5 ms·

Every time the US postal service comes up in discussion, someone invariably mentions how life would be so much better if the service was privatized. I think th

by tsally 17y ago

Every time the US postal service comes up in discussion, someone invariably mentions how life would be so much better if the service was privatized. I think this argument represents a fundamental misunderstanding of public services; the post office is perhaps the canonical example of an extremely important service that only can exist in the public sector. As others have mentioned already (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1236487 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1236487), delivering a piece of paper from California to Maine for under a dollar is not something the private sector can provide. As a rule of thumb, if your gut tells you that a particular service is essential to a civilized society the service belongs in the public sector. As a nation we've decided the ability to affordability correspond with others around the country is such a service. Education is another. These two examples are extraordinarily complex problems which the US public sector solves well, all things considered. Yet every time we discuss these services someone always wants to privatize them. For the most fundamental components of our society, privatization is never the answer.

steveklabnik 17y ago
Can only exist in the public sector? How do you explain FedEx and UPS? I can see both sides of this argument.
- argv_empty 17y ago
  How do you explain FedEx and UPS? I think GP's claim is not that private parcel services cannot exist, but rather that if they were to deliver first-class mail, they would charge more than $1 per letter.
  - steveklabnik 17y ago
    Gotcha. I would argue back that the "under $1" isn't even a legitimate path of arguing, because the post office doesn't deliver mail for under a dollar either; you'd have to factor in the cost of the taxes that subsidize that under a dollar price.
    - Avshalom 17y ago
      Taxes don't really subsidize the USPS, losses are paid for by tax money but they're supposed to run at a profit, which is why they have to cut mail delivery or increase stamp price. They can afford ridiculously low postage because they have a government granted monopoly on mail so they can price their rates at a level to subsidize Remote, Oregon with profit from Portland. If they didn't have to deliver to the middle of nowhere they could probably lower prices significantly. Which is why they need the monopoly, if I could set up a mail company in just the top 20 cities in the country I could undercut the USPS and then they'd suffer enormous revenue shortages because they'd still be mandated to deliver everywhere.
  - tsally 17y ago
    Actually, my claim is not that the cost would be more than a dollar, but that private carriers would flat-out refuse to deliver to many locations in the US (and with good reason; it wouldn't be profitable). We already see this problem with the lack of internet connectivity in many rural areas. So if you believe that this sort of communication is a fundamental right for all citizens, than the service needs to be provided by the public sector. It's impossible to build a profitable business in the private sector out of it.
juhgfcgvhnjm 17y ago
Then give Fedex/TNT/DHL/etc the same subsidy/letter to do it that you give the USPS.
- tsally 17y ago
  Yes, because that strategy has worked so well with cable and broadband providers. I have a heck of a lot more faith in the USPS than Comcast.
hnal943 17y ago
The essential service here is mail delivery, not mail delivery "under a dollar."
- tsally 17y ago
  No, the essential service is mail delivery under a dollar to anywhere in the United States. That is a fundamentally different service than what is provided by Fedex or UPS.
  - hnal943 17y ago
    Simply because it's different doesn't mean it's essential. Is there an inalienable right to mail delivery whose rate structure ignores distance? Why doesn't the same right protect people from paying a premium for mailing heavy objects?
    - SapphireSun 17y ago
      Think of how revolutionary the internet is. The post office is the old version of the internet.
- smallblacksun 17y ago
  The essential service is universal mail delivery for a uniform (not cheaper to mail something to Chicago than Bumblefuck, WY), reasonable cost. Could/would private companies do that? Reply hazy, try again
roboneal 17y ago
With the dramatic drop in mail volumes, hasn't the market (businesses and citizens alike) "voted" that traditional first-class letter (USPS only monopoly) is not a "fundamental component" of our society? If we haven't quite reached that point yet, can't you see we will?
- tsally 17y ago
  With the dramatic drop in mail volumes, hasn't the market (businesses and citizens alike) "voted" that traditional first-class letter (USPS only monopoly) is not a "fundamental component" of our society? No, mail is not the fundamental component I've identified. As I said, the fundamental component is: "the ability to affordability correspond with others around the country". If we haven't quite reached that point yet, can't you see we will? Oh, we'll get there. I think it's high time the USPS started providing free email accounts to every United States citizen with no advertisements. The USPS can provide privacy guarantees for the data on their servers that private companies cannot offer. Plus, imagine the optimizations that would be possible in business and government methodologies if every US citizen was guaranteed to have an email address. Hell, in this day and age I'm far less likely to change my email address than my mailing address. If I had a government issued email, it would never change.
