Jump to content

U.s Withdrawal From Postal Union: Consequences.


k3eax

Recommended Posts

It would seem that U.S.based buyers of pens from China will soon be paying much more. The U.S. has stated its intention of withdrawing from the Universal Postal Union and thus ending the extremely low-cost of shipping enjoyed by Chinese sellers of pens to U.S. consumers. Needless to say, the increased shipping costs will be passed on to U.S. purchasers.

Edited by k3eax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 21
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Hanoi

    3

  • Astronymus

    3

  • bob_hayden

    2

  • Mech-for-i

    2

Top Posters In This Topic

Not just purchasers of chinese pens. With the withdrawal all international rates for the US will have to be re-evaluated. But it will take months before the negotiations are done and any consequences follow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would seem that U.S.based buyers of pens from China will soon be paying much more. The U.S. has stated its intention of withdrawing from the Universal Postal Union and thus ending the extremely low-cost of shipping enjoyed by Chinese sellers of pens to U.S. consumers. Needless to say, the increased shipping costs will be passed on to U.S. purchasers.

Yes, because subsidizing China is a brilliant idea. If the UPU won't move fast enough or at all to fix things then this is unfortunately necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Help me in clarifying this, will the international shipping from a US based seller (GPC, Anderson Pens etc) also be affected by this?

Or will it only affect the items coming in to the US?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Help me in clarifying this, will the international shipping from a US based seller (GPC, Anderson Pens etc) also be affected by this?

Or will it only affect the items coming in to the US?

I think it is some things coming into the US. Predominately China as i understand it. The rates are based on the development level of the country sending the mail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An official statement of the UN: https://news.un.org/en/story/2018/10/1023602.

 

k3eax> Needless to say, the increased shipping costs will be passed on to U.S. purchasers.

To whom else?

 

What that statement doesn't state is that the UPU has already voted to move Chinese rates in line with "some" European nations, but the changes aren't going to be complete until 2021. What the US move does is pulls them out of the UPU by (almost) 2020. It appears that it will only hasten the inevitable by a year, though it may be slightly more expensive than it otherwise would have been, too.

 

Anyway, it's much less of a story than it seems.

 

tl;dr: the rates were going to go up anyway.

Edited by JollyCynic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is a move in the right direction, even though it will affect me as well. And no I'm not a nationalist, but globalization has been good only for a handful of countries (and a handful of people, many of whom live here).

 

I always try to buy as locally as I can.

 

alex

---------------------------------------------------------

We use our phones more than our pens.....

and the world is a worse place for it. - markh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is the possibility that shipping small items by post out of the U.S. might get cheaper. One of the things which annoys me is the high cost of sending things to Canada from the U.S. Perhaps once the current agreement ends rates can be made a bit more sensible. There appear to me to be little reason for the costs to be so much higher Very much higher simply due to crossing a border. I listen to Canadian radio and I know Canada Post doesn't pay better or have any other significantly higher costs than their U.S. counterparts. Actually, given the lower quality of service, especially in regard to package service in Canada (the requirement to pick up all packages at a central location rather than discrete delivery in many places and the lack of dedicated Post Offices and reliance on rented space operated within retail settings), other than the cost of Rural delivery, I would expect Canada Post to have slightly lower costs than their U.S. counterpart in most urban settings due to their higher density of customers in those urban areas. So, maybe when I send a package the relatively short distance from Columbus, Ohio to Toronto, Ontario I will no longer face a higher cost than sending the same size package from Columbus to Sacramento.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is some things coming into the US. Predominately China as i understand it. The rates are based on the development level of the country sending the mail.

 

OK thanks for the clarification and much appreciated

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the rates were set long ago and intended to subsidize developing countries. One question is whether we should subsidize those countries at the expense of making US companies less competitive. I just ordered a 78 cent pen from China so the cost of shipping must be less than 78 cents. I don't think I could ship that pen to the next town for 78 cents. Then there is the question of whether China currently qualifies as a developing nation. In any case, it looks like we have one year to stock up. In the meantime we can watch for the all too common Trump back track ;-) (I don't oppose the change, just the manner of implementation.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the forum rule did state no political discussion or am I wrong , let's get back on track with the mail rate ... IMHO the old mail rate had long been a faulted system anyway. There is 3 part of a mail ( or packet that need delivered ) internationally .. the sending country part, the receiving country part, and the fright in between. UPU had a system long in place to compensate for country where they have more inbound than outbound. And countries with more outbound are required to pay a fee annually to facilitate this cost.

