5 ms·

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.

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.
      - nostrebored 6y ago
        PAEA gave the post office much more autonomy over their rates. Months ago a bailout was offered on the stipulation of raised rates. The Post Office is culpable for their insane pricing. And assuming you mean accounting for actuarial costs, other businesses certainly do need to account for those.
        jimktrains2 6y ago
        Can you please give examples of businesses that are required to prefund their pensions in the manner that the post office is?
    - evan_ 6y ago
      The VA sends medicine to millions of veterans through the mail. They’re not CVS. Your point is invalid.
      - nostrebored 6y ago
        The article linked specifically mentions that one of the main advocates for the Post Office from a medical standpoint are pharmacies. The point is certainly valid. The high risk loans and bailouts given to the post service are absolutely more expensive than mailing medicine to veterans.
        evan_ 6y ago
        The cost of keeping the post office afloat is part of the cost of mailing medicine to veterans.
        nostrebored 6y ago
        Again, irrelevant. Yes, of course it's part of the cost of mailing the medicine to veterans, but it's the part that we're talking about. The cost of mailing medicine to veterans is _part_ of the cost of keeping the post office afloat. Other parts of that cost are the problem, and private alternatives which charge higher rates for infrequently recurring mail are actually less expensive to the government.
- jhardy54 6y ago
  Please follow the HN guidelines. > Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. If you can't accept the reality that USPS does more than deliver "grocery store spam" I'd recommend you abstain from adding to the conversation.
  - nostrebored 6y ago
    Sure, the USPS does more than deliver grocery store spam -- but not much more. A plurality of mail sent via USPS is spam, and the majority of that mail remains unopened (if it's not a leaflet). The main parcel shipped by the USPS is physical waste.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- jimktrains2 6y ago
  Or maybe you're forgetting that the postal service delivers more than just spam and circulars? (Also, you're picking local grocery circulars as your example of spam? I would wager that grocery circulars are among the few pieces of unsolicited bulk mail that most people don't consider unwanted.) The postal service also delivers tax documents, ballots, bills, and (actual and important, not the junk made to look as such) notifications from utilities. It's disingenuous to argue that the postal service doesn't do anything important.
  - nostrebored 6y ago
    Many of these are monthly, quarterly, or yearly subscriptions that do not account for a fraction of what the USPS delivers. The USPS delivered over 500 pieces of mail per living person in the US, including children, in 2014. Were the US to pay for private delivery the 30-40 pieces of critical mail people receive each year and use bulk pricing discounts, they would likely come out ahead.
jariel 6y ago
"It does not need to have a profit and thinking about it in that sense is absurd." No - your ideologically loaded responses is maybe the 'absurd' thing here. You've made arbitrary comparisons to 'Healthcare' or 'NASA' without providing any basis for why 'some things are public and some are private'. You do also realize that almost all Healthcare services are provided by private entities? Even in fully socialised markets like Canada 'the Government' does not actually 'provide' service, they regulate, and do the 'insurance' layer. Parcel delivery does not have any of the systematic characteristics of something that might make it a public good. While there's nothing inherently wrong with having a public delivery service - there is definitely something wrong if is not self sustaining, and effectively subsidises some businesses and not others. It would be better if there were 3 regular, national carriers, with reasonable regulations. ""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," Conspiracy theories are not arguments. Also - this idea that the USPS is 'forced to pay retirement 50 years ahead' is essentially a canard - a purposefully misrepresented falsehood. The USPS for the most part - was required to fund its pensions in almost the same manner any private entity would. [1] The notion that the USPS was burdened by some deal to have to pay '50 years in advance' is basically a lie. You can read the legislation yourself right here [2] and here [3]. You'll note there is no mention of '50 years'. There is no real reason for the US Government to provide mail delivery, when it could achieve the same results through legislation and via private services. There is a commenter below who uses as 'evidence' the fact that UPS and Fedex do not 'deliver everywhere' as proof that they cannot deliver everywhere. This again - is a myth. That UPS and FedEx do not deliver everywhere mostly implies they don't see the margins there today. Were the USPS not to exist, and, were they required to deliver by law, then they probably could. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2020/04/14/post-office-pensions--some-key-myths-and-facts/#a2ea81047f5d https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2020/04/14/post-office-p... [2] https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/house-bill/6407 https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/house-bill/6407 [3] https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/house-bill/6407/text?overview=closed https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/house-bill/6407...
- salusinarduis 6y ago
  I agree there is room for private businesses to operate under the umbrella of regulation. However, the USPS is designed to operate in circumstances where huge losses are inevitable (like shipping to remote towns always at a loss). We already have for profit shipping companies so I see no problem with the USPS, and actually applaud my tax dollars going towards giving every American access to mail.
elliekelly 6y ago
> "Everything needs to make a profit" I finally started watching Star Trek because I kept seeing “Ferengi” mentioned in this context. I’m only a few episodes into Next Generation but so far the analogy definitely holds up. Interestingly, in one of the episodes the Ferengi leader prioritizes his own personal gain (in the form of revenge) over profit and his fellow Ferengi are so disgusted by the behavior that he’s overthrown.

