Searching \ for '[OT] Import tariffs' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/ios.htm?key=port
Search entire site for: 'Import tariffs'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] Import tariffs'
2010\04\09@160018 by Vitaliy

face
flavicon
face
was Re: [AVR] use a PICKit2 to program AVRs!

Funny NYPD wrote:
> wow, that's a duty preventing people from importing.

We run into this all the time. The worst situation is when the customer gets
the package, refuses to pay customs fees, and the carrier charges them to
our account.

You don't even have to import anything to be hurt by tariffs. Back in the
early 2000s tariffs on steel were raised by 100%, to protect US steel makers
from competition. Back then we used steel enclosures for our products (made
in the US), and our prices went up x2. Thankfully, unlike the American auto
makers, we had the option to switch to plastic for our products.

Vitaliy

2010\04\09@165154 by Chris Smolinski

flavicon
face
>was Re: [AVR] use a PICKit2 to program AVRs!
>
>Funny NYPD wrote:
>>  wow, that's a duty preventing people from importing.
>
>We run into this all the time. The worst situation is when the customer gets
>the package, refuses to pay customs fees, and the carrier charges them to
>our account.

This is why I absolutely refuse to use FedEx any more. They did this
to me too many times. Now I ship USPS exclusively.


--

---
Chris Smolinski
Black Cat Systems
http://www.blackcatsystems.com

2010\04\09@214904 by YES NOPE9

flavicon
face
{Quote hidden}

FYI , those using USPS are charging costs to me.
www.usps.com/communications/newsroom/2009/pr09_066.htm
Gus

2010\04\09@221900 by John Gardner

picon face
> FYI , those using USPS are charging costs to me...

Care to explain? I'm not a big fan of the "public sector", but Priority
Mail gets me coast-to-coast service at about half the rate, & half the
time, of UPS, where shippers offer it unencumbered by premiums.

As well, UPS has abandoned servicing low-volume customers, & their
guaranties are worth what they cost to disseminate...

best regards,

Jack

p.s. - I'm willing to listen - This ain't a troll...

On 4/9/10, YES NOPE9 <spam_OUTyesTakeThisOuTspamnope9.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> -

2010\04\10@082614 by Carl Denk

flavicon
face
I have been told, but have no proof, that the USPS first class postage
subsidizes the parcel business.

Since Fedex took over the package shipment from DHL when DHL left
Wilmington, Ohio (between Columbus and Cincinnati) leaving 4000 people
without jobs, the priority with tracking has deteriorated. It used to be
I would reliably get 2 day service from anywhere in the USA, today,
rarely 2 day, mostly 3 day, and sometimes more.

The local post office does scan in and out (at my box), and if Fedex
misses the local carriers (we are rural motor routes), they try to send
a vehicle out to deliver those packages same day they received.

Note that USPS has a special low cost book rate for Books, Cd's, etc.,
but it is slow.


On 4/9/2010 10:18 PM, John Gardner wrote:
{Quote hidden}

>> --

2010\04\11@030046 by Vitaliy

face
flavicon
face
"Carl Denk" wrote:
>I have been told, but have no proof, that the USPS first class postage
> subsidizes the parcel business.

Only in the sense that first class loses less money than the parcel
business. :)

The point is moot because USPS gets billions in direct subsidies. Loss from
operations numbers, from USPS's own report:

2007: $5.3bn
2008: $2.8bn
2009: $3.7bn

http://www.usps.com/financials/_pdf/annual_report_2009.pdf

Vitaliy

2010\04\11@045135 by Russell McMahon

face picon face
> The point is moot because USPS gets billions in direct subsidies. Loss from
> operations numbers, from USPS's own report:
>
> 2007: $5.3bn
> 2008: $2.8bn
> 2009: $3.7bn
>
> http://www.usps.com/financials/_pdf/annual_report_2009.pdf

Addressing only your statement and not at all commenting on the merit
of your arguments -

Based on the document you cite your claims would appear to be
incorrect prima facie. It may however be I rather than you that is
reading the report wrong.

You equate the "annual loss from operations" (reported on pages 2 &
61) with "direct subsidies" from the government. It is obvious that
there is government $ input but this seems to be at least in large
part on a commercial footing and not as handouts. Until supported by
direct evidence to the contrary there is no reason to conclude that
annual losses equate to direct subsidies for USPS than it is for any
other similar sized US company.

>From a quick skim of the report it is not at all obvious that these
losses represent any of direct equivalent government input, direct
subsidies, or money which is contributed by the US  government without
any expectation of repayment. Debt related interest payments of 80
million were made.


          Russell


.

2010\04\11@155037 by YES NOPE9

flavicon
face
{Quote hidden}

TP = taxpayer
( http://www.usps.com/cpim/ftp/ar09html/ar_2_069.htm )
Private companies are prohibited by law from competing with USPS first  
class mail services.   <== equivalent to TP subsidy
USPS claims ownership of the mailbox at your site.  <== equivalent to  
TP subsidy
USPS benefits from special laws regarding theft of mail , protection  
of federal employees
USPS employees get federal retirement ( http://www.postalmag.com/retirement.htm
 ) <=== equivalent to TP subsidy
Capital Contributions from US Government  dated 20090930   $3.087  
Billion
Approximate ( range ) gift of assets from the US Government     $35-60  
billion    ( property and equipment is valued at $48 billion and I  
held my finger up into the air and approximated a range )
Deficit since 1971 reorganization   $8.5 Billion
Current liabilities to US Government   $207 million
Gus

2010\04\11@180651 by M.L.

flavicon
face
I can see this thread ending well..

--
Martin K.

2010\04\11@191940 by Russell McMahon
face picon face
> I can see this thread ending well..

Indeed.

OK - dons admin hat.

*** ADMIN MESSAGE ***

If you are intending to post any more on this thread please read the
following first.

____________

The WISE thing to do would be to say "No more posts on this thread or
anything that walks talk or smells like it, last and only warning,
Y'A\ll stop, No more warnings Nothing to see here, move along ..."

BUT

Instead, I say:

LAST CHANCE for all to behave maturely and salvage some possible value
from this thread.

For reasons which are partially obvious and some which are not, we are
on or beyond the edge of this subject going ballistic and for urgent
remedial action to be taken.

If people are interested in the effects of import tariffs on their own
ability to do business or on other list members ability to do so etc,
then just possibly consider posting.

Otherwise, it would be better if this just faded away. Discussions on
the debts, operation, legislation or anything vaguely similar of USPS
may be of great interest to many (and even interest me) BUT are
getting well into religious and political territory, are bound to
cause argument and bad feelings and should be avoided.

If that meaning is unclear read it as - DON'T talk about them here, please.

This subject was obviously contentious from the very start. It was
always likely to lead to where it is now leading, whether this is
obvious or not. Allowing it to continue at all was an act of judgement
from the very start. If people would like this sort of thing to have
even a chance of being talked about in a quiet and rational way in
future please demonstrate NOW that it can be handled well.

NO MORE USPS details etc please. Be they ever so enlightening.

___________

If you want any comment on why I am posting this, please contact me
privately. Only outline chapter and verse will be provided (eg no
names).





                Russell

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2010 , 2011 only
- Today
- New search...