4 ms·
You do realize the Post Office is entirely funded by Postage? The "loss" is artificial, imposed by the Bush administration, which required the Post Office to p
by ddingus 6y ago
You do realize the Post Office is entirely funded by Postage?
The "loss" is artificial, imposed by the Bush administration, which required the Post Office to prepay benefits so far in advance, that at the time of the decision, there were people not even born yet, who would go to work for the Post Office having bennies paid for now.
Frankly, the Post Office could meet that burden if it were not also for deep rate cuts that essentially force the Post Office to deliver for big publishing at a loss.
Yes, that volume is significant, and Congress is responsible for it, and the artificially low costs for it today.
The Post Office is in the Constitution and it must be run by the Federal Government.
Many in said government want to further privatize the Post Office which in every other way has given the nation exemplary performance, at respectable rates, while serving everyone equally.
I am always saddened, and a little bit disturbed, to see the hobbling and abuse directed toward a clear example of a public service delivering a net good so well.
Prior to that mess, the Post Office made regular and significant contributions to the treasury, funds to be part of the General Budget.
It is a shame to see leadership priorities and politics cause so much grief.
- Supermancho 6y ago> it must be run by the Federal Government That's a little broad. Oversight would be sufficient.
- agentdrtran 6y agoIt would very much not be, oversight is a codeword for doing nothing when the oversight is as defunded and weak as ours.
- Supermancho 6y ago"it must be run" is not in the US constitution. That's the point I was disputng. The OPs comment is just as valid, and stronger, without this small hyperbolic statement. Your comment about what oversight means, is separate and also not legal or factual. It's partisan comment that adds nothing.
- ddingus 6y agoRead it again. "Create" does not mean purchase from someone else. It means Congress needs to do it. "Shall" has specific meaning too. "Shall" is not optional. It means "must" and or "will" And that is the basis for my comment.
- ddingus 6y agoThat is not what the text says.
- ddingus 6y agoAnd I strongly disagree. The Post Office is fundemental to our society. It needs to be treated as such. These ongoing games being played by Congress are expensive and should bot be tolerated by Americans who should demand a remedy so the otherwise exemplary service can continue as it has since the beginning. There literally is no benefit to a private service being primary. State laws, etc... Federal govt is entirely appropriate here.
- jumelles 6y agoAnd don't expect the postal services in the rest of the world to compare, the USPS is consistently ranked very highly in multiple metrics (speed, accuracy of delivery, cost, etc.) - not to mention we don't really have to worry about paying VAT/customs on most international orders.
- exabrial 6y agoMost definitely not. It acts in a very privileged bubble that definitely costs taxpayers. fortune.com/2015/03/27/us-postal-service/amp/
- justin66 6y agoI wouldn't place too much stock in that Fortune analysis (in fairness, it's apparently just a summary of a larger work). It looks pretty slanted in some ways that have become almost stereotypical. An analysis that talks about "the subsidies and legal monopolies that Congress bestows upon the post office" without talking about their unique costs - being required to deliver first class mail just about everywhere, at prices mandated by Congress that represent a loss in many geographic areas - is incomplete.
- exabrial 6y agoTrump claims he's a self-made billionaire in the same way the post-office claims they're self-funded. If all of your expenses are paid for, and you're just reaping profit, you are far from self-funded.
- ddingus 6y agoThe Post Office returned a nice profit to the treasury prior to Congress hobbling it during the Bush Administration. There is nothing wrong with the otherwise exemplary Post Office, other than too many in both government and private industry don't like it and want it privatized. They want that as an opportunity, not any meaningful benefit to the American people.