5 ms·

The author does not remotely address why, if USPS is so 'important' - that they cannot turn a profit, or break even. How about we establish regulations, and th

by jariel 6y ago

The author does not remotely address why, if USPS is so 'important' - that they cannot turn a profit, or break even. How about we establish regulations, and then privatise USPS and encourage other vendors? If states made minimal requirements for coverage (i.e. if you deliver in Chicago, you have to deliver everywhere in Illinois) and other types of regs, there no real reason that Verizon can be private but USPS cannot be.

afterburner 6y ago
Do roads turn a profit? They're pretty important. What about the military?
- chrisco255 6y ago
  In Florida we have a turnpike run by a state owned corporation. It's very profitable. As for the military, it would be profitable if we could charge for services, ethically. However, I would argue that it pays dividends in a different ways and you know it. Edit reply: the post office is less useful in 2020 than it ever has been in its existence. It used to be an absolutely critical piece of infrastructure as people relied on mail for bills, communication, magazine subscriptions, etc. Now over 90% of mail is junk advertisements. People consume digital media, pay bills electronically, communicate electronically, sign documents electronically, etc. There is less and less demand for the parcel business. I'm not arguing that we should shut it down, but the prices should go up and the USPS should be able to set prices without an act of Congress and it should be able to vary postage based on distance traveled. My argument about the Florida corp running the turnpike is that it's entirely possible to run a state owned enterprise in a profitable way. The Florida turnpike is one of the best maintained with the best amenities of any road I've ever traveled on, including excellent beautiful rest areas and Tesla superchargers at every stop. Congestion is quickly delt with rapid construction of new lanes. The surfaces are kept smooth and free of potholes.
  - afterburner 6y ago
    > However, I would argue that it pays dividends in a different ways and you know it. Kinda like roads and the post office huh?
  - wheresmycraisin 6y ago
    Wow, a single turnpike? Time to privatize interstate travel.
- jariel 6y ago
  Because both roads and the military are unsuitable for privatisation. Roads represent a key problem with access, and of course, he military requires a level of commitment and responsibility far beyond what would be appropriate in the private market. Mail delivery does not have such structural limitations as you can see literally from the existence of UPS and Fedex. The question remains: 1) Why is USPS consistently bankrupt? 2) If we didn't have the USPS today, would the government create one?
  - untog 6y ago
    > Mail delivery does not have such structural limitations as you can see literally from the existence of UPS and Fedex. Incorrect. UPS and FedEx do not deliver everywhere. If it is not profitable for them to do so (e.g. in rural areas), they do not deliver and instead give the package to USPS. This is the public service part. > Why is USPS consistently bankrupt? Google “USPS pension obligations”.
  - afterburner 6y ago
    > Why is USPS consistently bankrupt Republican many years ago passed a law that forced the USPS to allocate budget for many many decades of pension payments in advance, something no one else is forced to do. It was a deliberate act of sabotage by Republicans in the Bush years.
    - sukilot 6y ago
      Republicans and Democrats passed that law unanimously
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- jovial_cavalier 6y ago
  When Jeff Bezos starts out competing the interstate with his private roads, then you can make that argument. The fact is that roads serve their market well, and if the USPS did the same they would not be being out competed by 10 different private entities at once. I don't care if it's not their fault or that their hands are tied by regulations. The mere fact that they are in trouble is evidence that they aren't serving their purpose in their current form.
  - xenophonf 6y ago
    Please note that private highways actually exist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_highways_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_highways_in_the_United...
    - jovial_cavalier 6y ago
      And they aren't out-competing publicly held roads. This shows that the roads are serving their purpose adequately.
salusinarduis 6y ago
The postal service is a basic service provided to citizens by the government. It does not need to make a profit, and thinking about it in that sense is absurd. Does it make sense to talk about Medicare turning a profit? Does NASA, the military (heh), welfare, garbage disposal... etc... need to turn a profit too in your mind? "Everything needs to make a profit" is straight out of right wing talking points. The purpose, of course, is to psyop all of us into privatizing everything, so a few cronies can extract wealth from everyday things Americans need.
- nostrebored 6y ago
  Treating getting grocery store spam delivered to you as the same level of service as medical care is not reasonable, and you know you're being hyperbolic.
