Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When UPS charged me a $684 tariff on $355 of vintage computer parts

oldvcr.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 316 posts

Re: When UPS charged me a $684 tariff on $355 of vintage computer parts

#171

Post by mitthrowaway2 »

lostlogin wrote: post #143
axiolite wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> tariffs are surely paid by the buyer, not the seller. The US has declared import tariffs are to be paid by the importer/shipper, not collected from the end purchaser after... The opposite of the rest of the world. If you look through eBay, at items coming from China, you'll see most are noted as: Import fees: Includes import fees This item includes applicable import fees—you won’t pay anything extra after checkout.…

> It seems to be a rare exception that you'll see the seller is not paying the tariffs The seller won’t take the hit if that results in a loss. Surely the price just went up to include the tariff?

Maybe, but when I order from Canada I don't see a lower price. So probably we're paying for your tariffs.

Re: When UPS charged me a $684 tariff on $355 of vintage computer parts

#172

Post by NooneAtAll3 »

themafia wrote: post #151
chrneu wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>America had no idea how good they had it, in the before times. The downside is the insane consumption associated with that. Americans are responsible for an insane amount of pollution, far more per capita than any other people in the history of the world, much of which is tied to how easy/cheap it is to order shit we don't need. So, good if ya wanna buy cheap pollution, pretty bad if ya care about the next generatio…

> Americans are responsible for an insane amount of pollution So does Canada. > far more per capita than any other people in the history of the world Not even remotely close to true. Aside from that it's down 20% from it's peak 40 (!) years ago. > much of which is tied to how easy/cheap it is to order shit we don't need. The data does not support this conclusion. > pretty bad if ya care about the next generation. Spe…

> > Americans are responsible for an insane amount of pollution

> So does Canada.

it's not as good of a comeback as you think it is...

Re: When UPS charged me a $684 tariff on $355 of vintage computer parts

#173

Post by bruce511 »

Spivak wrote: post #138
bruce511 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Leaving aside the other (valid) items in your list, reciprocal tarifs really aren't helpful. Firstly, they're unnecessary. Just do what Canadians are doing. Stop buying US goods. Stop going to the US on holiday. Shop keepers get the hint real quick. Secondly, they just make goods more expensive for you. They gave no impact on American producers. So it may feel like the EU is doing nothing. But really, there's nothing…

> Stop buying US goods. If only there was a way to make US goods more expensive to discourage their purchase :P

Sure, that's one way to approach it. But I feel like the Canadian approach is better.

You don't need to coerce fellow citizens, indeed the point is far more effective when it's not coerced.

And if not enough citizens care to make the point, then they're also not going to thank you for rising prices.

Re: When UPS charged me a $684 tariff on $355 of vintage computer parts

#174

Post by bruce511 »

mindslight wrote: post #136
intended wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dang it no! That isn’t remotely how deflationary works. There’s always things being supplied for at lower prices. That is what product or service improvements do. Your car is vastly safer than a Ford Model T. Air bags, better brakes, power steering, AC - all of which make it a vastly superior vehicle. If inflation worked the way you implied, the price of it would have constantly gone up, and never would it have manag…

> Air bags, better brakes, power steering, AC - all of which make it a vastly superior vehicle. If inflation worked the way you implied, the price of it would have constantly gone up, and never would it have managed to be affordable. You're talking about something different than what I was - improvements that make a product better without the price going up (because the cost is small enough to become the new baseline…

Clearly monetary policy is a big subject, and yes the Fed has specific targets etc in mind.

But I was talking more about a mindset. And of course speaking generally- lots of people (everywhere) have budget constraints.

Having traveled in the US and Europe I'd suggest that in the US "volume" is rewarded as "good". For the same amount of money, "more" is preferred to "good". In contrast in Europe it's less "look how big the plate is" and more about "better quality."

So, to rather over-simply things, I'd describe US food as "bland, loaded with sugar, lots of it", whereas Europe is more "smaller quantities, less processing, more farmer's market".

Not just food. But across the board. Cheap = good.

And yes, I'm talking generally big-picture here - it's a culture thing - there are lots of counter examples if you look hard.

Re: When UPS charged me a $684 tariff on $355 of vintage computer parts

#175

Post by scheme271 »

WalterBright wrote: post #129
esalman wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you run a business with good margin, good cash flow, optimally leveraged and for profit? If yes, please tell us more about how tariffs have helped you.

