Pricepoint is gone :-(

On 2016-08-16 08:09, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/16/2016 8:18 AM, AMuzi wrote:


The quasi-public USPS...

Very much OT, but: I'm probably the only person here who's had the
experience of a USPS official standing near my property line and yelling
at me "WE CAN TAKE YOUR HOUSE!!!"


I sure hope you reported that expression censored and informed the
media. If goverment overreach is that engrained in "public servants"
they need a reprimand. Preferably a public one.

[...]

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 8/16/2016 7:37 AM, Joerg wrote:

snip

Unfortunately (or perhaps as usual) you have not read carefully. I wrote
that there was a decision by the movers and shakers in the US to no
longer allow international surface mail. _That_ is the key problem and
it's got nothing to do with old international treaties. If I send
something to Manila it costs over 10 bucks. If they send the same thing
back here it costs less than a buck. Do you now understand?

Except all that stuff with free shipping from DealExtreme, and eBay
vendors does NOT go by ship or train or truck from China. It comes by plane.

Even if the USPS took advantage of the reciprocity agreements like China
does, it would not benefit U.S. sellers of stuff unless the stuff was
being sent outside the U.S..

On 8/16/2016 12:36 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-08-16 08:09, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/16/2016 8:18 AM, AMuzi wrote:


The quasi-public USPS...

Very much OT, but: I'm probably the only person here who's had the
experience of a USPS official standing near my property line and yelling
at me "WE CAN TAKE YOUR HOUSE!!!"


I sure hope you reported that expression censored and informed the
media. If goverment overreach is that engrained in "public servants"
they need a reprimand. Preferably a public one.

Yes, we took steps. The gentleman in question was soon no longer in
charge of his project.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Tuesday, August 16, 2016 at 7:37:16 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-08-16 00:46, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 16:26:46 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-08-15 15:48, sms wrote:
On 8/15/2016 3:36 PM, Joerg wrote:

snip

AFAIK shipping is a real killer for US businesses. Our oh-so-smart
decision makers have largely done away with surface mail. That means our
businesses will internationally barely stand a chance. China's decision
makers were not this stupid so people almost anywhere in the world can
order stuff from there at very low shipping costs. Same for other Asian
countries such as the Philippines.

China takes full advantage of the reciprocity agreements for
international mail. A package mailed from China to the U.S. generates
zero revenue for the U.S.P.S. while a package mailed from the U.S. to
China generates zero revenue for the China Post. When these agreements
were made, they were not thinking about USB cables or bicycle parts
being shipped to individual consumers in the U.S., it was assumed that
the mail volumes would not be unequal enough for each country's postal
service to bother with with trying to divide revenue.


Well, it's time for the decision makers to wake up. Why are we paying
their salaries, fat pensions and all that if they let us as a country down?

We have to make sure that our infrastructure costs are not penalizing
our own businesses and right now WRT shipping they sure are.

Unfortunately (or perhaps "as usual") you have it wrong. This
infrastructure cost you are talking about is the U.S. cost of mailing
a package and has nothing to do with China.

The great "loss" that you are ranting about doesn't exist per se. This
horrendous loss is the difference between the cost of mailing a letter
in China and the cost of mailing a letter in the U.S. and the U.,S.
cost is set by the U.S. Postal Department, I believe as allowed by
some sort of public law or policy.

This terribly unfair system you are talking about is actually an
international treaty that dates back to the mid 1800's and (Surprise)
one of the main instigators of the treaty was the U.S.


Unfortunately (or perhaps as usual) you have not read carefully. I wrote
that there was a decision by the movers and shakers in the US to no
longer allow international surface mail. _That_ is the key problem and
it's got nothing to do with old international treaties. If I send
something to Manila it costs over 10 bucks. If they send the same thing
back here it costs less than a buck. Do you now understand?

Sea-mail was a huge money loser for the USPS. It discontinued the service. If you can figure out a way that the USPS can pay all of its overhead/legacy costs and provide cheap ground/sea shipping for you, let us know. We could shut down a bunch of rural post offices, but then that would put people out of work -- and even The Donald understands how bad that would be. Lines of unemployed fathers. Roving bands of thugs in USPS uniforms.

They cut costs in Europe by shutting down post offices, but then again, how bad could their costs be? When your national delivery area is the size of two Oregon counties (NL), it's easy to cut costs. In Holland, you can drive a package across the country in three hours or less. I can't even get to Roseburg in that time. You hit he end of the runway in NL, and you're at your destination. Tape a letter to a pigeon.

I imagine there is a whole economy of US small-package shippers who were deeply hurt by the discontinuation of cheap overseas surface shipping, and when The Donald becomes our overlord, maybe he can oil up the ships and get those packages floating again. Make America great again! Everyone will be sending cheese baskets to Manilla! Tillamook will be saved!

-- Jay Beattie.

On 2016-08-16 10:45, sms wrote:
On 8/16/2016 7:37 AM, Joerg wrote:

snip

Unfortunately (or perhaps as usual) you have not read carefully. I wrote
that there was a decision by the movers and shakers in the US to no
longer allow international surface mail. _That_ is the key problem and
it's got nothing to do with old international treaties. If I send
something to Manila it costs over 10 bucks. If they send the same thing
back here it costs less than a buck. Do you now understand?

