• ryathal@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    Chinese packages are a net negative for the post office, you can probably find articles about that from Trump’s first term.

    • Empricorn@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      Everything they do is a “net negative”! My company’s IT and HR departments don’t generate any revenue at all…

    • BertramDitore@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      The USPS was never intended to turn a profit. It’s not a business. Its entire purpose is to deliver mail to every American, regardless of where they’re located. Making that profitable was never realistic nor necessary for a government service.

          • bjorney@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 day ago

            The UN Postal Union sets guidelines for international mail that dictates developing countries shouldn’t have to pay full price to send mail to developed countries. Basically if it costs $30 to ship something from a developing country, they would charge $20 and the destination country would pay for the shortfall (dollar values not real). China was a much smaller economy when this agreement was drafted.

            The US renegotiated this agreement with the United postal union in 2019/2020 but there were still come compromises made - while the amount of subsidization is minimal compared to 10 years ago, USPS still allegedly eats some losses on every package from China.

            Basically Trump is mad because the deal he personally negotiated 5 years ago wasn’t good enough. Same thing that happened with his trade agreement with Canada

            • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              12 hours ago

              You’re ignoring the fact that the person who ordered the thing is in America, and are acting like this is a subsidy for China.

              Not everything is zero-sum.

              • bjorney@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 hours ago

                Yeah, and the person who ordered the thing from China is getting their shipping cost subsidized by the American taxpayer, while someone who orders something domestically has to pay for 100% of their own shipping. It literally is a subsidy for China

                  • bjorney@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    6 hours ago

                    You should try scrolling up and looking at what the context of the discussion is. Someone asked what was being subsidized, I answered, you swooped in with a bunch of self righteous off-topic remarks.

                • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 hours ago

                  for fucks sake this entire conversation is bullshit. the whining about pittance of tax dollars spent on packages from china is entirely designed to make you stop paying attention to the absolutely obscene mountains of tax moneys going directly to american billionaires in the form of tax cuts, bailouts, and yes–fucking subsidies
                  honestly gtfo with this bitching about the USPS