3 ms·

It totally is. Fact is anti government interests have paid Congress to hobble the Post Office to encourage your point of view. Corruption, bribes, deliberate

It totally is. Fact is anti government interests have paid Congress to hobble the Post Office to encourage your point of view. Corruption, bribes, deliberate mismanagement and debt all have impacted the Post Office to make private carriers look better. It started with the Bush Administration and has gone on for decades.

erik_seaberg 5y ago
No matter how good it might be for the general public, USPS doesn’t meet the definition of a “public good” as long as they require stamps and put more mailmen in trucks every year. The classic example is a lighthouse. It serves an unlimited number of sailors, but it’s hard to make them pay for it, which is a rationale for using tax money to build one and ignore the free rider problem.
- ddingus 5y ago
  The Post has no free rider problems, and runs on postage. The service is the public good, and operating it where all are served equally (remember everyone can receive a package at no cost to them) is in the public interest. No private entity can, or even has a plan to do the same at anywhere close to the low cost and quality of service.
  - erik_seaberg 5y ago
    A public good isn’t paid for by users. That’s part of how economists define that term, and why they make theories about how and when someone else ought to. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good_(economics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good_(economics)
    - ddingus 5y ago
      See above. I am not making an entirely economic argument.
rsj_hn 5y ago
My explaining basic definitions of words is not a "point of view", it's a basic fact. The meanings of words should not offend you. The definition of "public good" has no more to do with the Bush administration than the definition of "celsius" has to do with the Carter administration. The term "public good" is a term from economics and has a specific economic meaning. It's not a term like "demand" that was in circulation by non-economists and was given a specialist meaning, so there can be confusion by people who use "demand" in a non-specialist way. "public good" is term coined by economists, so if you are going to use it, you need to understand it. The word "good" here is meant as an object value (e.g. "goods and services") not as as moral claim. And the term "public" here does not mean "the public benefits from the good", but that the public as a whole cannot be prevented from benefiting from the good. Obviously the public benefits from all goods, otherwise they wouldn't be demanded by the public and they wouldn't have a positive price. But that is not what we are talking about here. You can learn about what public goods are in this article: https://sites.bu.edu/manove-ec101/files/2017/11/WikipediaPublicGoods171110.pdf https://sites.bu.edu/manove-ec101/files/2017/11/WikipediaPub...
- ddingus 5y ago
  Anyone can receive a package. Seems good enough to qualify for me.
  - mindslight 5y ago
    The point is that "public good" has a narrow technical definition, and mail delivery isn't one. Note that there are other economics terms that do apply in favor of supporting the USPS. For example, last mile letter delivery is a natural monopoly.
    - ddingus 5y ago
      I do not care. I am not making an entirely economic argument. Fact is, the Post Office is in the Constitution and it must be run by the Federal Government. The basic premise behind all of that is we are better able to exercise our freedom with it, and self governance than without and that is also the basis for the authority government has. It was deemed necessary we have a Post Office as part of all that to actually work and be to our benefit. Say what you want. Public good has clear use outside technical economic theory.

erik_seaberg 5y ago

No matter how good it might be for the general public, USPS doesn’t meet the definition of a “public good” as long as they require stamps and put more mailmen in trucks every year. The classic example is a lighthouse. It serves an unlimited number of sailors, but it’s hard to make them pay for it, which is a rationale for using tax money to build one and ignore the free rider problem.

ddingus 5y ago
The Post has no free rider problems, and runs on postage. The service is the public good, and operating it where all are served equally (remember everyone can receive a package at no cost to them) is in the public interest. No private entity can, or even has a plan to do the same at anywhere close to the low cost and quality of service.
- erik_seaberg 5y ago
  A public good isn’t paid for by users. That’s part of how economists define that term, and why they make theories about how and when someone else ought to. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good_(economics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good_(economics)
  - ddingus 5y ago
    See above. I am not making an entirely economic argument.

rsj_hn 5y ago

My explaining basic definitions of words is not a "point of view", it's a basic fact. The meanings of words should not offend you. The definition of "public good" has no more to do with the Bush administration than the definition of "celsius" has to do with the Carter administration. The term "public good" is a term from economics and has a specific economic meaning. It's not a term like "demand" that was in circulation by non-economists and was given a specialist meaning, so there can be confusion by people who use "demand" in a non-specialist way. "public good" is term coined by economists, so if you are going to use it, you need to understand it. The word "good" here is meant as an object value (e.g. "goods and services") not as as moral claim. And the term "public" here does not mean "the public benefits from the good", but that the public as a whole cannot be prevented from benefiting from the good. Obviously the public benefits from all goods, otherwise they wouldn't be demanded by the public and they wouldn't have a positive price. But that is not what we are talking about here. You can learn about what public goods are in this article: https://sites.bu.edu/manove-ec101/files/2017/11/WikipediaPublicGoods171110.pdf https://sites.bu.edu/manove-ec101/files/2017/11/WikipediaPub...

ddingus 5y ago
Anyone can receive a package. Seems good enough to qualify for me.
- mindslight 5y ago
  The point is that "public good" has a narrow technical definition, and mail delivery isn't one. Note that there are other economics terms that do apply in favor of supporting the USPS. For example, last mile letter delivery is a natural monopoly.
  - ddingus 5y ago
    I do not care. I am not making an entirely economic argument. Fact is, the Post Office is in the Constitution and it must be run by the Federal Government. The basic premise behind all of that is we are better able to exercise our freedom with it, and self governance than without and that is also the basis for the authority government has. It was deemed necessary we have a Post Office as part of all that to actually work and be to our benefit. Say what you want. Public good has clear use outside technical economic theory.