Except all that stuff with free shipping from DealExtreme, and eBay
vendors does NOT go by ship or train or truck from China. It comes by
plane.


Right. Their planes fly for less and the gvt there seems to subsidize
it. That would be the perfect start for some tariff discussions because
it creates an unfair advantage. Yet only Trump has indicated any
willingness to tackle this.


Even if the USPS took advantage of the reciprocity agreements like China
does, it would not benefit U.S. sellers of stuff unless the stuff was
being sent outside the U.S..


And that's the key. We in the US face a major disadvantage in
international business ever since surface mail was canned. Which was a
huge mistake. Nowadays one must think international.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 2016-08-16 11:12, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, August 16, 2016 at 7:37:16 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-08-16 00:46, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 16:26:46 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-08-15 15:48, sms wrote:
On 8/15/2016 3:36 PM, Joerg wrote:

snip

AFAIK shipping is a real killer for US businesses. Our
oh-so-smart decision makers have largely done away with
surface mail. That means our businesses will
internationally barely stand a chance. China's decision
makers were not this stupid so people almost anywhere in
the world can order stuff from there at very low shipping
costs. Same for other Asian countries such as the
Philippines.

China takes full advantage of the reciprocity agreements for
international mail. A package mailed from China to the U.S.
generates zero revenue for the U.S.P.S. while a package
mailed from the U.S. to China generates zero revenue for the
China Post. When these agreements were made, they were not
thinking about USB cables or bicycle parts being shipped to
individual consumers in the U.S., it was assumed that the
mail volumes would not be unequal enough for each country's
postal service to bother with with trying to divide revenue.


Well, it's time for the decision makers to wake up. Why are we
paying their salaries, fat pensions and all that if they let us
as a country down?

We have to make sure that our infrastructure costs are not
penalizing our own businesses and right now WRT shipping they
sure are.

Unfortunately (or perhaps "as usual") you have it wrong. This
infrastructure cost you are talking about is the U.S. cost of
mailing a package and has nothing to do with China.

The great "loss" that you are ranting about doesn't exist per se.
This horrendous loss is the difference between the cost of
mailing a letter in China and the cost of mailing a letter in the
U.S. and the U.,S. cost is set by the U.S. Postal Department, I
believe as allowed by some sort of public law or policy.

This terribly unfair system you are talking about is actually an
international treaty that dates back to the mid 1800's and
(Surprise) one of the main instigators of the treaty was the
U.S.


Unfortunately (or perhaps as usual) you have not read carefully. I
wrote that there was a decision by the movers and shakers in the US
to no longer allow international surface mail. _That_ is the key
problem and it's got nothing to do with old international treaties.
If I send something to Manila it costs over 10 bucks. If they send
the same thing back here it costs less than a buck. Do you now
understand?

Sea-mail was a huge money loser for the USPS.


So why is it not for the folks sending merchandize from the Philippines
to us? Last time I looked the miles are the same from the US to the
Philippines as they are from the Phillipines to the US.


... It discontinued the
service. If you can figure out a way that the USPS can pay all of its
overhead/legacy costs and provide cheap ground/sea shipping for you,
let us know. We could shut down a bunch of rural post offices, but
then that would put people out of work -- and even The Donald
understands how bad that would be. Lines of unemployed fathers.
Roving bands of thugs in USPS uniforms.

They cut costs in Europe by shutting down post offices, but then
again, how bad could their costs be? When your national delivery
area is the size of two Oregon counties (NL), it's easy to cut costs.
In Holland, you can drive a package across the country in three hours
or less. I can't even get to Roseburg in that time. You hit he end
of the runway in NL, and you're at your destination. Tape a letter to
a pigeon.


I regularly get stuff from Europe and the distance is the same from
there to here as it is from here to there. Yet their rates are way
lower, as clearly evidenced by the postage on their parcels. It used to
be the other way around.


I imagine there is a whole economy of US small-package shippers who
were deeply hurt by the discontinuation of cheap overseas surface
shipping, and when The Donald becomes our overlord, maybe he can oil
up the ships and get those packages floating again.


If he has any smarts (and despite his bad manners I believe he does have
the business smarts) he'll tell our ship owners to either become
efficident or go pound sand and see that business going to ships run
under foreign flags. A law might have to change for that but so be it.


... Make America
great again! Everyone will be sending cheese baskets to Manilla!
Tillamook will be saved!


:-)

For the companies that make electronics kits this matters a lot. They
don't stand a chance anymore against Asians and now even Europeans. In
the old days people said the Western quality is better but that
difference is no longer of much relevance, IOW it's all quite adequate.
Now if you see a kit for $99 plus $35 shipping and then you see the same
kit for $99 plus $5 shipping, where would you order?

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 2016-08-16 10:49, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/16/2016 12:36 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-08-16 08:09, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/16/2016 8:18 AM, AMuzi wrote:


The quasi-public USPS...

Very much OT, but: I'm probably the only person here who's had the
experience of a USPS official standing near my property line and yelling
at me "WE CAN TAKE YOUR HOUSE!!!"