  - MattGaiser 6y ago
    Except that the postal service plays a key role in medical care. https://www.pharmacytimes.com/news/us-postal-service-role-in-medication-supply-chain-crucial-to-keeping-saturday-delivery https://www.pharmacytimes.com/news/us-postal-service-role-in... It is a lot more than just “grocery store spam.”
    - nostrebored 6y ago
      Oh, great, a gigantic money pit that makes sure CVS has a higher profit margin! This is NOT compelling at all. There are private delivery options that do not mask the legitimate cost of delivery.
      - jimktrains2 6y ago
        It's about guaranteed delivery to an address. If you want to discuss the USPS rates, and how those rates are largely controlled by Congress, along with Congress saddening the post office with expenses no other organization has, we can have that discussion.
simonw 6y ago
They turned a profit just fine until 2006 when a bill passed saying they had to fund 50 years of pensions and healthcare up front. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Accountability_and_Enhancement_Act https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Accountability_and_En...
- magila 6y ago
  The USPS has lost money over the last decade even if you discount the mandated pension fund payments. Pension costs haven't helped, but the USPS would be in the red anyways due to declining mail volume.
  - jimktrains2 6y ago
    So, you're saying you don't think it's possible that the substantial sums of money that had been forcibly funneled away from them couldn't have been spent over the past 10 years to improve their operations and change the prognosis of your simple arithmetic?
    - magila 6y ago
      What money? Like I said, the USPS has been losing money even before it makes the pension payments. To cover it's pension costs the USPS has been taking on debt from the treasury.
      - jimktrains2 6y ago
        Debt has both monetary and opportunity costs. My point is that because of those costs and that I don't think that it's fair to say things would have turned out exactly the same minus the pension money, it's unfair to say they would still be red or by how much.
- zaroth 6y ago
  If they can’t fund the annual net increase in pension obligations they are incurring, then they either need to raise their rates or lower their pension benefits. Not actually funding the net annual increase in the Net Present Value of their Accrued Pension Benefits should not be an option.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
andykx 6y ago
Why does the importance of a public mail service depend on its ability to make money?
heluser 6y ago
Here is a good explanation why there were profitable and now they are not (tldr regulations) https://youtu.be/IoL8g0W9gAQ https://youtu.be/IoL8g0W9gAQ
phil21 6y ago
Why should the USPS be private or profitable? At best it should be operated as a break-even venture. Reliable mail service to every address in the country is one of the foundational building blocks of a developed nation. Those that argue against it to me seem irrational. No private business, especially when you compare it to a company like Verizon, will ever provide the level of universal service the USPS has historically. Rural areas have absolutely been "left behind" for Internet access just as soon as the regulators stopped regulating minimum access requirements. No thanks. I don't want the (imo, completely and irreversibly broken) US telco landscape extended to the physical mail delivery. Not to mention the constitutional rights you get shipping with the USPS vs. any private business.
- jariel 6y ago
  "Reliable mail service to every address in the country is one of the foundational building blocks of a developed nation. Those that argue against it to me seem irrational." Those who would argue, blindly, that this service must be provided by the government ... seem irrational. Moreover, we are in a digital era, trying to reduce our paper usage. I have not received a paper letter of material usefulness literally in years. 95% of my mail is junk mail - wasted. The remaining 5% is the occasional letter from the government, of the bank, reminding me of what I have already received online. By any reasonable stretch, the USPS is largely just a 'junk mail service'. Society may benefit frankly from the end of this waste and the end of paper mail for most procedures. What remains for the most part is just packages and a few letters there's no reason decent regulation couldn't have it managed by private entities.
techlaw 6y ago
Fire Depts are important but don't turn a profit either. Many services are difficult to quantify and/or cannot exist merely by charging only those who directly benefit from them.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
d2v 6y ago
I've gotten better service and respect for my privacy from USPS than any telecom monopoly like Verizon. If anything this feels like an argument in favor of municipal broadband. If the telecom industry is any indication, eliminating the USPS would just result in private mail carriers divvying up the country into a few regions run by monopolies, with lower quality service, and profiting at the expense of users. The point of a public good isn't to profit, but to serve a need that can't adequately be served by the private sector.

