<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Jones Act, Get Your Act Together &#8211; YOUblog Featured Article</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gcaptain.com/jones-act-act-youblog-featured/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gcaptain.com/jones-act-act-youblog-featured/?7723</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2011 07:11:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: FredFry</title>
		<link>http://gcaptain.com/jones-act-act-youblog-featured/?7723#comment-19502</link>
		<dc:creator>FredFry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 04:17:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gcaptain.com/maritime/blog/?p=7723#comment-19502</guid>
		<description>The problem here is the cost to domestic shipping as part of supporting domestic shipbuilding. There is no requirement that trucks in the US be US-built or even manned for that matter, nor is there is a US requirement that planes in domestic service be US Built. And talking about &#039;Made in USA&#039; there is nothing to say that you can&#039;t build a ship in the US competitively, especially if the shipyards are given more freedom to use parts/sub assemblies that are imported. 
 
If the US wants to shift cargo to travel on water, it needs to do more to make sure that the equipment is there to do the transporting. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem here is the cost to domestic shipping as part of supporting domestic shipbuilding. There is no requirement that trucks in the US be US-built or even manned for that matter, nor is there is a US requirement that planes in domestic service be US Built. And talking about &#039;Made in USA&#039; there is nothing to say that you can&#039;t build a ship in the US competitively, especially if the shipyards are given more freedom to use parts/sub assemblies that are imported. </p>
<p>If the US wants to shift cargo to travel on water, it needs to do more to make sure that the equipment is there to do the transporting. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FredFry</title>
		<link>http://gcaptain.com/jones-act-act-youblog-featured/?7723#comment-23212</link>
		<dc:creator>FredFry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 04:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gcaptain.com/maritime/blog/?p=7723#comment-23212</guid>
		<description>The problem here is the cost to domestic shipping as part of supporting domestic shipbuilding. There is no requirement that trucks in the US be US-built or even manned for that matter, nor is there is a US requirement that planes in domestic service be US Built. And talking about &#039;Made in USA&#039; there is nothing to say that you can&#039;t build a ship in the US competitively, especially if the shipyards are given more freedom to use parts/sub assemblies that are imported. 
 
If the US wants to shift cargo to travel on water, it needs to do more to make sure that the equipment is there to do the transporting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem here is the cost to domestic shipping as part of supporting domestic shipbuilding. There is no requirement that trucks in the US be US-built or even manned for that matter, nor is there is a US requirement that planes in domestic service be US Built. And talking about &#039;Made in USA&#039; there is nothing to say that you can&#039;t build a ship in the US competitively, especially if the shipyards are given more freedom to use parts/sub assemblies that are imported. </p>
<p>If the US wants to shift cargo to travel on water, it needs to do more to make sure that the equipment is there to do the transporting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

