SB sellers-why shipping not included?

[Jcp2]

I am because there are a lot of things that are done here based on historical circumstances. I did not move to the United States until after I was an adult, so did not know much about American history. This excess free time from the pandemic has allowed me to do some catch up reading in this area, and it’s been good to compare the different background noises between the different areas where I have lived.

 

[MiloR]

<snip>

Based on the aggregate of my experiences in the US and the rest of the world, I can unequivocally state that the US goes about this in an unnecessarily complicated way.

Hey, but keep going, because this has become super amusing.

-Z

I don't see how it is complicated. Where I live it is 7.5% sales tax. I just do the mental math and add 10% to anything I am buying and BOOM, price plus tax.

I LOVE that tax is added at the end. Reminds me, and should remind others, how much extra the Government gets on MY money after they already took a bunch in Income taxes from my paycheck.

Also serves a way to show that, for example, Best Buy only charged me $1456 for the Tv I bought not the $1565 I paid.

 

[tursiops]

Why does Europe insist on the unnecessarily complicated liters per kilometer measure of gas consumption? That is not what I want to know, but rather the inverse.

 

[tmassey]

I usually include shipping but some things aren’t worth selling with the cost of shipping these days, fins being a good example, I’ve taken to just throwing some stuff in the trash.

That‘s the biggest thing with Amazon. It has made purchase and delivery of new goods so much cheaper and faster that used goods can have little to no value, and the only economical thing you can do is throw them away.

I’m not blind to both sides of this argument. Cheaper (even if of lower quality and durability) goods make more things available to more people. Many fewer people had washing machines when they cost multiple thousands of dollars in the past (and more valuable dollars at that!), even if they might last a lifetime. Same thing with durable clothes, furniture, etc. And if you personally want those goods, they’re still there. Speed Queen will sell you a commercial-quality machine for your home — at $3k. But if you can only afford a $600 machine, you can still get a brand new machine.

So there are strong advantages to an Amazon (and before that Walmart) economy. But re-use and longevity are not among them. And it’s sad to see ugly but completely functional goods go to the landfill.

All probably off-topic, but it’s a big reason why I have a bunch of scuba gear piled up looking for a home, but can’t make it go anywhere. Adding shipping on top of that just increases the difficulty.

 

[coldwaterlloyd]

Where I live I have to travel 15 - 20 miles to shop . Gas is very expensive up here . Shipping fees are just the money I would spend on gas , my time , no problem
Tax is tax , unless I do a private deal I am going to pay tax anywhere anytime , no problem

shopping on line is easy , I do not worry about the add ons

 

[TheRealScubaSteve]

Sometimes, a seller will part with an item at a below-market price just for the satisfaction of seeing a newer diver enjoy the item that the seller got so much enjoyment out of. I have been on both ends of that. "Paying it forward." Buy quality gear and keep it in circulation!

And for items that would be prohibitive to sell/ship for their value, I have sometimes saved with the hope of giving away to a new diver as gear can be very expensive. It was satisfying giving a new home to some gear for free - at least someone has gotten some use out of it rather than going to a landfill.

 

[DiveClimbRide]

Why does Europe insist on the unnecessarily complicated liters per kilometer measure of gas consumption? That is not what I want to know, but rather the inverse.

Actually it's usually litres per 100km. My car for example get 6.5l per 100km. That's pretty good because it's a small hatch back. Now the reason we do it this way instead of miles per gallon is because multiplication is easier than division. If I have a trip of 500km then I multiply 5 x 6.5 which is aprox 33l. If I convert that to miles per gallon i have an economy of 36mpg so to work out fuel for my trip of 310miles I need to divide. The calculator says that is 8.5 gallons. So which do you think is easier?

 

[tursiops]

Actually it's usually litres per 100km. My car for example get 6.5l per 100km. That's pretty good because it's a small hatch back. Now the reason we do it this way instead of miles per gallon is because multiplication is easier than division. If I have a trip of 500km then I multiply 5 x 6.5 which is aprox 33l. If I convert that to miles per gallon i have an economy of 36mpg so to work out fuel for my trip of 310miles I need to divide. The calculator says that is 8.5 gallons. So which do you think is easier?

It was a trick question.
The easiest is the one you are used to.
Just like with having the tax show up at the register.

By the way I disagree with "My car for example get(s) 6.5l per 100km." Your car uses 6.6l per 100km. Volume consumed per distance is not the rate of consumption of gasoline; distance per liter is a consumption rate. You say that is inconvenient; I say you are not used to it.

 

[DiveClimbRide]

By the way I disagree with "My car for example get(s) 6.5l per 100km." Your car uses 6.6l per 100km.

Too right.

Volume consumed per distance is not the rate of consumption of gasoline; distance per liter is a consumption rate

Correct that's why we talk about the economy of a car not the consumption rate (here at least)

You say that is inconvenient; I say you are not used to it

Perhaps but I still feel multiplication is easier than division. Unless I'm just doing the wrong calculation?

 

[tursiops]

Too right.


Correct that's why we talk about the economy of a car not the consumption rate (here at least)

Perhaps but I still feel multiplication is easier than division. Unless I'm just doing the wrong calculation?

Your calculation is fine.