I sure hope you reported that expression censored and informed the
media. If goverment overreach is that engrained in "public servants"
they need a reprimand. Preferably a public one.

Yes, we took steps. The gentleman in question was soon no longer in
charge of his project.


Good!

BTDT, that gentlemen also lost his charge, actually his job along with
that. They tried to strong-arm us and several dozen neighbors. Little
did they know what would happen ...

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 8/16/2016 11:49 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-08-16 10:45, sms wrote:
On 8/16/2016 7:37 AM, Joerg wrote:

snip

Unfortunately (or perhaps as usual) you have not read carefully. I wrote
that there was a decision by the movers and shakers in the US to no
longer allow international surface mail. _That_ is the key problem and
it's got nothing to do with old international treaties. If I send
something to Manila it costs over 10 bucks. If they send the same thing
back here it costs less than a buck. Do you now understand?

Except all that stuff with free shipping from DealExtreme, and eBay
vendors does NOT go by ship or train or truck from China. It comes by
plane.


Right. Their planes fly for less and the gvt there seems to subsidize
it. That would be the perfect start for some tariff discussions because
it creates an unfair advantage. Yet only Trump has indicated any
willingness to tackle this.

Oh please. Trump knows nothing about any of this, nor has any candidate
or party mentioned international postal service reciprocity unfairness.


Even if the USPS took advantage of the reciprocity agreements like China
does, it would not benefit U.S. sellers of stuff unless the stuff was
being sent outside the U.S..


And that's the key. We in the US face a major disadvantage in
international business ever since surface mail was canned. Which was a
huge mistake. Nowadays one must think international.

The trade imbalance with China has nothing to do with surface mail.
Consumer goods, other than specialty items, are shipped by sea unless
they are high-value, small items.

On 2016-08-16 15:13, sms wrote:
On 8/16/2016 11:49 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-08-16 10:45, sms wrote:
On 8/16/2016 7:37 AM, Joerg wrote:

snip

Unfortunately (or perhaps as usual) you have not read carefully. I
wrote
that there was a decision by the movers and shakers in the US to no
longer allow international surface mail. _That_ is the key problem and
it's got nothing to do with old international treaties. If I send
something to Manila it costs over 10 bucks. If they send the same thing
back here it costs less than a buck. Do you now understand?

Except all that stuff with free shipping from DealExtreme, and eBay
vendors does NOT go by ship or train or truck from China. It comes by
plane.


Right. Their planes fly for less and the gvt there seems to subsidize
it. That would be the perfect start for some tariff discussions because
it creates an unfair advantage. Yet only Trump has indicated any
willingness to tackle this.

Oh please. Trump knows nothing about any of this, nor has any candidate
or party mentioned international postal service reciprocity unfairness.


He has said he is going to tackle the trade imbalance and some of the
unfair practices. No president ever knows everything but some are good
in seeking the right advisors. A guy who built half an empire must have
done a thing or two right in that domain. His demeanor is another story,
and a rather disgusting one. That needs to improve, and soon.


Even if the USPS took advantage of the reciprocity agreements like China
does, it would not benefit U.S. sellers of stuff unless the stuff was
being sent outside the U.S..


And that's the key. We in the US face a major disadvantage in
international business ever since surface mail was canned. Which was a
huge mistake. Nowadays one must think international.

The trade imbalance with China has nothing to do with surface mail.


Sure it does. Ever heard of Alibaba, Amazon, Newegg and on and on?


Consumer goods, other than specialty items, are shipped by sea unless
they are high-value, small items.


That is my point. The Chinese vendor can send his bicycle parts to me
via boat. The American guy cannot do so to foreign countries unless he
is able to fill at least half a sea container per trip and that's just
not going to happen for a small business.

I see that effect almost daily with my clients. For example, when they
do a quick circuit board run where they can be assured that shipping
costs are going to be negligible. As long as they order overseas. The
shipping charges are even lower than _inside_ the US. That costs real
American jobs.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 8/16/2016 4:20 PM, Joerg wrote:

snip

He has said he is going to tackle the trade imbalance and some of the
unfair practices. No president ever knows everything but some are good
in seeking the right advisors. A guy who built half an empire must have
done a thing or two right in that domain.

Actually he built his empire by screwing over vendors, employees, and
investors including four bankruptcies in 18 years in order to get out of
paying his debts.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/09/donald-trump-unpaid-bills-republican-president-laswuits/85297274/

It's amusing that some people like Trump because he's a businessman,
even though he's a terrible businessman, and some like him because he
"tells it like it is" even though he is just making stuff up or lying.

Meanwhile, Hillary is the most honest candidate in this presidential
election, topping even Bernie Sanders, and of course topping every
single Republican. Democratic politician are held to a higher standard
since everyone expects Republicans to be fundamentally dishonest, but
even among her fellow Democrats she rates highly.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/lists/people/comparing-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-truth-o-met/

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/28/hillary-clinton-honest-transparency-jill-abramson

Trump hopes that if he repeats "Crooked Hillary" enough times that more
than just his low-information supporters will believe it, but so far
it's not working for him.