5 ms·

Seems like a positive development from an enviromental point of view.. less low quality crap from Shein and Temu means less energy shipping it and less garbage

Seems like a positive development from an enviromental point of view.. less low quality crap from Shein and Temu means less energy shipping it and less garbage later. Win win.

watwut 1y ago
Environmental point of view would welcome wind electricity and generally pretty much any other administration
- brookst 1y ago
  That’s true, but “this policy will be good for the environment” is not the same thing as “the people who instituted this policy are unequivocally good for the environment”.
  - watwut 1y ago
    That is true but environmental impact is minimal and likelihood that it is genuin care about environmental even smaller.
    - brookst 1y ago
      True, but not everything needs to be about declaring people saints or demons. It’s possible to consider a policy’s actual real world impact without turning it into further proof of your strongly held convictions.
      - watwut 1y ago
        The comment was not about the policy’s actual real world impact. That is what I said in my second comment. That comment was not an attempt to evaluate the policy, bit an attempt to make it sound better due to made up environmental concern. We are overall already treating too many clearly bad faith arguments as if we all were naive polaynnas. There is no reason to insist on that as mandatory strategy.
        cosmicgadget 1y ago
        How is shipping huge volumes of cheap plastic and single-use items a "made up environmental concern"?
        Dylan16807 1y ago
        Mostly this is going to change which models people buy and make them go through distributers with less variety, not reduce wasteful production and designs. For the actual shipping, even if we pretend this rule removes the trip across the ocean, that trip across the ocean would have let out a very small amount of pollution per pound. Worrying about cargo ships is iffy to begin with. But GP was talking about the concern being made up, not the underlying issue they're pretending to be concerned about. Fake motivations in a bad faith argument.
        cosmicgadget 1y ago
        I don't know the numbers, but certainly the marketing pushes people toward impulse buys (because everything is so cheap!). And, of course, the replacement cycle is a pretty big environmental impact. Not sure I can say anything about the claim that some/most/all people expressing concerns over the environmental impact of low quality products are participating in bad faith. I guess you win?
        Dylan16807 1y ago
        > Not sure I can say anything about the claim that some/most/all people expressing concerns over the environmental impact of low quality products are participating in bad faith. I don't think you understood my post at all. The point was to disentangle low quality products from de minimis and cross-ocean shipping. I am not making the claim you're accusing me of making. watwut was also not making the claim you accused them of making. To put it a different way: The environmental concern you're expressing is valid but not affected much by this rule change. The actual environmental impacts of this rule change are pretty small, so be critical of anyone using those impacts as a major reason to support it. And there is a trend of people claiming whatever they wanted anyway is better for the environment, especially when the claims are small and hard to measure. Again in this situation that would be people talking about the effect of this specific rule change, not the general concern over mass produced junk.
gruez 1y ago
Not to mention that giving foreign storefronts a tax advantage is questionable at best. Do we really want to advantage random temu/aliexpress shops at the expense of brick and mortar retailers or even amazon, who at least employ local warehouse workers?
- theamk 1y ago
  A lot of the stuff I am buying in China (electronic components and modules) either does not exists in US shops, or exists with very high markup (3x-5x). And even the stuff that is sold in the US is same Chinese parts, but imported by seller instead of me - so it gets more expensive as well. I don't think this will give big advantage to US shops, it will mostly be extra expenses for consumers.
  - gruez 1y ago
    >A lot of the stuff I am buying in China (electronic components and modules) Surely you must realize that's a very atypical use case and is dwarfed by people buying cheap clothes and trinkets? Just go to aliexpress or temu right now and see what the items on the front page are. It's not niche components that you can only order from china, it's the same cheap shit you can order off amazon or buy at a local discount retailer.
- withinboredom 1y ago
  No. The US gave it to Walmart instead; local retailers were fucked decades ago.
  - gruez 1y ago
    That's why I said "brick and mortar retailers", not "locally owned". Moreover despite whatever misgivings you have about walmart's business practices, they at least have more attachment to the local economy than a random e-store shipping out of shenzhen.
    - withinboredom 1y ago
aaron695 1y ago
[dead]
scotty79 1y ago
That depends on how inefficiently substitute item is made. It's entirely possible that making a thing domestically will produce more CO2 than making it far away and shipping it. Americans are rich and will buy wastefully made expensive item if cheaper alternative is not available.
- cosmicgadget 1y ago
  If they are paying more maybe they'll just buy the "efficiently-made" imported product that has been bulk shipped and tariffed?
  - scotty79 1y ago
    Then imports is just an excuse to tax the people more.
    - cosmicgadget 1y ago
      I thought we were talking about carbon footprint.
      - scotty79 1y ago