If you've been making the products locally, the tariffs on foreign products help you.

Are your materials and supplies also locally made? The same for each of those suppliers. Very few things are entirely made in the US. How about your equipment? Are the motors, tools, electronics, etc also made in the US? Even companies making stuff in the US are being hit. Very few companies have their entire supply change within the US.

Re: When UPS charged me a $684 tariff on $355 of vintage computer parts

#176

Post by tombert »

15155 wrote: post #161
tombert wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still find it baffling that Trump managed to convince people that, somehow, "China" is paying these tariffs, despite the fact that that makes no fucking sense . These companies in China aren't charities; even if the exporter were the ones directly paying the tariffs, it would simply be baked into the price of the good being sold. This really isn't hard. It's literally something I learned on the first day of high sc…

> "China" is paying these tariffs What is China doing when they intentionally/greatly devalue the RMB?

All costs will be baked into the price of the good. No free lunches and whatnot.

Re: When UPS charged me a $684 tariff on $355 of vintage computer parts

#177

Post by Maxion »

zdc1 wrote: post #49

Government insanity aside, the most insane part to me is that card networks allow partial refunds, but UPS wants to... mail a cheque?

They probably have this type of cash in some short term investment vechicle to earn extra cash, so they have to hold on to it for an average of n days. Writing a cheque and mailing it basically gives them quite a few more extra days of interest payments.

Re: When UPS charged me a $684 tariff on $355 of vintage computer parts

#178

Post by WalterBright »

iancmceachern wrote: post #147
WalterBright wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more complicated than that. For example, the company can raise its prices. How well that works depends on whether there is competition for the company's product. If the competition is also hit by the tariffs, then they're on an even playing field. If the competition is using native parts, then the competitor gets the business.

This is one of the great misconceptions. There are often no "native" alternatives. Even the machines that make the chips are nearly all made in one country and then shipped around the world. The amazing, modern nature of our modern world is built on the collective effort and knowledge of humankind globally. Globally.

There's concern that if all our chips come from one country, they could cut the supply off and make demands. That's called an "embargo".

It's also done to protect local industries, hence the term "protectionism". For example, Canada's large tariffs on American milk are there to protect the local Canadian milk producers.

AFAIK, Trump's tariffs are meant to serve the following purposes:

1. so critical supplies, like chips, will be produced domestically

2. to raise money for the treasury

3. to convince countries that have high tariffs to lower them in exchange for the US to reciprocate in lowering ours

4. to incentivize foreign manufacturers to invest in factories in the US

5. to use them as a negotiating tool for other terms favorable to US interests

These are not crazy things. We'll see how things play out.

Re: When UPS charged me a $684 tariff on $355 of vintage computer parts

#179

Post by Terr_ »

15155 wrote: post #157
Terr_ wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Its funny how little US citizens know about this Is it really? It sounds like you're implying it's some kind of woeful ignorance, but I say it's perfectly reasonable: 1. Each US state is already in a open-borders zero-tariff framework with all other states, which covers a very large portion of what people purchase. 2. Until recently, most individual consumers didn't need to think about tariffs on international good…

> AFAICT was in place for ~80 years Sure, but it wasn't $800 for 80 years: the $800 change happened in 2016... the threshold was $200 from 2016-1994, starting at $1 (and tapering up) in 1938.

So it looks like there are 4 distinct spans in the past [0] where a nominal value kept getting decayed by inflation. To put them here with inflation-adjusted 2025 dollars in parens:

* 1938 to 1977: $1 ($22 -> $5.43)

* 1978 to 1992: $5 ($25 -> $11.50)

* 1993 to 2014: $200 ($446 -> $272)

* 2015 to 2025: $800 ($1087 -> $800)

* 2026 to ????: $0 ($0 -> $0)

The point I'd like to make from this is that Americans under 50 weren't adults-with-money in time to ever encounter those older more-restrictive spans. If you're under 28, the highest-exemption is the only situation they've ever known until now.

[0] https://www.brookings.edu/articles/small-parcels-big-problem...

Re: When UPS charged me a $684 tariff on $355 of vintage computer parts

#180

Post by Y_Y »

khannn wrote: post #118
bathtub365 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since ducks are migratory shouldn’t duck products be tariffed?

I have a bigger issue: a bunch of undocumented CANADIAN geese in MY BACKYARD! I want ICE to send them BACK to Snow Mexico!

This delightfully reads like an old `fortune` message.
Post reply on HN