On 8/11/11 10:51 PM, I am Tosk wrote:

So with the USPS running another loss this quarter, we are paying the
Chinese to ship their **** here??

What do you care? Almost everything you buy likely is made in the
communist people's republic of china.


--
Don't forget to leave a bit of beef for rec.boat's right-wing
conservatrashers and ID spoofers to feed upon. The more they feed, the
quicker rec.boats will fall into the black hole of cyberspace and disappear.

In article ,
says...

On 8/11/11 10:51 PM, I am Tosk wrote:

So with the USPS running another loss this quarter, we are paying the
Chinese to ship their **** here??

What do you care? Almost everything you buy likely is made in the
communist people's republic of china.

The USPS is the last mile. I have made several purchases and had them
shipped via USPS. What actually happens is that a common carrier
receives the package at the shippers location and delivers it to my
local post office for the last mile to my house.

The interesting thing is that the USPS wants out of the government
retirement and health care plans and they want to dump 120,000
employees.

On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:01:13 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On 8/11/11 10:51 PM, I am Tosk wrote:

So with the USPS running another loss this quarter, we are paying the
Chinese to ship their **** here??

What do you care? Almost everything you buy likely is made in the
communist people's republic of china.

The USPS is the last mile. I have made several purchases and had them
shipped via USPS. What actually happens is that a common carrier
receives the package at the shippers location and delivers it to my
local post office for the last mile to my house.

The interesting thing is that the USPS wants out of the government
retirement and health care plans and they want to dump 120,000
employees.



They want out because they're trying to lower costs in the current
toxic climate, not because they want to throw out 120K people.

On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:20:45 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:51:24 -0400, I am Tosk
wrote:

On 8/11/2011 4:41 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 12:17:02 -0700, wrote:

On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:53:15 -0400, wrote:


FACT: I bought a disk enclosure on Ebay that ended up coming from
China. Total cost including shipping was $2.30 and came air mail USPS.


I suspect they are building the cost of shipping into the price that
is paid for the item. I pay about $14 (depending) to ship a skirt to
Australia. I pay less than $5 to ship the skirt anywhere in the US.

Where are they hiding the cost. I only paid $2.30 total.

My postal carrier said it is because the USPS does not get anything
near the regular postage on imported goods. The US part of the trip is
getting a special rate. There are a lot of people ****ed about this at
USPS.
So with the USPS running another loss this quarter, we are paying the
Chinese to ship their **** here??

It sure looks that way

Except that's not how it works, despite how it "looks."

On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 22:29:06 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 17:12:32 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:20:45 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:51:24 -0400, I am Tosk
wrote:

On 8/11/2011 4:41 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 12:17:02 -0700, wrote:

On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:53:15 -0400, wrote:


FACT: I bought a disk enclosure on Ebay that ended up coming from
China. Total cost including shipping was $2.30 and came air mail USPS.


I suspect they are building the cost of shipping into the price that
is paid for the item. I pay about $14 (depending) to ship a skirt to
Australia. I pay less than $5 to ship the skirt anywhere in the US.

Where are they hiding the cost. I only paid $2.30 total.

My postal carrier said it is because the USPS does not get anything
near the regular postage on imported goods. The US part of the trip is
getting a special rate. There are a lot of people ****ed about this at
USPS.
So with the USPS running another loss this quarter, we are paying the
Chinese to ship their **** here??

It sure looks that way

Except that's not how it works, despite how it "looks."


Actually it is worse. I looked around a little and the best I can tell
we are still working under a Universal Postal Union treaty from 1991
where we collect postage for international shipments going out of the
country and people shipping into the country collect the postage on
that end. The receiving country carries the package internally for
free. The assumption is it will all come out in the wash.


We know the USPS has a significant charge for outgoing international
mail but it is unclear the chinese pay anything to ship things here.

Firstly, it's a treaty signed by which Republican president? Secondly,
we're not "paying" the Chinese to ship anything. We're honoring the
treating by carrying for free. Thirdly, do you really believe that the
differential in cost is what is causing the USPS to have financial
problems? The USPS is perhaps the most efficient like service in the
world. They're not perfect, certainly, but they do a damn good job.

On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 00:00:07 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:16:59 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 22:29:06 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 17:12:32 -0700, wrote:


So with the USPS running another loss this quarter, we are paying the
Chinese to ship their **** here??

It sure looks that way

Except that's not how it works, despite how it "looks."


Actually it is worse. I looked around a little and the best I can tell
we are still working under a Universal Postal Union treaty from 1991
where we collect postage for international shipments going out of the
country and people shipping into the country collect the postage on
that end. The receiving country carries the package internally for
free. The assumption is it will all come out in the wash.


We know the USPS has a significant charge for outgoing international
mail but it is unclear the chinese pay anything to ship things here.

Firstly, it's a treaty signed by which Republican president?

The original UPU treaty? Millard Fillmore.
There was a framework in place before the Civil War.

You quoted 1991. Which president was that?



Secondly,
we're not "paying" the Chinese to ship anything. We're honoring the
treating by carrying for free.

This was actually addressing a question of unfair trade practices. If
China is letting their manufacturers ship to the US virtually free and
we charge a much higher rate going to China that is not fair.

I agree. They also inflate their currency by something like 30%.