        It's connected. Taxing people more might reduce consumption and CO2 or might make them make worse choices and increase CO2. As with any other effects of tariffs, it's really hard to guess which is going to happen.
ajross 1y ago
It's only a win if it's replaced with lower-energy domestic alternatives, though. (Which, needlessly to say, don't remotely exist in almost all cases.) If your argument is that we just don't buy it at all, that's just cheering for economic contraction. I don't think you've thought things through if so. People think that this just means that their nieces will stop buying junky fast fashion or whatever but that their own clean aescetic lifestyle will be unimpacted. But, no, that avocado toast is bankrolled by your employer and IRA and investment accounts or whatever, none of which are prepared for a 10% GDP contraction (or whatever) because the rubes can't buy their skorts anymore. Economies are boats. We all sink or swim together.
Cheer2171 1y ago
Sure, tell me more how it is awesome that I can't order $100 of dollars of small bulk electronic components for my hobby work direct from Huaqiangbei and get them here in a week. There is no US manufacturer replacement. Instead I have to turn to an import/export middleman also sourcing from Huaqiangbei but at 4x cost to me. The environment cost is higher with the middleman "small business" because they need their own logistics (likely Amazon). So instead of a carrier driving from the boat to USPS/OnTrac, it goes into the warehouses at Amazon. Wow! Thanks! World saved! In the eloquent words of our dear leader: SAD!
- withinboredom 1y ago
  Just think of all the American robot jobs this will produce for our AI overlords! More people than ever will be able to stay home and fuel the underground drug trade and/or porn industry: tax free!
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- cosmicgadget 1y ago
  I don't understand, can't they ship as they do now and your hobby simply got a bit more expensive? In any event, volumewise I presume Ali does more environmental damage than hobby electronics being shipped through Amazon.
emptysongglass 1y ago
And note that basically no other developed country had this carve-out except the US. People are foaming at the mouths about this issue, but no one pointed a finger at the EU or anywhere else.
- signal11 1y ago
  I’m not sure I follow. The UK and other European countries have equivalents, although the term “de minimis” isn’t used. The UK has a £135 limit, Germany iirc had €150. This is the limit for duty exemptions, VAT still applies.
  - emptysongglass 1y ago
    You are correct that technically this is true. The EU has proposed to eliminate the threshold [1] but in practice EU consumers have not seen the benefit of the de minimis practiced by the US: try and import goods below the threshold from outside the EU and you will be hit by a variety of fees [2], making it uneconomical for a consumer to buy anything from outside. [1] https://copenhageneconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Study-on-customs-duty-de-minimis_Final-Report.pdf https://copenhageneconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/S... [2] https://www.postnord.dk/siteassets/pdf/forretningsbetingelser/eng/2025/en-import-levies-2025-01-01.pdf https://www.postnord.dk/siteassets/pdf/forretningsbetingelse...
    - IAmBroom 1y ago
      "You are correct that technically this is true" is an odd way to admit your statement was completely false.
      - emptysongglass 1y ago
        But it's not. I do not enjoy the benefits of a de minimis as a resident of Denmark. Every policy set in place is to discourage my enjoyment of a de jure de minimis. If you import goods into this country at below the threshold, you are very likely to pay more than the original price of the good itself. That's the truth. There is de minimis in name only.
HarHarVeryFunny 1y ago
If people need clothes they are going to buy clothes, and it makes little difference (other than cost to American consumer) whether it's direct from Shein/etc or bought off Amazon from some American manufacturer. For every shipping container full of Chinese product, there are going to be thousands of Amazon delivery trucks out delivering it to people houses. It's easy to be snobbish about "low quality crap" from Shein etc if you have the money and preference to buy better, but for many people cheap stuff from China, whether bought in Walmart or online, is a godsend. In terms of jobs and American manufacturers, there is zero demand for clothing sweatshop jobs in America, just as you don't see Americans lining up to replace illegals for low wage crop picking jobs. All this is doing is making things more expensive for consumers. It's a consumer tax paid for by those who can least afford it.
rcpt 1y ago
Thanks Jill Stein. There's a 3,500% tariffs on solar panels now btw.
seltzered_ 1y ago
Hi Keith, i met you 13-14 years ago in the austin startup weekend / coworking space. I'm happy if there's an environmental improvement from this (never bought from the stores you mentioned), but a counterpoint may be in how all this impacts those trying to operate repair shops, labs, and teach science. Bunnie Huang had some arguments on tariffs back in 2018: https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/2018/new-us-tariffs-are-anti-maker-and-will-encourage-offshoring/ https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/2018/new-us-tariffs-are-a... There were some arguments from repair youtuber Louis Rossmann also from a few months ago: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xR2_eqNL604&pp=ygUWbG91aXMgcm9zc21hbm4gdGFyaWZmcw%3D%3D https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xR2_eqNL604&pp=ygUWbG91aXMgcm9...
- caseysoftware 1y ago
  Thanks, I'll check out Rossman's video