by jariel 6y ago

afterburner 6y ago

Do roads turn a profit? They're pretty important. What about the military?

chrisco255 6y ago
In Florida we have a turnpike run by a state owned corporation. It's very profitable. As for the military, it would be profitable if we could charge for services, ethically. However, I would argue that it pays dividends in a different ways and you know it. Edit reply: the post office is less useful in 2020 than it ever has been in its existence. It used to be an absolutely critical piece of infrastructure as people relied on mail for bills, communication, magazine subscriptions, etc. Now over 90% of mail is junk advertisements. People consume digital media, pay bills electronically, communicate electronically, sign documents electronically, etc. There is less and less demand for the parcel business. I'm not arguing that we should shut it down, but the prices should go up and the USPS should be able to set prices without an act of Congress and it should be able to vary postage based on distance traveled. My argument about the Florida corp running the turnpike is that it's entirely possible to run a state owned enterprise in a profitable way. The Florida turnpike is one of the best maintained with the best amenities of any road I've ever traveled on, including excellent beautiful rest areas and Tesla superchargers at every stop. Congestion is quickly delt with rapid construction of new lanes. The surfaces are kept smooth and free of potholes.
- afterburner 6y ago
  > However, I would argue that it pays dividends in a different ways and you know it. Kinda like roads and the post office huh?
- wheresmycraisin 6y ago
  Wow, a single turnpike? Time to privatize interstate travel.
jariel 6y ago
Because both roads and the military are unsuitable for privatisation. Roads represent a key problem with access, and of course, he military requires a level of commitment and responsibility far beyond what would be appropriate in the private market. Mail delivery does not have such structural limitations as you can see literally from the existence of UPS and Fedex. The question remains: 1) Why is USPS consistently bankrupt? 2) If we didn't have the USPS today, would the government create one?
- untog 6y ago
  > Mail delivery does not have such structural limitations as you can see literally from the existence of UPS and Fedex. Incorrect. UPS and FedEx do not deliver everywhere. If it is not profitable for them to do so (e.g. in rural areas), they do not deliver and instead give the package to USPS. This is the public service part. > Why is USPS consistently bankrupt? Google “USPS pension obligations”.
- afterburner 6y ago
  > Why is USPS consistently bankrupt Republican many years ago passed a law that forced the USPS to allocate budget for many many decades of pension payments in advance, something no one else is forced to do. It was a deliberate act of sabotage by Republicans in the Bush years.
  - sukilot 6y ago
    Republicans and Democrats passed that law unanimously
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
jovial_cavalier 6y ago
When Jeff Bezos starts out competing the interstate with his private roads, then you can make that argument. The fact is that roads serve their market well, and if the USPS did the same they would not be being out competed by 10 different private entities at once. I don't care if it's not their fault or that their hands are tied by regulations. The mere fact that they are in trouble is evidence that they aren't serving their purpose in their current form.
- xenophonf 6y ago
  Please note that private highways actually exist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_highways_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_highways_in_the_United...
  - jovial_cavalier 6y ago
    And they aren't out-competing publicly held roads. This shows that the roads are serving their purpose adequately.

salusinarduis 6y ago

The postal service is a basic service provided to citizens by the government. It does not need to make a profit, and thinking about it in that sense is absurd. Does it make sense to talk about Medicare turning a profit? Does NASA, the military (heh), welfare, garbage disposal... etc... need to turn a profit too in your mind? "Everything needs to make a profit" is straight out of right wing talking points. The purpose, of course, is to psyop all of us into privatizing everything, so a few cronies can extract wealth from everyday things Americans need.

