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

Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

post.japanpost.jp

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 459 posts

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#311

Post by [deleted] »

philwelch wrote: post #309
jacobolus wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my understanding, this is only applicable when "an article is being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten or impair the national security". But "national security" is pretextual in this case.

National security is one of the primary motivations for wanting to protect American industry in the first place; it’s hardly pretextual. And even if it was, the law states that whether or not national security is threatened is up to the judgment of the Secretary of Commerce.

[deleted]

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#312

Post by arghwhat »

Retric wrote: post #304
arghwhat wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most wealthy people are not billionaire wealthy. Billionaire wealthy pretty much manage to avoid all taxation, progressive or not, so the comparison is moot. They just trample on everyone else.

Billionaires still pay property taxes etc so it’s worth separating how regressive various tax schemes are.

They don't really. They misreport the value for tax purposes, they own it through some other legal entity that is all negative, they own it through a company that negotiated tax rates to have some other business happen there, they own it in countries that don't to property taxes, etc. etc.

You can be damn sure they're paying at most a tiny fraction if not zero of any tax rate you'd be paying for that asset as they'd much rather pay very good lawyers, accountants, and most importantly, politicians to not have to pay tax.

You don't need progressive taxes. You just need everyone to pay it equally, without loopholes. Fewer less complicated tax rates are harder to work around.

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#313

Post by Balgair »

Also true of vinyl records and pottery out of the UK and EU. The people I buy from are just not doing it. Some stuff I've already paid for and now I'm having to pay the difference.

Technically, it's not tariffs on the records. But DHL isn't caring about that at all. To just staff up essentially overnight, the records are going from ~$20 shipping to ~$80 shipping. 4x! And I have to pay them, not the company. No telling how long it's on the docks either.

The potter in the UK that I like is just plain not dealing with it as it's a 1 man shop. Can't get it no matter how much I want to pay.

Just so disappointed.

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#314

Post by Kye »

hadlock wrote: post #245
phoenixhaber wrote: post #241

I'm worried that this could have unforeseen knock on effects or create havoc. Fukushima knocked out global supply chains for parts on cars so for a couple years there were no Honda fits for example (they were missing a necessary but small part). Is there any risk of domino effects having to do with business closures or is it just moronic and annoying?

This is specific to mail service, it does not impact private carriers (fedex, dhl, etc)

The toilet paper shortage during covid lockdowns came from people switching from the stuff stocked in offices to the stuff they buy for home. People switching to alternate carriers could have a similar impact.

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#316

Post by wan23 »

pessimizer wrote: post #227
bsimpson wrote: post #198

There was chatter about this in one of the NYC subreddits over the weekend. Apparently ending the de minimus exemption is closing the grey market for e.g. sunscreen; places that used to sell Japanese sunscreens on American shelves no longer are. There's a frustratingly long list of goods that the US decided to put requirements on in previous generations, and then stopped maintaining. Sunscreen is one; other countries…

I don't understand the argument that it's bad that the government is suppressing grey markets in goods that aren't approved in the US. I get it from a selfish point of view, as in I want a particular helmet and I think the design is safer, so I'm upset when I can't have it at the price I want it. I don't understand it as a political argument. If our government isn't meant to do anything, shut it down entirely. Don't…

Grey markets aren't the same black markets. Ideally the government would be omniscient, efficient, and benevolent so that it could properly regulate things to the benefit of the masses, but in practice it government isn't very responsive and in many cases has to consider different viewpoints on an issue. Even worse, regulations usually create winners and losers in a way where even if it's beneficial to change the regulation, whoever would lose out will automatically be opposed to the change. Americans - mostly working and middle class, not wealthy - bought 50+ billions of dollars of goods imported this way last year. The American people have voted with their wallets but the government is not responsive to their desires in this case.

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#317

Post by gizmodo59 »

Scoundreller wrote: post #173
vFunct wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So does any other shipper (UPS? Fedex?) allow shipments from India?

Yes, but you won’t like the pricing.

Is this to help private shipping companies like FedEx and UPS? Sometimes you have to do something even if it’s expensive

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#318

Post by Spooky23 »

pessimizer wrote: post #239
cheema33 wrote: post #34

This needs to be repeated. Tariffs are a tax on ordinary citizens. Unlike regular taxes, tariffs are not progressive and therefore benefit the wealthy. These are the sort of things the poor and middle class voted for. To make the rich, richer. And then turn around and complain that rich are getting richer and they are getting poorer.

> This needs to be repeated. Tariffs are a tax on ordinary citizens. Unlike regular taxes, tariffs are not progressive and therefore benefit the wealthy. No, people need to stop repeating it, because it's an extremely stupid anti-tax argument. Tariffs are meant to onshore production and raise wages. Telling half the story is simply lying. You might as well complain about buying food because it costs money. You might…

I’d hold judgement on that. The American empire is built on global trade. We tax the world with the dollar, and we’re killing the golden goose.

Re: Temporary suspension of acceptance of mail to the United States

#320

Post by czzr »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #267
czzr wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s very, very basic economics - the marginal utility of money decreases, so progressive taxation is better than regressive taxation.

It's basic economics in the sense that it's an oversimplified toy model. In the real world, every country I'm aware of gets a substantial amount of its tax revenue from consumption taxes, and indeed the US's lack of VAT means it's currently much more dependent on progressive income taxes than peer countries. ( https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/topics/policy-sub-i... )

I responded to a comment that called progressive taxation a crazy “far left” idea - I’m not sure the second and third order details of taxation policy are really relevant here…

But ok - yes, sure, in real life it’s a mix and the mix is worth debating. Note also that consumption taxes often have exemptions/reductions to offset the most severe regressive effects.

Post reply on HN