 

The system is not perfect but its fair by most account, since no single country can really falsify data ( after all the data had to match the other end ). In most countries, the mail is heavily subsidized for local mail in the letter and small packet area where the international rate is more a kind of break even part , and that is why most mail system are annually on red.

 

I think the problem start when mail system is now seen as a commercial entity instead of a service government need to provide for people for personal need. I believe the mail rate should really be splitted into civil service ( personal letter , etc ) and commercial ( you buy the pen you shoulder the fright cost then ) and its that where the issue lies, how one actually differentiate the two, this is not actually between US and China but globally as more and more on line retail go international and a hugh volume is on personal transaction. I think just puling away from UPU , whether its US, China or anyone else ( UK once try to do that, so do some other country but usually for other reasons ) is not the answer. USPS is not a civil service for long and a commercial entity and aim to made money and if they are still the one delivering the mail they will be charging for it and considering the mood they will charge it dear. In the end international mail require two side to work on the mail. I can with reasonable estimate most countries actually lost money on both the sending and delivering end, that is also bear out by data on hand.

 

So the question for US and US citizens is that do they see mail as a civil service the government need to provide or do they see mail as a commercial entity. Let me phrase it .. there is actually mail system that actually function as civil service but made money .. I know because where I stay, the HK Postal actually annually return profit but that's because they actively do business with commercial fright and had a rate on the civil service part being I say reasonable, affordable but not cheap. And there are a few other mail system in the world likewise. This question also apply to other countries

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the problem start when mail system is now seen as a commercial entity instead of a service government need to provide for people for personal need.

Indeed. Privatization of essential services and infrastructure is a big mistake, always has been.

 

I think the forum rule did state no political discussion or am I wrong , let's get back on track with the mail rate ... I

You can't always keep politics completely out of economics. Or other topics. Like art for instance.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where the problem is Postage in some countries being subsidized while in others not, I agree with the proposition that differential rates based solely on that proposition need to be addressed as a matter of trade as a subsidy is a subsidy. And in trade who pays the cost of the subsidy and who benefits from it is important.

I disagree that packaged mail should be subsidized for non-commercial users. I understand the idea of mail for personal communication being subsidized to facilitate personal communication and connections to help maintain personal relationships despite distance between the parties involved, typically family and friends. But the sending of packages at low rates distorts the economic relationships within communities as it provides a subsidy for goods coming from outsid the community that the receiver lives without the receiver, the sender, or the seller and producer of the item paying there appropriate portion to deliver the product to the end reciever. It would be better to simply send money and have the end receiver decide how to spend the gift. This helps harmonize the local commercial relationships. In pen terms it means that we might actually have some local stores to buy pens, and ink from if it were not for the disapearnce of those sales to the on line world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. Privatization of essential services and infrastructure is a big mistake, always has been.

 

 

I wholeheartedly agree. If a service is delivered by the government, I'm assuming that it's done without profit. When you privatize it, profit comes into the equation, usually at the expense of the quality (or quantity) of the service rendered.

 

alex

---------------------------------------------------------

We use our phones more than our pens.....

and the world is a worse place for it. - markh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If things become too expensive from China, perhaps Americans will start making more pens in their country. I will buy more US Made Parkers because the heritage has a lot of cache with a long history of innovation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity, I goto US Postal and China Post online and check their rate for a standard 100g packet for their rate going to the other end ; First class Air

 

  • US Postal first class packet to China would be US$ 14.25
  • China Post first class packet to US would be RMB 30.00 ( US$ 4.33 )

for ref. I have also taken to see how the same will cost ( shipping to US ) from other Asian region .. and Canada ( to China )

 

  • Hong Kong via HK Postal HK$ 22.50 ( US$ 2.87 )
  • Japan via Japan Post JY 240 ( US$2.13 )
  • Malaysia via Malaysia Post RM 21.00 ( US$ 5.05 )
  • Singapore via Singapore Post S$ 4.70 ( US$ 3.41 )
  • Canada via Canada Post to China CA$ 9.3 ( US$ 7.09 )