Seems like a positive development from an enviromental point of view.. less low quality crap from Shein and Temu means less energy shipping it and less garbage later. Win win.

watwut 1y ago

Environmental point of view would welcome wind electricity and generally pretty much any other administration

brookst 1y ago
That’s true, but “this policy will be good for the environment” is not the same thing as “the people who instituted this policy are unequivocally good for the environment”.
- watwut 1y ago
  That is true but environmental impact is minimal and likelihood that it is genuin care about environmental even smaller.
  - brookst 1y ago
    True, but not everything needs to be about declaring people saints or demons. It’s possible to consider a policy’s actual real world impact without turning it into further proof of your strongly held convictions.
    - watwut 1y ago
      The comment was not about the policy’s actual real world impact. That is what I said in my second comment. That comment was not an attempt to evaluate the policy, bit an attempt to make it sound better due to made up environmental concern. We are overall already treating too many clearly bad faith arguments as if we all were naive polaynnas. There is no reason to insist on that as mandatory strategy.
      - cosmicgadget 1y ago
        How is shipping huge volumes of cheap plastic and single-use items a "made up environmental concern"?
        Dylan16807 1y ago
        Mostly this is going to change which models people buy and make them go through distributers with less variety, not reduce wasteful production and designs. For the actual shipping, even if we pretend this rule removes the trip across the ocean, that trip across the ocean would have let out a very small amount of pollution per pound. Worrying about cargo ships is iffy to begin with. But GP was talking about the concern being made up, not the underlying issue they're pretending to be concerned about. Fake motivations in a bad faith argument.
        cosmicgadget 1y ago
        I don't know the numbers, but certainly the marketing pushes people toward impulse buys (because everything is so cheap!). And, of course, the replacement cycle is a pretty big environmental impact. Not sure I can say anything about the claim that some/most/all people expressing concerns over the environmental impact of low quality products are participating in bad faith. I guess you win?
        Dylan16807 1y ago
        > Not sure I can say anything about the claim that some/most/all people expressing concerns over the environmental impact of low quality products are participating in bad faith. I don't think you understood my post at all. The point was to disentangle low quality products from de minimis and cross-ocean shipping. I am not making the claim you're accusing me of making. watwut was also not making the claim you accused them of making. To put it a different way: The environmental concern you're expressing is valid but not affected much by this rule change. The actual environmental impacts of this rule change are pretty small, so be critical of anyone using those impacts as a major reason to support it. And there is a trend of people claiming whatever they wanted anyway is better for the environment, especially when the claims are small and hard to measure. Again in this situation that would be people talking about the effect of this specific rule change, not the general concern over mass produced junk.

gruez 1y ago

Not to mention that giving foreign storefronts a tax advantage is questionable at best. Do we really want to advantage random temu/aliexpress shops at the expense of brick and mortar retailers or even amazon, who at least employ local warehouse workers?

theamk 1y ago
A lot of the stuff I am buying in China (electronic components and modules) either does not exists in US shops, or exists with very high markup (3x-5x). And even the stuff that is sold in the US is same Chinese parts, but imported by seller instead of me - so it gets more expensive as well. I don't think this will give big advantage to US shops, it will mostly be extra expenses for consumers.
- gruez 1y ago
  >A lot of the stuff I am buying in China (electronic components and modules) Surely you must realize that's a very atypical use case and is dwarfed by people buying cheap clothes and trinkets? Just go to aliexpress or temu right now and see what the items on the front page are. It's not niche components that you can only order from china, it's the same cheap shit you can order off amazon or buy at a local discount retailer.
withinboredom 1y ago
No. The US gave it to Walmart instead; local retailers were fucked decades ago.
- gruez 1y ago
  That's why I said "brick and mortar retailers", not "locally owned". Moreover despite whatever misgivings you have about walmart's business practices, they at least have more attachment to the local economy than a random e-store shipping out of shenzhen.
  - withinboredom 1y ago

aaron695 1y ago

[dead]

scotty79 1y ago

That depends on how inefficiently substitute item is made. It's entirely possible that making a thing domestically will produce more CO2 than making it far away and shipping it. Americans are rich and will buy wastefully made expensive item if cheaper alternative is not available.

cosmicgadget 1y ago
If they are paying more maybe they'll just buy the "efficiently-made" imported product that has been bulk shipped and tariffed?
- scotty79 1y ago
  Then imports is just an excuse to tax the people more.
  - cosmicgadget 1y ago
    I thought we were talking about carbon footprint.
    - scotty79 1y ago
      It's connected. Taxing people more might reduce consumption and CO2 or might make them make worse choices and increase CO2. As with any other effects of tariffs, it's really hard to guess which is going to happen.

ajross 1y ago

It's only a win if it's replaced with lower-energy domestic alternatives, though. (Which, needlessly to say, don't remotely exist in almost all cases.) If your argument is that we just don't buy it at all, that's just cheering for economic contraction. I don't think you've thought things through if so. People think that this just means that their nieces will stop buying junky fast fashion or whatever but that their own clean aescetic lifestyle will be unimpacted. But, no, that avocado toast is bankrolled by your employer and IRA and investment accounts or whatever, none of which are prepared for a 10% GDP contraction (or whatever) because the rubes can't buy their skorts anymore. Economies are boats. We all sink or swim together.