  - solutionyogi 17y ago
    Do you really expect a government organization with all its bureaucracy to come up a solution for 'the ability to affordability correspond with others around the country'? Private market has already found out the solution. Email, facebook, twitter. And if you think that USPS (or any government organization for that matter) can do a better job hosting free email than Google, Yahoo or Microsoft (they all provide free email), I have serious questions about your sanity.
    - tsally 17y ago
      Do you really expect a government organization with all its bureaucracy to come up a solution for 'the ability to affordability correspond with others around the country'? Yes I do. It's called the United States Postal Service. It was founded in 1775. Given its track record, I think the government could implement a digital system that will be good for another couple hundred years. Private market has already found out the solution. Email, facebook, twitter. The public sector has its share of successes as well. How about the postal service, the census, and national elections? The US government has been handling large scale projects since the 1700s. And if you think that USPS (or any government organization for that matter) can do a better job hosting free email than Google, Yahoo or Microsoft (they all provide free email), I have serious questions about your sanity. Hrm, well lets think about what happened when we privatized part of our elections (Diebold) or our defense (Blackwater). Let's compare that to the USPS which has been running successfully for over 2.5 centuries. Damn right the government can handle some problems better than the private sector. Diebold is an gross embarrassment to this country and you're fooling yourself if you think similar things wouldn't happen with a privatized postal service. The government doesn't need to have a technically superior product to Gmail, just as the USPS doesn't need to have a superior product to UPS (hint: UPS is better). The government simply needs to provide a reliable, stable service with the privacy and civil guarantees that can only be provided by a public entity. The government cares about integrity. Diebold cares about profits, and look where that got us. Untraceable election fraud in the world's most powerful democracy.
solutionyogi 17y ago
I would argue that the most essential service is 'grocery delivery'. And it's not run or subsidized by Government and we seem to be doing just fine. There is no reason what so ever for USPS to exist.
- tsally 17y ago
  This is a gross simplification. Let's expand this discussion to public verses private. I'm going to talk about education instead of the USPS because I know more about education. Goal of a public education system: provide actual learning, understanding, and life-long skills to everyone. Goal of a private education system: maximize profits by providing competitive diplomas as cheaply as possible. See the issue? The priority in the private system is on making profit and providing diplomas to people. The priority in the public system is on actual learning. The rampant grade inflation at Ivy League schools is a great example of learning taking a back seat in favor of producing graduates that look good on paper. Don't make the mistake of thinking that "public" universities are any better. At my university (UIUC), research grants account for the vast majority of the funding for the engineering college. Consequently, research is the priority, not the education of the students. Simply put, the priority is where the money is. If the money is tied to the learning of the students, the students will actually learn. If it's tied to producing diplomas or publications, that's where the priority will be placed. UIUC can get away with it because its engineering graduates are still extremely highly paid. The prestige of UIUC's faculty is responsible for that, but it would be erroneous to attribute it to the educational curriculum. I can tell you from personal experience that the vast majority of graduates are average programmers at best and many haven't really internalized essential CS skills like algorithms, data structures, etc. One example that really sticks out in my mind: I went to a talk by Alan Kay last semester. Hardly any undergraduates attend, or even know or care who Alan Kay is. Alan puts up a few slides with pictures of McCarthy, Sutherland, Church, etc. Not a single undergraduate can name their primary contributions to the field. No one even knew the importance of Lisp! As Alan aptly put it, "you all are lucky your field isn't Physics; if it were you would be kicked out of the department and sent back to high school for not knowing the fundamentals of past research" (paraphrasing). So why doesn't your grocery store example hold up? The success of a grocery store is strongly coupled to the quality of its product. Spoiled food is spoiled food. Education? Turns out the diploma, not learning, is what matters the most. The USPS is a similar situation, true value of the service (essentially free communication for all citizens everywhere) is only loosely coupled with the financial success of the service.
billswift 17y ago
>a particular service is essential to a civilized society the service belongs in the public sector Like health care, manufacturing, transportation, agriculture, indeed everything? Welcome to the World Soviet, comrade!

