Tracking toy tariffs

I had ordered an item off Gundamit. They used to offer free shipping to the US. Not sure how they ever justified the cost. Although I think I understand now. With all this tariff nonsense, they started charging a couple of bucks for shipping. Still well below what a domestic store would charge you. My item arrived fine without any additional tariff or brokerage fee. I think they just partner with someone to ship all kinds of orders together to the US. And then break them up once they get here and have a logistics company work out individual shipping. As soon as your order ships from overseas, an additional local tracking number is made. They then throw on the local shipping label once it gets here. They save on brokerage fees by just having one large shipment (container) instead of a bunch of little shipments having to get cleared. I hear Aliexpress handles their shipments here the same way. Anyway, Gundamit continues to be a good place to buy imports from.
 
Trunks3540 said:
You mean the supreme court full of old republicans who basically let him get away with everything he wants? Ya no no, they'll stop him.
Click to expand...

That description only fits Alito and Thomas. The others still care about the Constitution, and this case is pretty different from most others.

Tariff power is explicitly given to Congress, but Congress passed their own law allowing presidents to enact tariffs in times of emergency. If they side with Trump and he gets to call anything he wants an "emergency" then they're effectively re-writing the Constitution and giving tariff power to the president. I've never seen this Court do anything close to that.

I still think they're going to rule against Trump, but it may be close. I won't be surprised if one or two among Roberts, Coney-Barrett, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh side with Trump, but I also won't be surprised if they all rule against him. Nor would I be surprised if Alito or Thomas rule against him. This one seems pretty egregiously unconstitutional.
 
AceofKnaves said:
I wish I believed that, even a little bit.
Click to expand...

Which of their decisions were flagrantly unconstitutional? I haven't seen one that would be as bad as this one.

People hate Citizens United, and I hate what it did as well--but I also don't know how they should have decided that one if you look at the actual quite-interesting details of that case. I'd love to discuss it in another thread if anyone is interested.

I don't entirely disagree with overturning Roe v. Wade given how bizarre the logic that went into it was. Ruth Bader Ginsburg also hated that decision and frequently said she wished the court hadn't decided it because the Congress likely would have passed a law had they rejected that case. She also thought that if they had decided it they took the wrong path and that the court should have argued it based upon a completely different justification than they did because she viewed it as likely to be overturned given the court's far-fetched rationale for deciding it.
 
EnigmaticClarity said:
Which of their decisions were flagrantly unconstitutional?
Click to expand...
This isn't a fair argument because the actual answer to that is 'none - by design.' The Supreme Court -is- the arbiter of what is constitutional. Therefore, any decision, no matter how egregiously in violation of what we think of as our constitutional rights or the spirit of the constitution, is by definition not actually an unconstitutional decision.


I would say that the decision on Trump v. US was absolutely blatantly unconstitutional under virtually any other configuration of the Supreme Court than the one we have now. Also the arguments they used to overturn Roe v. Wade were utter horseshit, even if you actually believe there was any validity in overturning that decision to begin with.

Also, when justices openly lie during their confirmation hearings, I think we can dispense with the idea that they took the position because they believe in upholding the Constitution. Spare me the 'I think the rapist and the Christo-fascist will do everything they can to protect our country's most sacred values.'
 
EnigmaticClarity said:
The others still care about the Constitution, and this case is pretty different from most others... I've never seen this Court do anything close to that.
Click to expand...
I'm honestly not sure where to start with this. I guess today is as good a place as any.

Today they ruled that Congress does not have the power of the purse. The thing we were taught in grade school.

https://bsky.app/profile/mford.bsky.social%2Fpost%2F3lzrfge3xbk2r

The last 12 months of decisions have been about consolidating power behind the executive branch. This court couldn't care less about the rule of law or the U.S. Constitution.

Just this week, they ruled that the president could fire members of independent agencies.

Last week's shadow docket ruling allowed immigration agents to racially profile people targeted for deportation. We're not a "papers, please" country. Or, at least, we weren't until this month.

Trump v. United States made the president a de facto king. It's as un-American a decision as the Court has ever issued. John Roberts has proven himself a lesser justice than Roger Taney.

A lot of folks have convinced themselves that it can't happen here, that there are guardrails in place. Well, the first Trump term was about dismantling those guardrails. The institutions are only as strong as their weakest-willed representatives. Theoretically, the Supreme Court and Congress could check the power of an authoritarian president. Unfortunately, no system of government can withstand an authoritarian when his peers gleefully hand him the keys.
 
