• Mycatiskai@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 day ago

    It wasn’t really a huge toll. It was 1 dollar a barrel, a ship carrying a million barells worth 100 million dollars of oil would pay 1 million. That is a 1% tax which isn’t that big unless you are an oil company that is used to paying nothing or getting a subsidy.

    I’m waiting for Iran to let through European bound vessels for free to set Trump up to order strikes on Spanish or British ships.

    Start up a whole new front where NATO kicks the USA out and blockades the USA from international trade.

    • picnic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      Isnt the strait like open seas and not anyone’s territorial waters? If so, I dont see taxing vessels legal, no matter how small the fee is.

      I’ve worked for a publicly listed company, and we’ve been doing savings for mere $10k’s. I think while compared to the oil carried the fee would be small, you could employ 20 people for a year for that sum. And that’s a one way fee for one vessel

    • homes@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      24 hours ago

      well, you’re right that the oil companies shipping the oil can easily pay the price, but that doesn’t mean they won’t still pass the cost on, even if they are getting subsidies. and the average ship carries around 2 million barrels. sure, some carry less, and the big ones can carry up to ~ 4 million, but the point is that the costs will be passed on to the customer either way.

      not to mention the massive backlog which already exists. even if they opened up the strait right now, to full capacity, it could take months to clear the backlog. and with those waiting to go through in line running out of (or already completely out of) supplies, some starving, this gets even more desperate. and stupid.

      and don’t even get me started on NATO

      • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Would you rather by oil for $60 + $1 toll, or for $150? Either one gets passed on to customers.

        • homes@piefed.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          21 hours ago

          I’d rather have neither, and the strait controlled by the UN, like before Trump fucked everything up with this idiotic and unnecessary war

            • homes@piefed.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              19 hours ago

              tolls that get passed on to customers isn’t “good” for anyone but the toll-collector and, potentially, the embezzling oil company

                • homes@piefed.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  18 hours ago

                  but “no oil at all” is what we’ve got. and it’s what we’ve had since this stupid war began, and it’s what we’ll have until it ends.

                  and, frankly, I see the most likely scenario being that Trump fucked anyone out of any long-term position of being able to charge tolls, but, short-term, Iran will use it to negotiate for something else that it wants. something big. Like getting Israel to stop bombing Lebanon.

                  • scutiger@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    13 hours ago

                    short-term, Iran will use it to negotiate for something else that it wants. something big. Like getting Israel to stop bombing Lebanon.

                    That sounds pretty good to me.