4 ms·

The article appeals to the USPS's historic role connecting rural communities and employing African Americans at a time when many business would not. Fine. But w

The article appeals to the USPS's historic role connecting rural communities and employing African Americans at a time when many business would not. Fine. But we don't live in the past, we live in the present. I don't want to keep the USPS around because of the social impact it had a century ago. The article also talks about the USPS's role supporting e-commerce businesses. I don't buy it. E-commerce businesses use a number of other delivery services, and I don't buy the idea that they would fold if the USPS went away. The USPS is just one of many options for them. The majority of the stuff I buy online is delivered by UPS and FedEx, and Amazon drivers. There is substantial demand for delivery services, so much so that multiple for-profit companies including UPS and FedEx are able to survive without government help. If the USPS is having trouble thriving in that environment, it must be doing something wrong. I'd like to see an argument for saving the USPS that does not depend on nostalgia.

whateveracct 6y ago
Paper mail? Voting? Seriously you think that isn't providing value?
- twblalock 6y ago
  Paper mail and mail-in ballots could easily be handled by any of the other deliver companies that operate in the United States. We are talking about moving paper documents from one place to another. Why is it that UPS and FedEx make a profit doing that, while the USPS cannot?
  - whateveracct 6y ago
    I mean a large reason USPS isn't profitable is that they have been forced to pay pensions in full ahead of time.. Regardless, having voting go through private companies isn't good enough. They aren't bound by the Constitution the same way USPS is.
  - theplague42 6y ago
    Have you ever tried to mail a letter with UPS or FedEx? These are not comparable entities.
    - twblalock 6y ago
      I have done it several times. It was no problem at all. I prefer using them for important documents. Why would you think it would be any worse than the USPS?
      - whateveracct 6y ago
        Mailing a letter with USPS means putting it in my mailbox. Comparing the in-office experience is disingenuous.
    - zanmat0 6y ago
      Yes? Its an even better experience because there's rarely a line and the clerk is usually polite.
      - whateveracct 6y ago
        Mailing a letter with USPS means putting it in my mailbox. Comparing the in-office experience is disingenuous.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ajross 6y ago
> I'd like to see an argument for saving the USPS that does not depend on nostalgia. It's relied upon by millions of people to deliver ballots in an election being held in a pandemic less than three months in the future. How about we disassemble it in a non-partisan way a little later?
- twblalock 6y ago
  We need ballots delivered, but I don't see why the USPS is the only option for delivering them. Why does it have to be the USPS? There are plenty of other companies that are very good at delivering mail.
  - evan_ 6y ago
    It’s a federal crime to tamper with USPS mail. If UPS or FedEx decide not to deliver your parcel you may be entitled to a partial refund.
    - twblalock 6y ago
      Obviously if state governments made a deal with UPS or FedEx to deliver ballots they would include some stipulations about delivering them. Besides, the law is no guarantee. The USPS loses plenty of packages. You have no real recourse. What are you going to do, take them to small claims court? Make the government count your ballot anyway (assuming they believe you)? Good luck with that. Such guarantees mean nothing the real world.
      - wasdfff 6y ago
        Be that as it may, it makes no sense to replace a public service with a rent seeking operation. Improve the public service, don’t give up and part it out.
PragmaticPulp 6y ago
> Why is it that multiple delivery companies are able to survive on their own in the free market, yet the USPS cannot? USPS operates with many government mandates that don't apply to private companies. Some of the financial woes are actually inflicted by the government. For example, the government mandated that the USPS pre-fund retiree health benefits well into the future, in a way that no rational private company would ever consider. This alone has contributed significantly to their cash flow problems: They even provide a convenient chart of how their profit/loss looks without the pre-funding requirement, at least up through 2010: https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/annual-reports/fy2010/ar2010_4_002.htm https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/annual-reports/...
- twblalock 6y ago
  > USPS operates with many government mandates that don't apply to private companies. Then let's remove those mandates before asking the taxpayers to pump more money into a failing system. The system won't magically fix itself. If we allow it to continue to demand more and more money, there won't be any incentive to fix the underlying problems. We could have a very similar conversation about the pension obligations of Ford or General Motors, but I doubt people would be as enthusiastic about bailing them out as they are about the USPS.
nfoz 6y ago
I think the argument is that mail is an essential service (e.g. for voting) that the government has a mandate to provide to communities that the private sector would not bother to service because it would not be profitable for them to do so.
- twblalock 6y ago
  What do you suppose would cost more: bailing out the failing business model of the USPS for decades to come, or just having state governments contract with another delivery company to deliver ballots during election years?
jes5199 6y ago
for one thing, USPS serves last-mile rural customers that UPS and FedEx do not find profitable. If you send a package to one of those places, FedEx/UPS will ship your package to the nearest town and then just _put it in the mail_
dbtc 6y ago
The USPS serves the more remote addresses that those private alternatives will not choose to lose money on. They contract out to USPS for those deliveries. I highly doubt a private mail corp would get the job done. Consider healthcare.

