Guys, Here is our True Savior HalleluYAH translates “Praise ye YaH” YaH is The Heavenly Father YaH arrives via the TENT OF MEETING YaH was Who they Crucified for our sins YaH was Crucified on an Almond TREE - Ancient Semitic Cuneiform of Moshe (Moses) - Isa Scroll (The Original Isaiah) Isaiah 42:8 "I am YaH; that is my Name! I will not yield my glory to another or my praise to idols.” Isaiah 43:11 “I am YAH, and there is no other Savior but Me.” Isaiah 45:5 “I am YaH, and there is none else.”
@@ronjohnson1800 I assure you the bankruptcy paperwork is complete and ready to be filed in a moments notice. As well as paperwork for a new company to resume business with.
You can't charge someone or something they can never reasonably pay. You own a restaurant at the base of a 80 storey building, your kitchen catches fire and burns the building down, it's a total loss. You aren't expected to replace the building. You'll be charged something decided by the court. 45m is a large fine for a shipping company imo.
@@cyberking1128A fine is something you pay for violating a law. Damages are what you pay for killing people and destroying property ( as a result of violating a law). They are not the same thing.
@@Chez8922-kf6cy " Consumers will bear the cost of the losses but none of the recovery will find it's way back to the consumer. That's a one way street by design. "
Maritime law is ancient and the SCOTUS is corrupt. Clarence Thomas and Alito will take a new motorhome, a few fishing trips and private jet rides to make it go away for the company.
Will seem so but with court reforms, expect more like 12-15y. BTW ‘court reforms’ /sarcasm …as a former tech policy analyst for NJ-OMB judiciary the MOST resistant to adopting efficiency solutions. Backlogs largely of their own making.
nevertheless due to the bridge not having any protections , as other bridges do, for a foreseeable event then others are liable too. It’s complicated, thus the lawyers will benefit the most. Very sad for the workers on the bridge and their families.
this bridge broke 40 yrs ago,the united states gov,t knew this,united syates has money to start wars but not to fic bridges.10000 bridges neeed fixing in the states but biden sends money to istreal and ukraine to continue losin wars
There was never any doubt in my mind that sooner or later we were going to learn that power failure should’ve never happened and of course, now we know why.
And you can go after as many people as you wish but you are obligated to follow the current law. You can certainly change it for future situations. But we have to follow OUR laws.
Please. The US never goes for the people at the top. It would set a dangerous president again the US home groan, broding school broken, sociopathic, billionair class.
You say so, but where did you get this information from? I mean, you could say whatever you want but if you have nothing to back up your claims, then you got nothing. Economics aside, what does this have to do with what happened?
@@HOOOLD_ON The Sydney Morning Herald reported that about the ship's owners on March 28. But you're obviously too much of a f*cking moron to know that.
@@Chez8922-kf6cy You are basing your thoughts on what ljb4541 said. He has not provided any evidence of his claims. I am pretty sure the crew manning the ship now is not the same as the one ljb4541 talks about and Im still waiting for some evidence of his claims. Mind you, the ship _did_ leave Australia, which means any potential conflicts were resolved. If I were a garage based five year old not being paid for what i did, I'd probably sabotage something, but as a grownup sea farer I wouldnt even think of endangering the very vessel Im on. You seem to be the kind of guy that would drill a hole in your canoe to let the water out.
No consumers shouldnt be punished for that F up it should be passed along to the ship owners as well as the cost of the rebuilding of the bridge and for those dock workers who made be laid off !
Ship owners will pass cost kn to customers who will pass it on to consumers. We always pay in the end, not the shareholders & directors. Another reason we need that great reset WEF was discussing.
Passing costs along means people who had nothing to do with this fiasco, no idea the ship needed repair end up paying one way or another. It is inherently unfair.
A disaster anywhere in this world can/will have a ripple effect. A war in the wheat fields of Ukraine drives up the wheat prices for us all. Every time we buy a loaf of bread, we are paying the price for Blyatimir Putain wanting to get the title of "Emperor" before he dies. Welcome to Earth.