 

actually I am surprised at the charge cause even at casual glance one can tell there is a very very big difference. Not so much between US, and China, but US vs almost everyone else. Its rather interesting to read the numbers , especially that of Japan ( really wide eyed , no wonder they have such deficit annually ). I figure there is a very basic difference here, while in US any operation are seen to be possibly privatized ( and thus meaning the consumer must be made to pay ). In most Asian ( and other part of the world ) such are seen as civil service the government need to provide to the public. I suppose the inter transaction though had become a financial issue for US Postal ( since they are seeing red ) but when I check , many of the Asian countries postal service actually do break even or even made a profit so one had to wonder if US Postal is doing something wrong or simply US Postal had been unable to compete on a commercial operation level of an environment. I recall years ago Royal Mail ( UK ) had similar concern and they ultimately farm out a lot of service to .. guess what .. Dutch Mail, I am not sure if that still the case but I do know Royal Mail still had a lot of their service contracted to outsider ( private sector ) and this also apply to many Mail service around the world. So obviously there's more to it .. I do wonder if particular geographical and locale specific environment made US Postal operate on a rather thin base or not !!

 

If my numbers are wrong .. correct me

Edited by Mech-for-i
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not just postal services but government run airports in the US lose a lot of money too. The UK has pushed for privatization which is the reason Heathrow actually makes money. The US is losing economic competitiveness due to socialist policies. Oh the irony.

Edited by Hanoi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heathrow might be a big exception. Apart from that privatization is always a lucrative business - for some. Most privatized serviced end up back in government hands in the end.

 

Infrastructure is build with taxpayer money (as it is supposed to). With privatization companies get access to a fully developed and running system. They will invest a minimum, ignore security and squeeze the maximum profit out of it till the system collapses. Before that they will have separated the branch from their mother holding and let it go bankrupt.

Then the government is forced to take over to maintain the service to the people. The service is rebuild with taxpayer money. ... Only for some politicians to demand another privatization.

 

Privatization is often more about corruption than capitalism. There is nothing socialist about keeping certain service under government control. Privatizing them is just stupid. Under pressure companies will run away and the state has to take over anyway. Some services will never make profit. But the government's responsibility is to provide to the people. These services are to be financed by the taxes on more profitable things.

 

Ask the British about their railway. They did the same mistake twice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Most Contributions

    1. amberleadavis
      amberleadavis
      43844
    2. PAKMAN
      PAKMAN
      33501
    3. Ghost Plane
      Ghost Plane
      28220
    4. inkstainedruth
      inkstainedruth
      26627
    5. jar
      jar
      26101
  • Upcoming Events

  • Blog Comments

    • Shanghai Knife Dude
      I have the Sailor Naginata and some fancy blade nibs coming after 2022 by a number of new workshop from China.  With all my respect, IMHO, they are all (bleep) in doing chinese characters.  Go use a bush, or at least a bush pen. 
    • A Smug Dill
      It is the reason why I'm so keen on the idea of a personal library — of pens, nibs, inks, paper products, etc. — and spent so much money, as well as time and effort, to “build” it for myself (because I can't simply remember everything, especially as I'm getting older fast) and my wife, so that we can “know”; and, instead of just disposing of what displeased us, or even just not good enough to be “given the time of day” against competition from >500 other pens and >500 other inks for our at
    • adamselene
      Agreed.  And I think it’s good to be aware of this early on and think about at the point of buying rather than rationalizing a purchase..
    • A Smug Dill
      Alas, one cannot know “good” without some idea of “bad” against which to contrast; and, as one of my former bosses (back when I was in my twenties) used to say, “on the scale of good to bad…”, it's a spectrum, not a dichotomy. Whereas subjectively acceptable (or tolerable) and unacceptable may well be a dichotomy to someone, and finding whether the threshold or cusp between them lies takes experiencing many degrees of less-than-ideal, especially if the decision is somehow influenced by factors o
    • adamselene
      I got my first real fountain pen on my 60th birthday and many hundreds of pens later I’ve often thought of what I should’ve known in the beginning. I have many pens, the majority of which have some objectionable feature. If they are too delicate, or can’t be posted, or they are too precious to face losing , still they are users, but only in very limited environments..  I have a big disliking for pens that have the cap jump into the air and fly off. I object to Pens that dry out, or leave blobs o
  • Chatbox

    You don't have permission to chat.
    Load More
  • Files






×
×
  • Create New...