It's the American people that are paying for the shipping subsidies, too. It's about the same amount of middlemen either way.

So by itself that's a wash, no benefit nor loss.

But also people that could have bought a local product send their money out of the country, which means less money circulating in the economy.

And more labor is spent on shipping than necessary, which means less value per dollar spent.

Both of those hurt the American people.

Right but in real practical terms the cost for an individual and businesses to have goods in hand is going up. The second order effect is that the cost of goods from local businesses are also going up since that they were taking advantage of cheap shipping too.

In vague hand wavy tickle down from a government that isn't going to lower taxes nor reduce total expenditure there might be a benefit in increased funding available for other things but the visible net effect is less money in individual Americans' pockets.

Suggesting that the postal service will charge $2 more for X and $2 less for Y so it all balances out is not "trickle down".

Maybe they'll save more to that pension fund, but I can't in good conscience say "The USPS should keep that policy where I can get $3 cheaper shipping from china and the money to pay for it comes out of the USPS pension fund."

If most of the money stays inside the realm of shipping, the average cost for local businesses will go down. (The first order effect just shuffles money around. More to buy from china, less to send to customers, on average the same. A second order effect is that more purchases from china will shift to being bulk, dropping the average cost.)

Where is the USPS charging less now?

I agree with you that the right deal was made. But the cheap shipping from China has pretty much proved a market for subsidized small parcel shipping as an economic multiplier that ought to be made available to everyone in the US and abroad.

They're not charging more to china yet either! Give it a while, then we'll see where the additional revenue goes.

I'm not sure I agree that there's a big difference between $4 small parcel shipping and $.50 small parcel shipping to the economy, especially when it involves waiting a month for the product.

No, getting cheaply made crap even cheaper is bad for the American people because it drives out competing cheap but high-quality US- and Canadian-made products.

And that is the primary reason that China subsidizes shipping costs for Chinese manufacturers: to drive foreign competitors out of business until only China is left.

The current scheme allows me to cut out expensive middlemen for quite a bit of products. Middlement that don't add anything I value to the equation.

Alternative is getting the same or maybe at best rebranded chinese OEM products, that went through a local distributor that adds his own markup, taxes, and other stuff, because he's operating in bulk quantities.

Changing the current scheme will be bad for plenty of consumers around the world.

It will also make it more expensive to get replacenemnt parts, for typical electronics, and will make self-made repairs more expensive. Because normal (unatuhorized) people can only get many of those spare parts from China.

Making it more expensive to ship from China will have many negative effects. It may have some positive ones, but that's to be seen.

Assuming you are an average mail user, you can still buy directly from China, no middleman, and spend the same amount of money you always did. The difference is that the cost will no longer be hidden behind abstract government subsidies.

If a middleman ends up cheaper because of bulk shipping, that's because they're actually providing value! They are reducing the total cost of shipping.

If the total shipping cost you pay, including your share of hidden subsidies, goes up? That means you were an above-average china-buyer, and the average citizen was paying part of your bill and getting nothing. That's not fair, and you're not entitled to offload shipping costs onto everyone else.

You assume taxes will go down as a result of this, which is most certainly not the case. They'll just be redirected to something else, perhaps something I don't care as much about.

And I'm also paying quite a bit of taxes that go to someone else's needs, and I have nothing from. Just a nature of taxation and government subsidies.

This just shifts the balance of what's comming back to me, to where I don't care as much, perhaps.

Taxes may not drop instantly, but on average I'd expect extra money to delay budget increases, which has just about the same effect over time.

Especially when you're looking internal to the post office.

Like the way Amazon subsidizes shipping to drive retail stores out of business?

How are retail stores supposed to compete when Amazon will ship for free! Eventually, there will just be Amazon, and then watch prices skyrocket!