Thirdly, do you really believe that the
differential in cost is what is causing the USPS to have financial
problems? The USPS is perhaps the most efficient like service in the
world. They're not perfect, certainly, but they do a damn good job.

I like the USPS, they are better here than UPS and FedX
I do think they are taking a screwing with this "free" mail they have
to deliver.

I agree. I don't think the fix is a tariff or something like that,
however.

I believe it was GWB who decided to grant China most favored trade
status, which removed the annual review by Congress. Yet another of
his dubious policy decisions.

On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 02:01:09 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 22:19:13 -0700, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 00:00:07 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:16:59 -0700, wrote:



Firstly, it's a treaty signed by which Republican president?

The original UPU treaty? Millard Fillmore.
There was a framework in place before the Civil War.

You quoted 1991. Which president was that?

GHWB, what's your point?

So that the morons here can't blame Clinton or Obama for it.


Secondly,
we're not "paying" the Chinese to ship anything. We're honoring the
treating by carrying for free.

This was actually addressing a question of unfair trade practices. If
China is letting their manufacturers ship to the US virtually free and
we charge a much higher rate going to China that is not fair.

I agree. They also inflate their currency by something like 30%.


Thirdly, do you really believe that the
differential in cost is what is causing the USPS to have financial
problems? The USPS is perhaps the most efficient like service in the
world. They're not perfect, certainly, but they do a damn good job.

I like the USPS, they are better here than UPS and FedX
I do think they are taking a screwing with this "free" mail they have
to deliver.

I agree. I don't think the fix is a tariff or something like that,
however.

No it is something called Terminal Dues that is in the treaty when
most of the trade is one way.
We just don't do it with China

I believe it was GWB who decided to grant China most favored trade
status, which removed the annual review by Congress. Yet another of
his dubious policy decisions.

I am surprised you didn't Google this before you spoke but if you tee
it up I will hit it.

William Jefferson Clinton
http://tech.mit.edu/V114/N27/china.27w.html

Bummer that you left out the key phrase, "Echoing the case made by
George Bush when he was president, Clinton said he was convinced the
Chinese would take more steps to improve human rights if the issue
were separated from the threat of trade sanctions."

Feel free to "hit" that one. So, I say again, GWB decided to grant
China that status... right around Tiananmen Square time I believe.

wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 06:31:53 -0400, X -
wrote:

On 8/11/11 10:51 PM, I am Tosk wrote:

So with the USPS running another loss this quarter, we are paying the
Chinese to ship their **** here??
What do you care? Almost everything you buy likely is made in the
communist people's republic of china.
Almost everything everyone buys was made in some slave wage country.
Sometimes they will use the dodge "assembled in the USA" but that just
means they put it in the box here.
I'm pretty sure the FTC won't allow that. There may be a loophole if
the parts were made in North America due to NAFTA.

wrote:
On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 17:12:32 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:20:45 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:51:24 -0400, I am Tosk
wrote:

On 8/11/2011 4:41 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 12:17:02 -0700, wrote:

On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:53:15 -0400, wrote:

FACT: I bought a disk enclosure on Ebay that ended up coming from
China. Total cost including shipping was $2.30 and came air mail USPS.
I suspect they are building the cost of shipping into the price that
is paid for the item. I pay about $14 (depending) to ship a skirt to
Australia. I pay less than $5 to ship the skirt anywhere in the US.
Where are they hiding the cost. I only paid $2.30 total.

My postal carrier said it is because the USPS does not get anything
near the regular postage on imported goods. The US part of the trip is
getting a special rate. There are a lot of people ****ed about this at
USPS.
So with the USPS running another loss this quarter, we are paying the
Chinese to ship their **** here??
It sure looks that way
Except that's not how it works, despite how it "looks."

Actually it is worse. I looked around a little and the best I can tell
we are still working under a Universal Postal Union treaty from 1991
where we collect postage for international shipments going out of the
country and people shipping into the country collect the postage on
that end. The receiving country carries the package internally for
free. The assumption is it will all come out in the wash.


We know the USPS has a significant charge for outgoing international
mail but it is unclear the chinese pay anything to ship things here.

Most Chinese merchandise is shipped by shipping containers. The USPS
would cost too much.

On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 23:38:24 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 10:46:40 -0700, wrote:

On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 02:01:09 -0400, wrote:


I believe it was GWB who decided to grant China most favored trade
status, which removed the annual review by Congress. Yet another of
his dubious policy decisions.

I am surprised you didn't Google this before you spoke but if you tee
it up I will hit it.

William Jefferson Clinton
http://tech.mit.edu/V114/N27/china.27w.html

Bummer that you left out the key phrase, "Echoing the case made by
George Bush when he was president, Clinton said he was convinced the
Chinese would take more steps to improve human rights if the issue
were separated from the threat of trade sanctions."

Feel free to "hit" that one. So, I say again, GWB decided to grant
China that status... right around Tiananmen Square time I believe.

You can say what you want but the fact is Clinton gave China MFN and I
remember the stink when he did it. GHWB said he was not willing to do
it until he saw real human rights reform out of China. Little did we
understand, it was the US economy that was at stake.

GWB was still in Texas, Running against Ann Richards.

So, you're denying that Bush I did it before him, and Reagan before
that? It might have started in 1979, but it was renewed by both of
those presidents prior to Clinton.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedicti...-Nation+Status

Try again.