by tsally 17y ago

steveklabnik 17y ago

Can only exist in the public sector? How do you explain FedEx and UPS? I can see both sides of this argument.

argv_empty 17y ago
How do you explain FedEx and UPS? I think GP's claim is not that private parcel services cannot exist, but rather that if they were to deliver first-class mail, they would charge more than $1 per letter.
- steveklabnik 17y ago
  Gotcha. I would argue back that the "under $1" isn't even a legitimate path of arguing, because the post office doesn't deliver mail for under a dollar either; you'd have to factor in the cost of the taxes that subsidize that under a dollar price.
  - Avshalom 17y ago
    Taxes don't really subsidize the USPS, losses are paid for by tax money but they're supposed to run at a profit, which is why they have to cut mail delivery or increase stamp price. They can afford ridiculously low postage because they have a government granted monopoly on mail so they can price their rates at a level to subsidize Remote, Oregon with profit from Portland. If they didn't have to deliver to the middle of nowhere they could probably lower prices significantly. Which is why they need the monopoly, if I could set up a mail company in just the top 20 cities in the country I could undercut the USPS and then they'd suffer enormous revenue shortages because they'd still be mandated to deliver everywhere.
- tsally 17y ago
  Actually, my claim is not that the cost would be more than a dollar, but that private carriers would flat-out refuse to deliver to many locations in the US (and with good reason; it wouldn't be profitable). We already see this problem with the lack of internet connectivity in many rural areas. So if you believe that this sort of communication is a fundamental right for all citizens, than the service needs to be provided by the public sector. It's impossible to build a profitable business in the private sector out of it.

juhgfcgvhnjm 17y ago

Then give Fedex/TNT/DHL/etc the same subsidy/letter to do it that you give the USPS.

tsally 17y ago
Yes, because that strategy has worked so well with cable and broadband providers. I have a heck of a lot more faith in the USPS than Comcast.

hnal943 17y ago

The essential service here is mail delivery, not mail delivery "under a dollar."

tsally 17y ago
No, the essential service is mail delivery under a dollar to anywhere in the United States. That is a fundamentally different service than what is provided by Fedex or UPS.
- hnal943 17y ago
  Simply because it's different doesn't mean it's essential. Is there an inalienable right to mail delivery whose rate structure ignores distance? Why doesn't the same right protect people from paying a premium for mailing heavy objects?
  - SapphireSun 17y ago
    Think of how revolutionary the internet is. The post office is the old version of the internet.
smallblacksun 17y ago
The essential service is universal mail delivery for a uniform (not cheaper to mail something to Chicago than Bumblefuck, WY), reasonable cost. Could/would private companies do that? Reply hazy, try again

roboneal 17y ago

With the dramatic drop in mail volumes, hasn't the market (businesses and citizens alike) "voted" that traditional first-class letter (USPS only monopoly) is not a "fundamental component" of our society? If we haven't quite reached that point yet, can't you see we will?

