Hacker News Reader

Comment by Simon_ORourke | Hacker News Reader

That will only lead to areas close enough to land, but within international waters where these uninsured junks will just anchor and wait it out.

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/apr/12/a...

View on HN

But would you even start a journey towards a port that requires insurance if you don't have it? You're not going to get the benefit of docking at that port (unloading the ship and getting paid for the cargo).

they can contract only for the time near the port

Who would pay a ship to take their cargo near a port if they knew ships need insurance to dock with that port and the ship didn’t have it?

This is still arguably better. These crew aren't going to be paid by these irresponsible owners anyway. Let them abandon ship in international waters after a couple of missed paychecks.

Why is that better?

It's better for the workers who can find a different job as soon as the paychecks stop coming, instead of being strung along indefinitely.

It's not too hard to get a small boat to rescue them and be shepherded to the airport. The Saudis aren't doing it because they are owed port fees.

Negligent boat owners should lose their property just like negligent land (real property) owners do.

The only way that would be better would be from the port authority's perspective. I'm sure the guys stuck on a ship 100 miles off any shore would not find it too pleasant.

Crew rescue isn't too difficult to arrange. The coast guard can do this, and auction off the ship to recoup the costs. But at least the crew aren't wasting their time.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com