Yesterday’s 6-3 decision basically tells me where the tariff thing is going. Unless the Supreme Court completely makes up a new rule like they did with the Fed this summer, they’ll likely side with Trump. This Trump term has exposed how much the government was setup to rely on good faith actors. Members of Congress would act in good faith and represent their districts/states, certain positions would be apolitical for a reason, presidents wouldn’t weaponize the government against political opponents, and even if they did, the legislature would be there to hold them accountable. It’s all bullshit. The only surprise is it lasted as long as it did.
 
You know...

We could have been getting 25k stipends for first time home owners, not even be having this God damned tariff discussion, everyone would still be on Medicaid and Medicare, farmers wouldn't need us to bail them out (in spite of then voting against their own self interests(, and let's be honest, Charlie Kirk would likely still be alive (fortunately or unfortunately, depending on how you view it)...

But here we are. I really hope the few of you still here who voted for him are still enjoying what you're seeing. Hope that vote was worth it.
 
Just received an email that the Yoda I forgot about shipped from Amazon Jp. They shipped it ecms which can be duty paid, fingers crossed it is. My hope is that Amazon is taking care of the duty for old pre orders but that’s probably naïve of me 😂
 
Misfit said:
Yesterday’s 6-3 decision basically tells me where the tariff thing is going. Unless the Supreme Court completely makes up a new rule like they did with the Fed this summer, they’ll likely side with Trump.
Click to expand...
This is the key point. Over the summer, SCOTUS separated the Fed from other independent agencies because they didn't want Trump to crash the economy. He fired Fed Governor Lisa Cook anyway. A lower court reinstated her. Trump is appealing the decision to SCOTUS, the same court that said he couldn't fire her, or anyone else at the Fed, this year.

The last two months of SCOTUS decisions have pointed to the idea that Trump, not the Constitution or decades of legal precedence, has final say. The only hope here is that SCOTUS doesn't want Trump to crash the economy. I suspect they'll rule the same way on Cook and tariffs. Two months ago, I thought they'd rule against tariffs. Now I don't think so.

We're entering The Cool Zone. Does SCOTUS know? Do they care? Do they think they're shielded from its consequences? We're going to find out soon.
Misfit said:
This Trump term has exposed how much the government was setup to rely on good faith actors. Members of Congress would act in good faith and represent their districts/states, certain positions would be apolitical for a reason, presidents wouldn’t weaponize the government against political opponents, and even if they did, the legislature would be there to hold them accountable. It’s all bullshit. The only surprise is it lasted as long as it did.
Click to expand...
Well said.
 
BumblebeeScuba said:
Just received an email that the Yoda I forgot about shipped from Amazon Jp. They shipped it ecms which can be duty paid, fingers crossed it is. My hope is that Amazon is taking care of the duty for old pre orders but that’s probably naïve of me 😂
Click to expand...
Same for me with Masterpiece Rattrap. They made me pay up front months ago and I gotta wonder if this gonna be my first experience with having to pay duties separate...
 
RicksNerdLife said:
You know...

We could have been getting 25k stipends for first time home owners, not even be having this God damned tariff discussion, everyone would still be on Medicaid and Medicare, farmers wouldn't need us to bail them out (in spite of then voting against their own self interests(, and let's be honest, Charlie Kirk would likely still be alive (fortunately or unfortunately, depending on how you view it)...

But here we are. I really hope the few of you still here who voted for him are still enjoying what you're seeing. Hope that vote was worth it.
Click to expand...
The problem is the farmers keep getting bailed out. So the few that do lose their farms don't matter because they won't be around to cause problems. The ones who keep going will get the money they need to survive and as such they are not really hurt by their continued support for Trump and the Republicans. So they'll line up next election and keep voting that way because they were helped by Trump and the Republicans while the Dems only help city folk.

Can't win with those kinds of people because they don't see the problems created as a problem when they get cheques to soften the blow. Although I imagine soy bean farmers might be hurting even with cheques because the market for US soy beans has bottomed out thanks to China's trade war. However if the farmers get a cheque to offset the losses they'll keep going next year and expect another cheque if things are still bad. Which they probably will get again. So rinse and repeat and there is no reason to vote for anyone but Trump and the Republicans.
 
canprime said:
Can't win with those kinds of people because they don't see the problems created as a problem when they get cheques to soften the blow. Although I imagine soy bean farmers might be hurting even with cheques because the market for US soy beans has bottomed out thanks to China's trade war. However if the farmers get a cheque to offset the losses they'll keep going next year and expect another cheque if things are still bad. Which they probably will get again. So rinse and repeat and there is no reason to vote for anyone but Trump and the Republicans.
Click to expand...

They're like people in abusive relationships who keep going back to the abuser "because they said they were sorry, and it wouldn't happen again." Only for it to happen again, REPEATEDLY.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top