress since 1973!!!!

 

I'm going to guess that's the long awaited Senate companion bill. I never could find the text on the House version.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, kearney said:

Sorry if I was being repetitive... just getting back on cruise critic after many months.... starting to feel like cruising might actually happen again.

 

The bill as introduced actually arguably does nothing.

 

A round trip cruise isn't a violation of the PVSA, so there would be no "fines, penalties, duties, or tariffs applicable only to coastwise voyages" involved.

 

Further, "otherwise qualified non-United States citizens" can serve as crew on those voyages, with work visas.

 

The DHS largely enforces the law US Code and Code of Federal Regulations requirements in this area for multiple secretaries, but visa requirements are set by the State Department, not DHS. Tax requirements are set by Treasury, not DHS. And so on.

 

If this two paragraph legislation passed, let's say by June, it would take until December to write the implementing regulations; and there's actually nothing directing the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the Secretaries of at least 2 and probably up to 5 other departments, to prepare implementing instructions. This is legislation whose purpose is to be introduced, not to be passed into law.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Alakegirl said:

Nuisance legislation, in other words

 

Arguably most legislation introduced like this by either party is for home constituent consumption. Both parties do it all the time. This just happens to be on a subject of interest to a fairly large internet forum. It won't get a hearing in either house; the minority leaders won't want it to come up either... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, markeb said:

 

Arguably most legislation introduced like this by either party is for home constituent consumption. Both parties do it all the time. This just happens to be on a subject of interest to a fairly large internet forum. It won't get a hearing in either house; the minority leaders won't want it to come up either... 

Kind of like the ‘Set Sail Safely Act’?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Turtles06 said:


I think what the OP is postulating are two separate cruises - the first from Florida to NY, and the second from NY across the pond. The first cruise can’t take place, it can’t be sold, because it violates the PVSA.  If these two cruises were instead one single cruise that went from Florida to the UK, with a port call in NY, it wood be bookable, but pax couldn’t disembark (for good) in NY. 

There is no reason that NCL couldn’t offer the TA with boarding in either/ both Florida and New York, and New York only as a port stop for those who board in Florida.  They could offer this, but they choose not to.  Perhaps they do not think it is worth it to run full hotel service, etc. for a minimal number of guests for only two days.  Or maybe they have never considered it.  EM

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 2/8/2021 at 9:02 PM, markeb said:

Their actual endstate is a bunch of cruisers who've oversimplified the issues thanks to them repeating the same incomplete information over and over again.

 

This is not a one liner process. No, an internet forum isn't the place to actually solve something. Too many posts that sound like gotcha trolling. But a few that suggest this is something you've thought about.

 

In this case, step one is defining the problem...

 

If that doesn't interest you, then I don't know why you keep commenting.

 

Hi Mark,

 

This was the end paragraph to a post and I thought I would go back and comment on your step 1.

 

Defining the problem (to discuss) requires a statement of the problem:

      "Does PVSA hurt cruising"

 

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-buchholz-pvsa-cruise-20170803-story.html

 

This article is a good starting point to look at PVSA not just from the cruising perspective,  but also the blue-collar and longshoreman and union perspective.

 

From my readings on CC,  I was always led to believe that PVSA saved American jobs but this article,  which was written by the Director for Economic Policy under Bush Senior describes as different scenario.  I probably butchered his title but you seem to be the Beltway mole so you can judge for yourself.    He was co-author on this piece.

 

That different scenario is that PVSA is hurting US ports and costing Americans jobs.  This article was written 3 years ago before the pandemic

 

 

I don't pay attention to the naysayers and the neuters who say leave it as it is.   If somebody is posting too much negative copy then that is not the kind of cruising spirit that I enjoy and if it becomes a matter of education,  and I believe that is the case,   then this article is a good starting point.

 

There are alot of blue-collar cruisers out here who would like to know the truth...

There are alot of other posters who have a genuine interest as well....

 

Btw,  on a different subject,  my dear FIL turned 96 yesterday.   He is a living Band of Brothers and getting through Covid-19 has been tough for him;  so he is a good inspiration for us pudknockers as he would say we have it pretty easy goofing around with this malarkey.   I mention this because I told you about his Army background,  in case you forgot.

I forgot to mention that his book is at the Eisenhower residential Library.   It's not published but it is a day-to-day account of battle travels from all of his WWII travels,  he kept a diary and then wrote a book about it.

 

So comment if you will,  but don't quote laws,  we know they are there. Start at the beginning and get it right on the statement of the problem,  not why it can't be changed.

 

  

 

Edited by JRG
final comment
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, JRG said:

Defining the problem (to discuss) requires a statement of the problem:

      "Does PVSA hurt cruising"

 

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-buchholz-pvsa-cruise-20170803-story.html

 

This article is a good starting point to look at PVSA not just from the cruising perspective,  but also the blue-collar and longshoreman and union perspective.

Thanks for sharing the article. Very interesting. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JRG said:

 

Hi Mark,

 

This was the end paragraph to a post and I thought I would go back and comment on your step 1.