nostrebored 6y ago
Treating getting grocery store spam delivered to you as the same level of service as medical care is not reasonable, and you know you're being hyperbolic.
- MattGaiser 6y ago
  Except that the postal service plays a key role in medical care. https://www.pharmacytimes.com/news/us-postal-service-role-in-medication-supply-chain-crucial-to-keeping-saturday-delivery https://www.pharmacytimes.com/news/us-postal-service-role-in... It is a lot more than just “grocery store spam.”
  - nostrebored 6y ago
    Oh, great, a gigantic money pit that makes sure CVS has a higher profit margin! This is NOT compelling at all. There are private delivery options that do not mask the legitimate cost of delivery.
    - jimktrains2 6y ago
      It's about guaranteed delivery to an address. If you want to discuss the USPS rates, and how those rates are largely controlled by Congress, along with Congress saddening the post office with expenses no other organization has, we can have that discussion.

simonw 6y ago

They turned a profit just fine until 2006 when a bill passed saying they had to fund 50 years of pensions and healthcare up front. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Accountability_and_Enhancement_Act https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Accountability_and_En...

magila 6y ago
The USPS has lost money over the last decade even if you discount the mandated pension fund payments. Pension costs haven't helped, but the USPS would be in the red anyways due to declining mail volume.
- jimktrains2 6y ago
  So, you're saying you don't think it's possible that the substantial sums of money that had been forcibly funneled away from them couldn't have been spent over the past 10 years to improve their operations and change the prognosis of your simple arithmetic?
  - magila 6y ago
    What money? Like I said, the USPS has been losing money even before it makes the pension payments. To cover it's pension costs the USPS has been taking on debt from the treasury.
    - jimktrains2 6y ago
      Debt has both monetary and opportunity costs. My point is that because of those costs and that I don't think that it's fair to say things would have turned out exactly the same minus the pension money, it's unfair to say they would still be red or by how much.
zaroth 6y ago
If they can’t fund the annual net increase in pension obligations they are incurring, then they either need to raise their rates or lower their pension benefits. Not actually funding the net annual increase in the Net Present Value of their Accrued Pension Benefits should not be an option.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

andykx 6y ago

Why does the importance of a public mail service depend on its ability to make money?

heluser 6y ago

Here is a good explanation why there were profitable and now they are not (tldr regulations) https://youtu.be/IoL8g0W9gAQ https://youtu.be/IoL8g0W9gAQ

phil21 6y ago

Why should the USPS be private or profitable? At best it should be operated as a break-even venture. Reliable mail service to every address in the country is one of the foundational building blocks of a developed nation. Those that argue against it to me seem irrational. No private business, especially when you compare it to a company like Verizon, will ever provide the level of universal service the USPS has historically. Rural areas have absolutely been "left behind" for Internet access just as soon as the regulators stopped regulating minimum access requirements. No thanks. I don't want the (imo, completely and irreversibly broken) US telco landscape extended to the physical mail delivery. Not to mention the constitutional rights you get shipping with the USPS vs. any private business.

jariel 6y ago
"Reliable mail service to every address in the country is one of the foundational building blocks of a developed nation. Those that argue against it to me seem irrational." Those who would argue, blindly, that this service must be provided by the government ... seem irrational. Moreover, we are in a digital era, trying to reduce our paper usage. I have not received a paper letter of material usefulness literally in years. 95% of my mail is junk mail - wasted. The remaining 5% is the occasional letter from the government, of the bank, reminding me of what I have already received online. By any reasonable stretch, the USPS is largely just a 'junk mail service'. Society may benefit frankly from the end of this waste and the end of paper mail for most procedures. What remains for the most part is just packages and a few letters there's no reason decent regulation couldn't have it managed by private entities.

techlaw 6y ago

Fire Depts are important but don't turn a profit either. Many services are difficult to quantify and/or cannot exist merely by charging only those who directly benefit from them.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

d2v 6y ago

I've gotten better service and respect for my privacy from USPS than any telecom monopoly like Verizon. If anything this feels like an argument in favor of municipal broadband. If the telecom industry is any indication, eliminating the USPS would just result in private mail carriers divvying up the country into a few regions run by monopolies, with lower quality service, and profiting at the expense of users. The point of a public good isn't to profit, but to serve a need that can't adequately be served by the private sector.