3 ms·

Are you saying Amazon would not exist but for USPS providing service to areas in the U.S. that would never be profitable? What percentage of the population liv

Are you saying Amazon would not exist but for USPS providing service to areas in the U.S. that would never be profitable? What percentage of the population lives in these areas? It seems like you're conflating two distinct issues. 1) Providing access to ecommerce to people living in remote/sparsely populated/rural areas. 2) Generally subsidizing delivery costs for ecommerce businesses.

2PMinc 6y ago
Yes, I am saying that the costs for delivery would become unsustainable for many companies if we had to rely on UPS and FedEx alone. Also, yes, USPS is uniquely capable to democratize shipments and last mile delivery to these underserved areas. eCom is still early (~15% of all retail). As it reaches 30 and 40, this will become more relevant. That's all I'm saying. Thanks for listening.
- googthrowaway42 6y ago
  > Yes, I am saying that the costs for delivery would become unsustainable for many companies if we had to rely on UPS and FedEx alone. I mean you could levy this argument in favor of anything you wanted. Early computers were prohibitively expensive except for very wealthy households. Now you can get 1000x the computing power for a fraction of the cost. You would have been out there making the same argument for having the government build Apple IIs for everyone at cost. You're basically arguing that innovation or having a better run system is fundamentally impossible in the area of logistics and delivery in general and so we need the government to step in.
  - lovehashbrowns 6y ago
    The government funds a lot of services that are not yet profitable. ARPANET back when AT&T was convinced that packet switching would not work and would not be profitable. Space programs. Clean energy research. GPS. Weather. Subsidies for electric vehicles. DARPA funding Boston Dynamics. Medical research through NIH funding.
    - googthrowaway42 6y ago
      All of those were military projects except for the clean energy research and electric vehicle subsidies which I don't think were necessary (and both of which started under the Obama administration). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra#Government_support https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra#Government_support
      - lovehashbrowns 6y ago
        NIH is not military. https://www.pnas.org/content/115/10/2329 https://www.pnas.org/content/115/10/2329 And we can go with your opinion that EV subsidies weren't necessary and take that as fact. Agricultural subsidies. Coal receives subsidies, too. Battery research funded by the DoD (military). Kodak and its ~760 Million dollar loan through the Defense Production Act. At this point, I'm moving away from the original point. I'm now swerving into subsidies and loans. Although they still stand to benefit private companies for endeavors that might not otherwise be profitable, I think there are far better examples. Let's talk about CERN. ️
        googthrowaway42 6y ago
        NIH came from the military. The internet is also not military but came from the military via ARPANET. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health#... I'm not saying there isn't a role for government in providing funding for or even management of large ambitious projects but for something like the post office I don't see the value. Even back when it was created, courier services were not some fantastical pie-in-the-sky endeavor like building a massive particle accelerator and research lab. The author of the article has basically said he just wants the tax payer to subsidize ecommerce businesses.
        lovehashbrowns 6y ago
        I didn't know that about the NIH, thank you! And yes, it's basically subsidizing e-commerce. As I have shown through my examples, these types of subsidies are not new. Nor is it merely a subsidy for e-commerce. The USPS handles government mail, ballots and voter registration, delivering medication, etc. These functions should never rely on a for-profit private business. Mail delivery is a major part of the US infrastructure and USPS is crucial in standardizing costs for that.

2PMinc 6y ago

Yes, I am saying that the costs for delivery would become unsustainable for many companies if we had to rely on UPS and FedEx alone. Also, yes, USPS is uniquely capable to democratize shipments and last mile delivery to these underserved areas. eCom is still early (~15% of all retail). As it reaches 30 and 40, this will become more relevant. That's all I'm saying. Thanks for listening.

googthrowaway42 6y ago
> Yes, I am saying that the costs for delivery would become unsustainable for many companies if we had to rely on UPS and FedEx alone. I mean you could levy this argument in favor of anything you wanted. Early computers were prohibitively expensive except for very wealthy households. Now you can get 1000x the computing power for a fraction of the cost. You would have been out there making the same argument for having the government build Apple IIs for everyone at cost. You're basically arguing that innovation or having a better run system is fundamentally impossible in the area of logistics and delivery in general and so we need the government to step in.
- lovehashbrowns 6y ago
  The government funds a lot of services that are not yet profitable. ARPANET back when AT&T was convinced that packet switching would not work and would not be profitable. Space programs. Clean energy research. GPS. Weather. Subsidies for electric vehicles. DARPA funding Boston Dynamics. Medical research through NIH funding.
  - googthrowaway42 6y ago
    All of those were military projects except for the clean energy research and electric vehicle subsidies which I don't think were necessary (and both of which started under the Obama administration). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra#Government_support https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra#Government_support
    - lovehashbrowns 6y ago
      NIH is not military. https://www.pnas.org/content/115/10/2329 https://www.pnas.org/content/115/10/2329 And we can go with your opinion that EV subsidies weren't necessary and take that as fact. Agricultural subsidies. Coal receives subsidies, too. Battery research funded by the DoD (military). Kodak and its ~760 Million dollar loan through the Defense Production Act. At this point, I'm moving away from the original point. I'm now swerving into subsidies and loans. Although they still stand to benefit private companies for endeavors that might not otherwise be profitable, I think there are far better examples. Let's talk about CERN. ️
      - googthrowaway42 6y ago
        NIH came from the military. The internet is also not military but came from the military via ARPANET. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health#... I'm not saying there isn't a role for government in providing funding for or even management of large ambitious projects but for something like the post office I don't see the value. Even back when it was created, courier services were not some fantastical pie-in-the-sky endeavor like building a massive particle accelerator and research lab. The author of the article has basically said he just wants the tax payer to subsidize ecommerce businesses.
        lovehashbrowns 6y ago
        I didn't know that about the NIH, thank you! And yes, it's basically subsidizing e-commerce. As I have shown through my examples, these types of subsidies are not new. Nor is it merely a subsidy for e-commerce. The USPS handles government mail, ballots and voter registration, delivering medication, etc. These functions should never rely on a for-profit private business. Mail delivery is a major part of the US infrastructure and USPS is crucial in standardizing costs for that.