Cheer2171 1y ago

Sure, tell me more how it is awesome that I can't order $100 of dollars of small bulk electronic components for my hobby work direct from Huaqiangbei and get them here in a week. There is no US manufacturer replacement. Instead I have to turn to an import/export middleman also sourcing from Huaqiangbei but at 4x cost to me. The environment cost is higher with the middleman "small business" because they need their own logistics (likely Amazon). So instead of a carrier driving from the boat to USPS/OnTrac, it goes into the warehouses at Amazon. Wow! Thanks! World saved! In the eloquent words of our dear leader: SAD!

withinboredom 1y ago
Just think of all the American robot jobs this will produce for our AI overlords! More people than ever will be able to stay home and fuel the underground drug trade and/or porn industry: tax free!
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
cosmicgadget 1y ago
I don't understand, can't they ship as they do now and your hobby simply got a bit more expensive? In any event, volumewise I presume Ali does more environmental damage than hobby electronics being shipped through Amazon.

emptysongglass 1y ago

And note that basically no other developed country had this carve-out except the US. People are foaming at the mouths about this issue, but no one pointed a finger at the EU or anywhere else.

signal11 1y ago
I’m not sure I follow. The UK and other European countries have equivalents, although the term “de minimis” isn’t used. The UK has a £135 limit, Germany iirc had €150. This is the limit for duty exemptions, VAT still applies.
- emptysongglass 1y ago
  You are correct that technically this is true. The EU has proposed to eliminate the threshold [1] but in practice EU consumers have not seen the benefit of the de minimis practiced by the US: try and import goods below the threshold from outside the EU and you will be hit by a variety of fees [2], making it uneconomical for a consumer to buy anything from outside. [1] https://copenhageneconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Study-on-customs-duty-de-minimis_Final-Report.pdf https://copenhageneconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/S... [2] https://www.postnord.dk/siteassets/pdf/forretningsbetingelser/eng/2025/en-import-levies-2025-01-01.pdf https://www.postnord.dk/siteassets/pdf/forretningsbetingelse...
  - IAmBroom 1y ago
    "You are correct that technically this is true" is an odd way to admit your statement was completely false.
    - emptysongglass 1y ago
      But it's not. I do not enjoy the benefits of a de minimis as a resident of Denmark. Every policy set in place is to discourage my enjoyment of a de jure de minimis. If you import goods into this country at below the threshold, you are very likely to pay more than the original price of the good itself. That's the truth. There is de minimis in name only.

HarHarVeryFunny 1y ago

If people need clothes they are going to buy clothes, and it makes little difference (other than cost to American consumer) whether it's direct from Shein/etc or bought off Amazon from some American manufacturer. For every shipping container full of Chinese product, there are going to be thousands of Amazon delivery trucks out delivering it to people houses. It's easy to be snobbish about "low quality crap" from Shein etc if you have the money and preference to buy better, but for many people cheap stuff from China, whether bought in Walmart or online, is a godsend. In terms of jobs and American manufacturers, there is zero demand for clothing sweatshop jobs in America, just as you don't see Americans lining up to replace illegals for low wage crop picking jobs. All this is doing is making things more expensive for consumers. It's a consumer tax paid for by those who can least afford it.

rcpt 1y ago

Thanks Jill Stein. There's a 3,500% tariffs on solar panels now btw.

seltzered_ 1y ago

Hi Keith, i met you 13-14 years ago in the austin startup weekend / coworking space. I'm happy if there's an environmental improvement from this (never bought from the stores you mentioned), but a counterpoint may be in how all this impacts those trying to operate repair shops, labs, and teach science. Bunnie Huang had some arguments on tariffs back in 2018: https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/2018/new-us-tariffs-are-anti-maker-and-will-encourage-offshoring/ https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/2018/new-us-tariffs-are-a... There were some arguments from repair youtuber Louis Rossmann also from a few months ago: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xR2_eqNL604&pp=ygUWbG91aXMgcm9zc21hbm4gdGFyaWZmcw%3D%3D https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xR2_eqNL604&pp=ygUWbG91aXMgcm9...

caseysoftware 1y ago
Thanks, I'll check out Rossman's video