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.
    - nostrebored 6y ago
      PAEA gave the post office much more autonomy over their rates. Months ago a bailout was offered on the stipulation of raised rates. The Post Office is culpable for their insane pricing. And assuming you mean accounting for actuarial costs, other businesses certainly do need to account for those.
      - jimktrains2 6y ago
        Can you please give examples of businesses that are required to prefund their pensions in the manner that the post office is?
  - evan_ 6y ago
    The VA sends medicine to millions of veterans through the mail. They’re not CVS. Your point is invalid.
    - nostrebored 6y ago
      The article linked specifically mentions that one of the main advocates for the Post Office from a medical standpoint are pharmacies. The point is certainly valid. The high risk loans and bailouts given to the post service are absolutely more expensive than mailing medicine to veterans.
      - evan_ 6y ago
        The cost of keeping the post office afloat is part of the cost of mailing medicine to veterans.
        nostrebored 6y ago
        Again, irrelevant. Yes, of course it's part of the cost of mailing the medicine to veterans, but it's the part that we're talking about. The cost of mailing medicine to veterans is _part_ of the cost of keeping the post office afloat. Other parts of that cost are the problem, and private alternatives which charge higher rates for infrequently recurring mail are actually less expensive to the government.
jhardy54 6y ago
Please follow the HN guidelines. > Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. If you can't accept the reality that USPS does more than deliver "grocery store spam" I'd recommend you abstain from adding to the conversation.
- nostrebored 6y ago
  Sure, the USPS does more than deliver grocery store spam -- but not much more. A plurality of mail sent via USPS is spam, and the majority of that mail remains unopened (if it's not a leaflet). The main parcel shipped by the USPS is physical waste.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
jimktrains2 6y ago
Or maybe you're forgetting that the postal service delivers more than just spam and circulars? (Also, you're picking local grocery circulars as your example of spam? I would wager that grocery circulars are among the few pieces of unsolicited bulk mail that most people don't consider unwanted.) The postal service also delivers tax documents, ballots, bills, and (actual and important, not the junk made to look as such) notifications from utilities. It's disingenuous to argue that the postal service doesn't do anything important.
- nostrebored 6y ago
  Many of these are monthly, quarterly, or yearly subscriptions that do not account for a fraction of what the USPS delivers. The USPS delivered over 500 pieces of mail per living person in the US, including children, in 2014. Were the US to pay for private delivery the 30-40 pieces of critical mail people receive each year and use bulk pricing discounts, they would likely come out ahead.

jariel 6y ago

"It does not need to have a profit and thinking about it in that sense is absurd." No - your ideologically loaded responses is maybe the 'absurd' thing here. You've made arbitrary comparisons to 'Healthcare' or 'NASA' without providing any basis for why 'some things are public and some are private'. You do also realize that almost all Healthcare services are provided by private entities? Even in fully socialised markets like Canada 'the Government' does not actually 'provide' service, they regulate, and do the 'insurance' layer. Parcel delivery does not have any of the systematic characteristics of something that might make it a public good. While there's nothing inherently wrong with having a public delivery service - there is definitely something wrong if is not self sustaining, and effectively subsidises some businesses and not others. It would be better if there were 3 regular, national carriers, with reasonable regulations. ""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," Conspiracy theories are not arguments. Also - this idea that the USPS is 'forced to pay retirement 50 years ahead' is essentially a canard - a purposefully misrepresented falsehood. The USPS for the most part - was required to fund its pensions in almost the same manner any private entity would. [1] The notion that the USPS was burdened by some deal to have to pay '50 years in advance' is basically a lie. You can read the legislation yourself right here [2] and here [3]. You'll note there is no mention of '50 years'. There is no real reason for the US Government to provide mail delivery, when it could achieve the same results through legislation and via private services. There is a commenter below who uses as 'evidence' the fact that UPS and Fedex do not 'deliver everywhere' as proof that they cannot deliver everywhere. This again - is a myth. That UPS and FedEx do not deliver everywhere mostly implies they don't see the margins there today. Were the USPS not to exist, and, were they required to deliver by law, then they probably could. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2020/04/14/post-office-pensions--some-key-myths-and-facts/#a2ea81047f5d https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2020/04/14/post-office-p... [2] https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/house-bill/6407 https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/house-bill/6407 [3] https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/house-bill/6407/text?overview=closed https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/house-bill/6407...

salusinarduis 6y ago
I agree there is room for private businesses to operate under the umbrella of regulation. However, the USPS is designed to operate in circumstances where huge losses are inevitable (like shipping to remote towns always at a loss). We already have for profit shipping companies so I see no problem with the USPS, and actually applaud my tax dollars going towards giving every American access to mail.

elliekelly 6y ago

> "Everything needs to make a profit" I finally started watching Star Trek because I kept seeing “Ferengi” mentioned in this context. I’m only a few episodes into Next Generation but so far the analogy definitely holds up. Interestingly, in one of the episodes the Ferengi leader prioritizes his own personal gain (in the form of revenge) over profit and his fellow Ferengi are so disgusted by the behavior that he’s overthrown.