Well boo hoo! I am supposed to pay his middleman markup ecause it creates job? That is rubbish. Let’s see its ok for him to buy direct but not me. I have an idea lets require thus guy to also buy through a middleman. See, anothe job created. Heck then we can require that go to buy through a middleman...etc until everyone has a job.
In reality what I dont give to him I keep and spend somewhere else.
His argument has the same flaw as the broken wind fallacy.
No one in this article is crying about “direct” competition on eBay or Amazon. What’s at issue (originally) is that USPS effectively subsidizes those Chinese sellers such that they can offer free or much reduced cost shipping. Then, if you or I want to send something overseas, via USPS, we get dinged hard, to pay for the e-packet program.
The middleman markup (from responsible sellers) does provide service: A US address to send returns to, much easier communication between customer and seller, etc. Whether one chooses it is up to them.
When you look at it, buying in bulk and reselling should be viable / competitive, but the USPS policy of robbing Peter to pay Paul (so to speak) makes it pretty rough on Peter. Are you saying you are in favor of such policies?
I really hate agreeing with you but I do. Why should I buy the exact pair of boots here when I can get them directly from China for a third of the price including shipping? Just remember “buy one size up.” LOL!