@tm13tube, Right on. Why is the consumer always the scapegoat and the victim? Because capitalism? These businesses use the excuse of supply and demand dictating market prices, if that was the case the business would be eating the cost of their mistake.
Why call this a major revelation? Even on the day of the accident there were reports that this ship had a documented history of problems with the systems that caused the accident.
@@denningmp37 The companies that bring their products to market through the port calculate the additional surcharge and make it a separate line item. Purchasers would use their invoice as evidence of the claim of damages eligible for reimbursement.
Whoever was the genius that allowed a ship of that size to transit under the bridge without tug support, should be the one put behind bars first. Then the captain, the engineer and then the pilot
@stewiesaidthat That is a Port of Baltimore rule that came about because of the cost requirements of the Tugs. The Port Authorities should have required that given the inferior protection that was in place on the bridge supports based on today's standards.
I’ve worked on these ships. Gonna let you in on something. A lot of these ships have major major mechanical and structural problems. Many time have I seen the owner or managers of these shipping companies wait till the last moment to repair these ships. Seen it time and time again. They wait for something to become a real problem before they do anything about it.
@@neilkurzman4907Assuming, of course, that people CAN buy from someone else! Not everyone has that option, especially if you’re poor and live in a food desert area.
@@johnhall3570 It’s a localized supply restriction that’s going to affect that area but not 400% What it will affect is because shipping in that area becomes more expensive. It’s moved to other parts and people lose their job. He used 400% because it made his conspiracy theory sound better. Allowing him to ignore reality.
This bridge spanning a limited shipping space to the Port of Baltimore, was a ticking time bomb. Surely the port authority should have recognised the fact that as the years went by the ships coming into the river and more importantly under the bridge, were getting larger and if a problem occurred could, at the very least, do some serious damage to it. Proper planning by the port authority should have included buying tugboats capable of escorting huge ships of this size from the wharf areas out to beyond the bridge structure and visa versa. I really don’t think that the housekeeping at such a large and vital port was adequate. Thanks.
This port should have long ago redesigned and increased the size of their 'Dolphins' (channel bumpers). It's like they have ones for the size of a small commercial fishing boat and today we now have mega ships. Politics.
There is a huge conflict of interests around requiring tugboats, and for how long. The governing authority that operates the harbor sets the rules around tugboat requirements, and in this instance that is the state of Maryland. The shipping companies pay for tugboat services, which are fairly steep. And then the last source of conflict in this relationship is the consumers who all want their goods as cheaply as possible. Seems that I recall reading that this barge had contracted for 2 tugs to pull them from the dock and into the shipping channel, which is what the port required, at a cost of just north of $18,000.
@bigk4755 that is in line with shipping experts commenting online within hours of the event. Two tugs to reach the open channel was standard. The ship was then under its own power and would have passed safely along the channel had the power not failed. There was also a port pilot on the bridge to ensure the correct route was followed. When the power failed, physics took over and steered the ship off course with inadequate space to stop. An anchor has been dropped to counteract the steering but was not enough.
Politicians LOVE to pass the buck. How many years or decades have engineers been recommending the installation of bridge pier protection? The shipping company definitely screwed up, but bankrupting them isn't going to cover all the expenses incurred. An ounce of prevention...
The state is responsible for the bridge not being protected from a collision in a busy port. The grounding of the Dali is irresponsible but it should have never been able to touch the bridge supports.
I wish one time that a retailer would create an active list of the things they purchase/rent/or other things that come out of their pockets that cost more as a result of a disaster. Just let us see what really goes up in price and who inflates their real expenses.
I've noticed nobody is talking about the fact the port is required to do a safety inspection on the vessel before it is released? also missing is the fact that a Harbor pilot needed to be on board for arrival and departure, they are also responsible for alerting the harbor master of any and all deficiencies in the ship. I wonder why none of this is being discussed.
