5 ms·

Every day I go to my mailbox and put 98% of its contents directly into the recycle bin. I have followed all the recommended steps to remove my address from var

Every day I go to my mailbox and put 98% of its contents directly into the recycle bin. I have followed all the recommended steps to remove my address from various mailing lists. The USPS is a garbage-spamming environmental disaster that solicits money from companies to do direct marketing, offers no opt-out features, and every day drives tens of thousands of polluting vehicles to stuff unwanted paper into mailboxes across the country. In addition to its monopoly, the post office is one of the most unpleasant retail locations anyone could imagine -- filthy counters, grudging employees, and long lines. Since "first class" mail takes between 2-12 days, there is no reason to have first class mail delivered every day. Doing so is just a handout to the employees' unions. There may be a case to be made for more frequent delivery of expedited mail, but this would take a fraction of the number of vehicles and personell that the current system does -- and with less reliable guarantees, nearly identical prices and worse service than UPS, I always choose UPS over USPS for parcel shipment. It's fine to be nostalgic about the pony express, but the USPS needs to either be phased out or drastically scaled down, and laws forbidding other companies to deliver standard mail must be changed.

rorrr 15y ago
I have pretty much the opposite experience with USPS. Got almost no spam, maybe 10-20% of my mail, mostly sent by local businesses and free local newspapers. It's not a monopoly. Forgot about UPS, DHL and FedEx? Their employees are usually very hard working and have to deal with all kinds of assholes. Plus, it's much cheaper than their competitors.
- yummyfajitas 15y ago
  The USPS holds a monopoly on non-urgent mail. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service#Universal_service_obligation_and_monopoly_status http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service#Un... You are correct that non-urgent mail (what the USPS sells) is cheaper than urgent mail (what their competitors sell).
- grandalf 15y ago
  As someone else pointed out, the USPS has a monopoly on non-urgent mail. As for spam, you must be fortunate that you have not managed to wind up on spammers' lists. If you donate to charity that's an easy way to get on the lists, and some of the spam is just unnecessary garbage sent by business I use b/c sending it to everyone (via the USPS) is cheaper than implementing an opt-out policy.
  - SageRaven 15y ago
    I forget the URL, but I opted out of junk mail years ago via the Direct Marketers Association web page. I think that's the name. After a couple of months, my dead tree spam fell to a trickle. It's not perfect. I still get local grocery and retail circulars that I could do without. But at least the daily credit card offers stopped, which cut down the volume dramatically. If someone would drop a bomb on Geico's direct marketing arm, I'd be a happy camper.
    - grandalf 15y ago
      I did this too, as well as a couple of extra precautions, and I did not notice any decline in the junk mail at all.
- coin 15y ago
  > It's not a monopoly. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service Article I, section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution grants Congress the power to establish post offices and post roads, which has been interpreted as a de facto Congressional monopoly over the delivery of mail. Accordingly, no other system for delivering mail – public or private – can be established, absent Congress's consent. Congress has delegated to the Postal Service the power to decide whether others may compete with it, and the Postal Service has allowed an exception to its monopoly for extremely urgent letters.
sundae79 15y ago
So when google advertises pretty much the e-version of it in your search, you are ok with it?
- politician 15y ago
  I'm sure most people, probably all people are ok with it. It's the difference between hiking out to your mailbox just to throw useless paper into the recycling bin (why can't my USPS mailman do that for me?) and pollute the environment versus ignoring the small text comment on the right side of your monitor while you look at lolcats.
jberryman 15y ago
Regarding long lines: that's a common complaint (e.g. Of the DMV), presented as evidence of government inefficiency (not that you were making that argument). But sizable lines are evidence of government efficiency here; one unskilled employee is able to process a huge number of people. In return for for the massive taxpayer savings, you have to wait in line for ten minutes 2x a month (or per year in the case of the much-maligned DMV), and occasionally endure employees who are unenthusiastic to be earning very few of your tax dollars per hour.
- arohner 15y ago
  efficiency. I don't think that word means what you think it means. In any free market situation, like retail stores, you don't see lines as long, or employees that unhelpful. If there are 40 people in line (not uncommon at my local DMV), their time is actively wasted by one DMV employee who should be making as much as a retail cashier, but isn't because of gov't and union benefits. Opening up one more 'cashier lane' at the DMV would reduce everyone else's wasted time, so they can go back to being productive. It's not enough to analyze just the DMV's side of the equation, you have to look at both sides to get the whole story. It's the same story with, e.g. traffic. Minimizing traffic repair costs, at a cost of longer repair times, forcing every single person in town take longer to get to work is a huge net loss.
  - alttag 15y ago
    Efficient for whom? Most grocery stores I frequent have replaced several lanes of "efficient" cashiers with the much slower (for shoppers) self-checkout systems. Yes, the lines may be shorter, and the store needs fewer checkers (one can cover multiple self-check lanes), so the store is saving money. But I feel a loss in service quality and am not convinced my checkout time (waiting + service) has been shortened. So, yes, it's more efficient for the _store_, but not for _me_ as a customer. Maybe that's what you're saying—there are two sides to efficiency. Corporations maximize it for themselves, sometimes at the expense of customers. Every once in a while one is enlightened enough to realized that improved customer efficiency is a long-term win.
supersetgreg 15y ago
"the post office is one of the most unpleasant retail locations anyone could imagine -- filthy counters, grudging employees, and long lines." i'm within a post office that is about 5 years old and clean. just because your post office is crap doesn't mean that every post office is.
- grandalf 15y ago
  Every post office I've been to has been dingy, depressing, poorly lit and has had very long lines. It's cruel to make people work in this environment, and so it's no wonder that occasionally an employee "goes postal". Sure there will occasionally be a new post office built, but I don't think this says anything about the values of the institution.
markzip 15y ago
I send small parcels through mail every day. They go all over the world and the error rate is less than 1one percent. I am consistently amazed that I can put something in a slot in Woodstock NY and have it turn up in the correct slot on the other side of the world in just a few days. They even come to my house and pick up. When I do go to my local post office the only surly people are the people behind me in line. As to junk mail, I opt out where I can and recycle the rest. And quietly thank the spamming businesses for subsidizing mine.

