The article makes clear that the analysis and exact numbers of loss are difficult to calculate. So there is in most cases an estimation. The author stated twic

The article makes clear that the analysis and exact numbers of loss are difficult to calculate. So there is in most cases an estimation. The author stated twice as fact, that there is no evidence for the USPS loosing money. Trump is pulling it out of his ... without evidence. And that it blatantly false. A simple google search pulled up that analysis by Citibank and multiple mainstream news articles. Including the WSJ. I appreciate you providing the article. More solid that the interpretation of news. On page 4 it says they are losing money and basically subsidizing the shipping or parcels? "We contend that this floor for competitive (parcel) products has been maintained at artificially low levels, creating large-scale systemic economic inefficiencies engendered by what is effectively a government-enforced taxpayer subsidization of the USPS’ irrational pricing." Again, even if the whole argument is weak, it was published with multiple news sources, and comes up with a Citibank study with even a quick Google search....this whole article is absolute hog wash man. Dishonest. Unless anyone wishes to completely invalidate the Citibank study and WSJ article. I've seen no opposing evidence.