We are seeing significant increases in fuel prices too, at least in the Baltimore area. There are terminals on the south side of the scene and the trucks have to go all the way around the city via 695 just to get to the other side of the bridge into sparrows point to get to the gas stations here.
They mentioned the 6 killed only once. When the press release was read, it didn't say anything about them. No cap on cost. Ships this large should have a lockout to avoid things like this. The people who decided to leave port with known electrical issues should be prosecuted.
There were cutting charges going off at strategic joints, on the bridge, when the ship hit it. You can see them in the videos. They were similar to the charges that could be seen going off in the World Trade Center, collapsing it into it's footprint. Building 7 collapsed without a plane hitting it.
This is why ports have tugboats. What seems to be the problem at this port. Do they not want to pay to operators? You should let foreign vessels come into your port and navigate on their own. That doesn’t make any sense they could crash and take out a bridge. .
The guy wonders why increased costs get passed on. He's obviously never ran a business and done things like pay employees or a lease. Good illustration of the caliber of people in government.
These costs aren't related to paying employees or other essential bills. Only to owners who prized speed over safety.
15 дней назад
It's nothing new that the employees are forced to use broken equipment. I've once was given the company car to be driven to location 400km away from company. I've noticed that that the rear of the car was a bit lower on the right side. They said that's a minor issue, but it turned out later that there were no suspension at all at rear right wheel. This could end up deadly too!
Hmm... I was on Norwegian Cruise in summer of 1995 and for 20 minutes, in the night time, the ship's power went off. Wonder if this is a normal occurrence?
I've seen footage of the bridge collapse. That bridge went down like a wet noodle, and it seems obvious that engineers had not built in any safety factors in case something hit it. The owners of the Dali bear responsibility, but they are not alone in doing so.
Bridges don't naturally collapse like that. Look at the struts that appear to have plastic charges explosions going off. Baltimore got rid of their harbor patrol a few years earlier for a reason. This was it.
That pittance will not even pay to replace the bridge, no less massive business losses, city losses, loss of jobs + income to port workers, even costs of demolition of bridge debris and clearing the channel. The owners must plan on paying several billion at the very least.
and why did the bridge have basically no protection for the piers. ? because baltimore didn't want to spend the money even though it was proposed after 9-11
Yeah but at least they invested the city's money into crime prevention and education instead. Now Baltimore is one of the safest cities in the US with top scoring high school grades and graduation rates. What's one bridge compared to that level of community success?
Mostly because it was designed and built in an era of ships 1/3 the size and displacement of the Dali. The "might happen" vulnerability of a terrorist attack was seen as less likely than other types of threats to the DelMarVa region and money was spent on those.
Ridiculously low liability caps are actually pretty common in maritime cases because they're based on the value of the ship and cargo. The sketchy part is that they're based on the value at the time of the suit/resolution so if the ship was severely damaged or sunk the liability limit can be very low or even zero
My dad always told me when I'd get hurt to suck it up buttercup ! My kids are priceless , Every parent shares the the same sentiment ! ..... justice will prevail in this tragedy and compassion will far exceed 43 million dollars for the families alone !
Someone pointed out, that a puff of black smoke raised fron the ship just before impact. Did the ship accelerate? There could be an alternative explanation.
So... Captain was under order from shipping company owners management to set sail anyway limp to Sri Lanka where maintenance costs to repair would be much lower than in Baltimore.
It isn't ships going in that's a problem. They can be diverted to other ports. It's the ships blocked in Baltimore that cannot get out. Their generators are kept running,crews fed and housed and the ship not working.
Gross negligence at the very least.Should have had tugs escort all the way to breakwater if they knew power was unreliable or faulty.As facts come out this tragedy should never have happened.
Called it, the ship had issues but they decided to chance it instead of staying in port all because of their schedule and no the court wont allow them to cap the costs due the shear amount of damage and economical losses
The issues actually stemmed from electrical issues with refrigerated containers. They kept blowing breakers on the ship. The last known issue was a few hrs before the ship left the port.