tsally 17y ago
With the dramatic drop in mail volumes, hasn't the market (businesses and citizens alike) "voted" that traditional first-class letter (USPS only monopoly) is not a "fundamental component" of our society? No, mail is not the fundamental component I've identified. As I said, the fundamental component is: "the ability to affordability correspond with others around the country". If we haven't quite reached that point yet, can't you see we will? Oh, we'll get there. I think it's high time the USPS started providing free email accounts to every United States citizen with no advertisements. The USPS can provide privacy guarantees for the data on their servers that private companies cannot offer. Plus, imagine the optimizations that would be possible in business and government methodologies if every US citizen was guaranteed to have an email address. Hell, in this day and age I'm far less likely to change my email address than my mailing address. If I had a government issued email, it would never change.
- solutionyogi 17y ago
  Do you really expect a government organization with all its bureaucracy to come up a solution for 'the ability to affordability correspond with others around the country'? Private market has already found out the solution. Email, facebook, twitter. And if you think that USPS (or any government organization for that matter) can do a better job hosting free email than Google, Yahoo or Microsoft (they all provide free email), I have serious questions about your sanity.
  - tsally 17y ago
    Do you really expect a government organization with all its bureaucracy to come up a solution for 'the ability to affordability correspond with others around the country'? Yes I do. It's called the United States Postal Service. It was founded in 1775. Given its track record, I think the government could implement a digital system that will be good for another couple hundred years. Private market has already found out the solution. Email, facebook, twitter. The public sector has its share of successes as well. How about the postal service, the census, and national elections? The US government has been handling large scale projects since the 1700s. And if you think that USPS (or any government organization for that matter) can do a better job hosting free email than Google, Yahoo or Microsoft (they all provide free email), I have serious questions about your sanity. Hrm, well lets think about what happened when we privatized part of our elections (Diebold) or our defense (Blackwater). Let's compare that to the USPS which has been running successfully for over 2.5 centuries. Damn right the government can handle some problems better than the private sector. Diebold is an gross embarrassment to this country and you're fooling yourself if you think similar things wouldn't happen with a privatized postal service. The government doesn't need to have a technically superior product to Gmail, just as the USPS doesn't need to have a superior product to UPS (hint: UPS is better). The government simply needs to provide a reliable, stable service with the privacy and civil guarantees that can only be provided by a public entity. The government cares about integrity. Diebold cares about profits, and look where that got us. Untraceable election fraud in the world's most powerful democracy.

solutionyogi 17y ago

I would argue that the most essential service is 'grocery delivery'. And it's not run or subsidized by Government and we seem to be doing just fine. There is no reason what so ever for USPS to exist.

tsally 17y ago
This is a gross simplification. Let's expand this discussion to public verses private. I'm going to talk about education instead of the USPS because I know more about education. Goal of a public education system: provide actual learning, understanding, and life-long skills to everyone. Goal of a private education system: maximize profits by providing competitive diplomas as cheaply as possible. See the issue? The priority in the private system is on making profit and providing diplomas to people. The priority in the public system is on actual learning. The rampant grade inflation at Ivy League schools is a great example of learning taking a back seat in favor of producing graduates that look good on paper. Don't make the mistake of thinking that "public" universities are any better. At my university (UIUC), research grants account for the vast majority of the funding for the engineering college. Consequently, research is the priority, not the education of the students. Simply put, the priority is where the money is. If the money is tied to the learning of the students, the students will actually learn. If it's tied to producing diplomas or publications, that's where the priority will be placed. UIUC can get away with it because its engineering graduates are still extremely highly paid. The prestige of UIUC's faculty is responsible for that, but it would be erroneous to attribute it to the educational curriculum. I can tell you from personal experience that the vast majority of graduates are average programmers at best and many haven't really internalized essential CS skills like algorithms, data structures, etc. One example that really sticks out in my mind: I went to a talk by Alan Kay last semester. Hardly any undergraduates attend, or even know or care who Alan Kay is. Alan puts up a few slides with pictures of McCarthy, Sutherland, Church, etc. Not a single undergraduate can name their primary contributions to the field. No one even knew the importance of Lisp! As Alan aptly put it, "you all are lucky your field isn't Physics; if it were you would be kicked out of the department and sent back to high school for not knowing the fundamentals of past research" (paraphrasing). So why doesn't your grocery store example hold up? The success of a grocery store is strongly coupled to the quality of its product. Spoiled food is spoiled food. Education? Turns out the diploma, not learning, is what matters the most. The USPS is a similar situation, true value of the service (essentially free communication for all citizens everywhere) is only loosely coupled with the financial success of the service.

billswift 17y ago

>a particular service is essential to a civilized society the service belongs in the public sector Like health care, manufacturing, transportation, agriculture, indeed everything? Welcome to the World Soviet, comrade!