whateveracct 6y ago

Paper mail? Voting? Seriously you think that isn't providing value?

twblalock 6y ago
Paper mail and mail-in ballots could easily be handled by any of the other deliver companies that operate in the United States. We are talking about moving paper documents from one place to another. Why is it that UPS and FedEx make a profit doing that, while the USPS cannot?
- whateveracct 6y ago
  I mean a large reason USPS isn't profitable is that they have been forced to pay pensions in full ahead of time.. Regardless, having voting go through private companies isn't good enough. They aren't bound by the Constitution the same way USPS is.
- theplague42 6y ago
  Have you ever tried to mail a letter with UPS or FedEx? These are not comparable entities.
  - twblalock 6y ago
    I have done it several times. It was no problem at all. I prefer using them for important documents. Why would you think it would be any worse than the USPS?
    - whateveracct 6y ago
      Mailing a letter with USPS means putting it in my mailbox. Comparing the in-office experience is disingenuous.
  - zanmat0 6y ago
    Yes? Its an even better experience because there's rarely a line and the clerk is usually polite.
    - whateveracct 6y ago
      Mailing a letter with USPS means putting it in my mailbox. Comparing the in-office experience is disingenuous.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

ajross 6y ago

> I'd like to see an argument for saving the USPS that does not depend on nostalgia. It's relied upon by millions of people to deliver ballots in an election being held in a pandemic less than three months in the future. How about we disassemble it in a non-partisan way a little later?

twblalock 6y ago
We need ballots delivered, but I don't see why the USPS is the only option for delivering them. Why does it have to be the USPS? There are plenty of other companies that are very good at delivering mail.
- evan_ 6y ago
  It’s a federal crime to tamper with USPS mail. If UPS or FedEx decide not to deliver your parcel you may be entitled to a partial refund.
  - twblalock 6y ago
    Obviously if state governments made a deal with UPS or FedEx to deliver ballots they would include some stipulations about delivering them. Besides, the law is no guarantee. The USPS loses plenty of packages. You have no real recourse. What are you going to do, take them to small claims court? Make the government count your ballot anyway (assuming they believe you)? Good luck with that. Such guarantees mean nothing the real world.
    - wasdfff 6y ago
      Be that as it may, it makes no sense to replace a public service with a rent seeking operation. Improve the public service, don’t give up and part it out.

PragmaticPulp 6y ago

> Why is it that multiple delivery companies are able to survive on their own in the free market, yet the USPS cannot? USPS operates with many government mandates that don't apply to private companies. Some of the financial woes are actually inflicted by the government. For example, the government mandated that the USPS pre-fund retiree health benefits well into the future, in a way that no rational private company would ever consider. This alone has contributed significantly to their cash flow problems: They even provide a convenient chart of how their profit/loss looks without the pre-funding requirement, at least up through 2010: https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/annual-reports/fy2010/ar2010_4_002.htm https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/annual-reports/...

twblalock 6y ago
> USPS operates with many government mandates that don't apply to private companies. Then let's remove those mandates before asking the taxpayers to pump more money into a failing system. The system won't magically fix itself. If we allow it to continue to demand more and more money, there won't be any incentive to fix the underlying problems. We could have a very similar conversation about the pension obligations of Ford or General Motors, but I doubt people would be as enthusiastic about bailing them out as they are about the USPS.

nfoz 6y ago

I think the argument is that mail is an essential service (e.g. for voting) that the government has a mandate to provide to communities that the private sector would not bother to service because it would not be profitable for them to do so.

twblalock 6y ago
What do you suppose would cost more: bailing out the failing business model of the USPS for decades to come, or just having state governments contract with another delivery company to deliver ballots during election years?

jes5199 6y ago

for one thing, USPS serves last-mile rural customers that UPS and FedEx do not find profitable. If you send a package to one of those places, FedEx/UPS will ship your package to the nearest town and then just _put it in the mail_

dbtc 6y ago

The USPS serves the more remote addresses that those private alternatives will not choose to lose money on. They contract out to USPS for those deliveries. I highly doubt a private mail corp would get the job done. Consider healthcare.