No, the courts really not gonna care how much damage they did. They probably will care if the ship owner showed negligence. Which is what Baltimore is trying to get before the court.
@@1972Ray Apparently, they lost electrical power not the engines. The main engine would go off-line once electrical power was lost since it depends on it to function, but the actual electricity comes from separate generators.
No way they should skate out on this without covering everything. The bridge wasn't moving, the boat was. Not the bridge's fault. Immediately begin seizing their assets in the US until they start paying. The bills are mounting.
This is what I was expecting. Blame the shipping company. Ships always break down and the bridge was very flimsy and not at all protected. The idea that this is 100% the fault of the shipping company is just scapegoating and lets off the real culprits who are the authorities that did not protect their flimsy bridge.
The “real culprit” is the ship owner/operator… they are responsible to maintain operability, and if they decided to depart without addressing known power issues, or requesting extended tugboat support from the port, then not only will they be held liable but USA will likely hold them accountable for damage in excess of the traditional ship value limit ($43M). Port of Baltimore contributed to the severity of the loss by taking financial shortcuts: no dolphins and no tug support to a bridge that was literally within sight of the departure pier. They are a contributor, not “the culprit”.
The bridge design was flawed from the beginning. Google up images of bridges over major waterways and you'll notice they always have enormous round or elliptical cement pilings protecting the piers from such collisions. Those big pilings are called 'dolphins.' This bridge doesn't have dolphins. Why? Who designed this bridge? Who approved the design? Not excusing the ship owners, but the same accident with any other bridge would have only damaged the vessel, not the bridge.
@@oriraykai3610 As in every case, a local pilot is in control as a ship enters or leaves a port. The ship's captain has little to no authority during that operation, no matter his nationality. It's on him and his company to explain the poor maintenance that led to losing power, but once it happened the local American pilot was helpless.
Everything that happens causes suppliers and retailers to use that event (and they never stop) to raise prices more. Whether it's a train derailment, a toxic spill, a strike, a bridge collapse, a bridge fire, a flood, a wildfire, a drought - the list is endless, and no one seems to verify how or why every single business gets to raise prices when stuff happens that may have had nothing whatsoever to do with this particular bridge and this particular ship. But, never let a good opportunity go to waste.
On the day it happened there was a local Baltimore news video on here featuring a femal dockworker who stated the vessel was having serious electrical problems right up to the time it departed. The video dissapeared and asking around I was told the dockworker had recanted her story....
As the bridge wasn’t up to code, Baltimore’s Bridge Maintenance Group, is largely culpable for the collapse. There should have been ship collision protections in place. This would not have happened were any of several protections in place. The fact is, this was bound to happen, it was just a matter of when. We can all be thankful it collapsed when it did. Hundreds of lives could have been lost.
The ship owners should countersue the city for not taking care of the bridge. It was falling apart and a rusty piece of garbage before the ship even hit it.
Please you know that bridge was built in 1972 making it well over 50 years old. Concrete starts separation and unstable after 45 years. The boat tapped it and went down like a house of cards.
The limit of liability should be capped at complete repair costs to bring it back to pre-collision condition, plus the families of the deceased compensation, plus lost revenue due to their negligence, plus prison time for those found to be knowingly negligent.
The City of Baltimore has a harbor captain who did not do his job, along with a tug crew who deserted the escort of the ship safely through the channel, bottom line the tug boat could easily have guided the cargo ship away from the piers. It is the City who are guilty of destroying the bridge as the Tug was not doing its job when the ship lost power, The ship owners should be suing the city for not doing the job they were paid to do!
I think that liability of the company should be. 1. If found to NOT be negligent .... liable for cleanup of the bridge. 2. If found to BE Negligent ... liable for clean up / rebuild / and civil liabilty for the road crew lives lost.
i can't get a straight answer from google so i'll say this. what about baltimore's inner harbor? or even the chesapeake side of baltimore? i remember several ports all around baltimore.
