No More Cheap Shipping for Chinese Sellers • Hacker News Board

Re: No More Cheap Shipping for Chinese Sellers

#191

Post by duskwuff » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 4:28 PM UTC

reallydude wrote: post #148

ceejayoz wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That first article is severely stretching the definition of "getting money". Virtually all of the alleged $18B is attributed to the law that gives the USPS jurisdiction over your mailbox. The second just reflects Congress's attempts to deliberately hobble the USPS in 2006 by requiring them to suddenly pre-fund their pension obligations. https://www.uspsoig.gov/blog/be-careful-what-you-assume https://www.bloomberg.com…

> hobble the USPS in 2006 by requiring them to suddenly pre-fund their pension obligations Maybe it's a flawed methodology (arguable), but being fiscally responsible about pensions is something that should be encouraged. In California pension liabilities are out of control and at impractical levels, causing all sorts of havoc and manipulation (corruption). https://www.vcstar.com/story/news/2018/12/07/governor-jerry-.…

Fully funding pensions out to 50 years in the future goes beyond "fiscally responsible". Consider that the nominal working lifetime of an employee is only 47 years (18 - 65) -- they're being required to fund pensions for hypothetical employees who are still in high school.

Re: No More Cheap Shipping for Chinese Sellers

#192

Post by lordnacho » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 4:29 PM UTC

orthecreedence wrote: post #176

lordnacho wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no baiting here. The guy says he's very leftie, but says something that sounds the opposite. I was curious.

Don't confuse "leftism" for "authoritarian" or "welfare capitalism." I advocate neither.

I think it's the word "rabid" that carries a certain cartoonish meaning. But I don't think I mentioned authoritarianism.

Re: No More Cheap Shipping for Chinese Sellers

#193

Post by autokad » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 4:30 PM UTC

tyingq wrote: post #113

Ouch for AliExpress.

so sounds like this will be bad for alibaba. Has anyone seen any quantitative numbers on this?

Re: No More Cheap Shipping for Chinese Sellers

#194

Post by reallydude » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 4:31 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #156

reallydude wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> hobble the USPS in 2006 by requiring them to suddenly pre-fund their pension obligations Maybe it's a flawed methodology (arguable), but being fiscally responsible about pensions is something that should be encouraged. In California pension liabilities are out of control and at impractical levels, causing all sorts of havoc and manipulation (corruption). https://www.vcstar.com/story/news/2018/12/07/governor-jerry-.…

If fiscal responsibility were the goal, they'd have required the other federal agencies to do the same. That this specifically targets one of the few agencies ripe for potential privatization is... suspicious. Even if it made fiscal sense, the sudden switch is problematic.

> If fiscal responsibility were the goal, they'd have required the other federal agencies to do the same

That's not how the Federal government works. It's a LARGE organization that sometimes have people with philosophies align. There is no chance that the military would prefund pensions. I think that, toward the initiative to make the USPS free of subsidy now and in the future, it made perfect sense. The USPS workers used to talk about everything moving electronic, but that's not happening in our lifetime. 50 years is just "the near future", respectively.

Re: No More Cheap Shipping for Chinese Sellers

#195

Post by samirm » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 4:31 PM UTC

ajnin wrote: post #23

Can someone shed light on the subsidy structure behing the current model, are shipments from China being subsidized by shipments from other countries or is there government money involved ? In any case this kind of subsidy is not necessarily bad for developing countries, and it was probably instrumental in China's phenomenal economic growth, but it is now in the conquering superpower category, it's time it loses this…

>but it is now in the conquering superpower category, it's time it loses this advantage

why?

Re: No More Cheap Shipping for Chinese Sellers

#196

Post by sorryitstrue » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 4:32 PM UTC

Now canada can become the shipping hub for epackets and it can be forwarded to US addresses from there. Good opportunity for someone.

Re: No More Cheap Shipping for Chinese Sellers

#197

Post by busterarm » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 4:32 PM UTC

yumraj wrote: post #190

chromaton wrote: post #175

I just got an email from eBay Main Street, which is eBay's mailing list for political issues which affect their sellers. This email is tells me to call congress to NOT withdraw from the Universal Postal Union, under the logic that it will make it harder to ship stuff from the US to other countries.

Of course this is bad for eBay, and perhaps etsy, shopify and others. The flood of direct-from-China sellers selling cheap products and shipping for free (on USPS's dime) will stop.

Definitely bad for eBay and etsy. They're absolutely dependent on the flood of cheap goods.

Honestly this is disastrous for etsy, but maybe it'll help them get back to their roots and be useful again.

Re: No More Cheap Shipping for Chinese Sellers

#198

Post by utf985 » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 4:33 PM UTC

Does this affect me somehow as a consumer in the EU?

Re: No More Cheap Shipping for Chinese Sellers

#199

Post by reallydude » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 4:35 PM UTC

duskwuff wrote: post #191

reallydude wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> hobble the USPS in 2006 by requiring them to suddenly pre-fund their pension obligations Maybe it's a flawed methodology (arguable), but being fiscally responsible about pensions is something that should be encouraged. In California pension liabilities are out of control and at impractical levels, causing all sorts of havoc and manipulation (corruption). https://www.vcstar.com/story/news/2018/12/07/governor-jerry-.…

Fully funding pensions out to 50 years in the future goes beyond "fiscally responsible". Consider that the nominal working lifetime of an employee is only 47 years (18 - 65) -- they're being required to fund pensions for hypothetical employees who are still in high school.

Talking about people in high school who will end up in public service is irrelevant.

Having more money in the bank than you take out for a car loan is fiscally responsible. Not exactly. More than. That's WITHOUT your holdings (bank account balance) being subject to market forces, which is a compelling reason.

Re: No More Cheap Shipping for Chinese Sellers

#200

Post by ryandrake » Tue, Aug 27, 2019, 4:37 PM UTC

entropea wrote: post #19

Zigurd wrote: post #10

Having bought a couple drop-shipped goods from China, I, for one, won't miss it. The most noticeable effect I have seen is scammy listings on eBay and Amazon, unresponsive sellers, and unreliable delivery time. I have not seen any arguments of the form "but the price of X will go way up."

>Having bought a couple drop-shipped goods from China, I, for one, won't miss it. I will, China makes good stuff depending on if you do your research to what's quality and is just a cheap piece of crap.

I’ve had great success getting all sorts of stuff delivered straight from China (usually sold through eBay). As long as you don’t need it next week (or sometimes next month), you can save a ton. Compared to domestic sellers who want to gouge me $7.99 to ship a 5 square inch bag of diodes 50 miles.