4 ms·

Also businesses like Harbor Freight will benefit, because it will be much harder/more expensive to buy direct. Same thing with the "cheap" brands at places lik

Also businesses like Harbor Freight will benefit, because it will be much harder/more expensive to buy direct. Same thing with the "cheap" brands at places like Menards. This will slow the pace of innovation in a lot of areas, especially among electronics hobbyists. Cheap chinese circuit boards from Shenzen are a major driver for electronics related businesses, robotics, drones, and lots of other areas. This is going to hurt a lot of people in the US, and put more money in the hands of big business like most other initiatives coming out of the government lately. All this isn't talking about the elephant in the room, which is the fact that this agreement is changing because our delusional President doesn't like non whites.

traek 7y ago
It's happening because many Americans don't see the value in subsidizing electronics hobbyists. It won't hurt robotics or drones companies, that's pure fearmongering. No business is having circuit boards shipped via ePacket.
Kadin 7y ago
There are lots of companies that buy in bulk from China and have US distribution. They will still be around for your Shenzen electronics needs. I have very little sympathy for people who were depending on what was essentially taxpayer-subsidized shipping from China. If you can't do what you're trying to do without that subsidy, you probably shouldn't be doing it. I'm certainly not interested in having the USPS lose money so someone can save a few bucks on a servo or flight controller vs. buying it from a legitimate retailer like Adafruit or Hobbyking (which has US warehouses in addition to its HK ones; I expect they'll need to expand the domestic ones now). The end-user cost of a good needs to encompass the price of manufacturing it and transporting it, inclusive of as many externalities as we can. Too many problems in the world are caused by artificially cheap goods that don't capture their full cost. Keeping stuff cheap for the purpose of having cheap stuff is not a noble goal.
- Accujack 7y ago
  Having worked at the USPS, I can say definitively it will lose money anyway, and it is not taxpayer supported except by special request (USPS can ask congress for funding for special needs, which they can deny) So, despite all the people complaining here about "muh dollars subsidizing", that isn't correct. See the USPS FAQ for more info. The UPU situation was not great, but it has a limited impact on taxpayers.

traek 7y ago

It's happening because many Americans don't see the value in subsidizing electronics hobbyists. It won't hurt robotics or drones companies, that's pure fearmongering. No business is having circuit boards shipped via ePacket.

Kadin 7y ago

There are lots of companies that buy in bulk from China and have US distribution. They will still be around for your Shenzen electronics needs. I have very little sympathy for people who were depending on what was essentially taxpayer-subsidized shipping from China. If you can't do what you're trying to do without that subsidy, you probably shouldn't be doing it. I'm certainly not interested in having the USPS lose money so someone can save a few bucks on a servo or flight controller vs. buying it from a legitimate retailer like Adafruit or Hobbyking (which has US warehouses in addition to its HK ones; I expect they'll need to expand the domestic ones now). The end-user cost of a good needs to encompass the price of manufacturing it and transporting it, inclusive of as many externalities as we can. Too many problems in the world are caused by artificially cheap goods that don't capture their full cost. Keeping stuff cheap for the purpose of having cheap stuff is not a noble goal.

Accujack 7y ago
Having worked at the USPS, I can say definitively it will lose money anyway, and it is not taxpayer supported except by special request (USPS can ask congress for funding for special needs, which they can deny) So, despite all the people complaining here about "muh dollars subsidizing", that isn't correct. See the USPS FAQ for more info. The UPU situation was not great, but it has a limited impact on taxpayers.