 

Defining the problem (to discuss) requires a statement of the problem:

      "Does PVSA hurt cruising"

 

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-buchholz-pvsa-cruise-20170803-story.html

 

This article is a good starting point to look at PVSA not just from the cruising perspective,  but also the blue-collar and longshoreman and union perspective.

 

From my readings on CC,  I was always led to believe that PVSA saved American jobs but this article,  which was written by the Director for Economic Policy under Bush Senior describes as different scenario.  I probably butchered his title but you seem to be the Beltway mole so you can judge for yourself.    He was co-author on this piece.

 

That different scenario is that PVSA is hurting US ports and costing Americans jobs.  This article was written 3 years ago before the pandemic

 

 

I don't pay attention to the naysayers and the neuters who say leave it as it is.   If somebody is posting too much negative copy then that is not the kind of cruising spirit that I enjoy and if it becomes a matter of education,  and I believe that is the case,   then this article is a good starting point.

 

There are alot of blue-collar cruisers out here who would like to know the truth...

There are alot of other posters who have a genuine interest as well....

 

Btw,  on a different subject,  my dear FIL turned 96 yesterday.   He is a living Band of Brothers and getting through Covid-19 has been tough for him;  so he is a good inspiration for us pudknockers as he would say we have it pretty easy goofing around with this malarkey.   I mention this because I told you about his Army background,  in case you forgot.

I forgot to mention that his book is at the Eisenhower residential Library.   It's not published but it is a day-to-day account of battle travels from all of his WWII travels,  he kept a diary and then wrote a book about it.

 

So comment if you will,  but don't quote laws,  we know they are there. Start at the beginning and get it right on the statement of the problem,  not why it can't be changed.

 

  

 

OF course in trying to build a case against PVSA he is only focusing on the cruise industry and does not mention everything else that are covered and protected by PVSA.

 

Nor does he mention the issues with CBP, and US tax issues that were sufficient by themselves to keep cruise lines from doing cruises to nowhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, markeb said:

 

Arguably most legislation introduced like this by either party is for home constituent consumption. Both parties do it all the time. This just happens to be on a subject of interest to a fairly large internet forum. It won't get a hearing in either house; the minority leaders won't want it to come up either... 

Most legislation is written by interns or lobbyists and put together is sort of a cut and paste.  Sadly after bills are rushed through Congress or the legislatures the bodies reconvene to fix errors in the original bills.

The Alaska bill is well intended - and certainly to show Alaskans he cares - but poorly worded and would not achieve its stayed goal even if passed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, markeb said:

 

The bill as introduced actually arguably does nothing.

 

A round trip cruise isn't a violation of the PVSA, so there would be no "fines, penalties, duties, or tariffs applicable only to coastwise voyages" involved.

 

Further, "otherwise qualified non-United States citizens" can serve as crew on those voyages, with work visas.

 

The DHS largely enforces the law US Code and Code of Federal Regulations requirements in this area for multiple secretaries, but visa requirements are set by the State Department, not DHS. Tax requirements are set by Treasury, not DHS. And so on.

 

If this two paragraph legislation passed, let's say by June, it would take until December to write the implementing regulations; and there's actually nothing directing the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the Secretaries of at least 2 and probably up to 5 other departments, to prepare implementing instructions. This is legislation whose purpose is to be introduced, not to be passed into law.

the proposed does address the work visa and tax issues by the language that any such cruises would be considered as being  foreign under the laws of the US.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, nocl said:

the proposed does address the work visa and tax issues by the language that any such cruises would be considered as being  foreign under the laws of the US.

 

Boyo,  finally.   I really hope that you are right @nocl

 

For the longest time I have been wondering why,   whenever the subject of a PVSA exemption comes up,  the opponents always say that the taxes and visas would be the next problem.

 

I have ALWAYS been under the impression that any realistic legislative action would have CORRECTLY addressed the hurdle issues (i.e. tax and visas),  within the language of the proposed legislation.

 

@nocl,   now you know what I was thinking all this time. 

 

@markeb,  we don't need detail on the hurdles,  we need discussion on the reasons to consider changes.   Leave the details to the legislature.   Leave the battles to the SIG's

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, JRG said:

 

Boyo,  finally.   I really hope that you are right @nocl

 

For the longest time I have been wondering why,   whenever the subject of a PVSA exemption comes up,  the opponents always say that the taxes and visas would be the next problem.

 

I have ALWAYS been under the impression that any realistic legislative action would have CORRECTLY addressed the hurdle issues (i.e. tax and visas),  within the language of the proposed legislation.

 

@nocl,   now you know what I was thinking all this time. 

 

@markeb,  we don't need detail on the hurdles,  we need discussion on the reasons to consider changes.   Leave the details to the legislature.   Leave the battles to the SIG's

 

It is still not going anywhere. Cruises to Alaska will still not happen this year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Thank You for 25 Years - Click for Fun Stuff!
      • Forum Assistance
      • Q&A: Cruise Insurance with Steve Dasseos of TripInsuranceStore.com - June 2021
      • ICYM Our Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Explore the Remote World with Hurtigruten!
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...