rorrr 15y ago

I have pretty much the opposite experience with USPS. Got almost no spam, maybe 10-20% of my mail, mostly sent by local businesses and free local newspapers. It's not a monopoly. Forgot about UPS, DHL and FedEx? Their employees are usually very hard working and have to deal with all kinds of assholes. Plus, it's much cheaper than their competitors.

yummyfajitas 15y ago
The USPS holds a monopoly on non-urgent mail. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service#Universal_service_obligation_and_monopoly_status http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service#Un... You are correct that non-urgent mail (what the USPS sells) is cheaper than urgent mail (what their competitors sell).
grandalf 15y ago
As someone else pointed out, the USPS has a monopoly on non-urgent mail. As for spam, you must be fortunate that you have not managed to wind up on spammers' lists. If you donate to charity that's an easy way to get on the lists, and some of the spam is just unnecessary garbage sent by business I use b/c sending it to everyone (via the USPS) is cheaper than implementing an opt-out policy.
- SageRaven 15y ago
  I forget the URL, but I opted out of junk mail years ago via the Direct Marketers Association web page. I think that's the name. After a couple of months, my dead tree spam fell to a trickle. It's not perfect. I still get local grocery and retail circulars that I could do without. But at least the daily credit card offers stopped, which cut down the volume dramatically. If someone would drop a bomb on Geico's direct marketing arm, I'd be a happy camper.
  - grandalf 15y ago
    I did this too, as well as a couple of extra precautions, and I did not notice any decline in the junk mail at all.
coin 15y ago
> It's not a monopoly. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service Article I, section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution grants Congress the power to establish post offices and post roads, which has been interpreted as a de facto Congressional monopoly over the delivery of mail. Accordingly, no other system for delivering mail – public or private – can be established, absent Congress's consent. Congress has delegated to the Postal Service the power to decide whether others may compete with it, and the Postal Service has allowed an exception to its monopoly for extremely urgent letters.

sundae79 15y ago

So when google advertises pretty much the e-version of it in your search, you are ok with it?

politician 15y ago
I'm sure most people, probably all people are ok with it. It's the difference between hiking out to your mailbox just to throw useless paper into the recycling bin (why can't my USPS mailman do that for me?) and pollute the environment versus ignoring the small text comment on the right side of your monitor while you look at lolcats.

jberryman 15y ago

Regarding long lines: that's a common complaint (e.g. Of the DMV), presented as evidence of government inefficiency (not that you were making that argument). But sizable lines are evidence of government efficiency here; one unskilled employee is able to process a huge number of people. In return for for the massive taxpayer savings, you have to wait in line for ten minutes 2x a month (or per year in the case of the much-maligned DMV), and occasionally endure employees who are unenthusiastic to be earning very few of your tax dollars per hour.

arohner 15y ago
efficiency. I don't think that word means what you think it means. In any free market situation, like retail stores, you don't see lines as long, or employees that unhelpful. If there are 40 people in line (not uncommon at my local DMV), their time is actively wasted by one DMV employee who should be making as much as a retail cashier, but isn't because of gov't and union benefits. Opening up one more 'cashier lane' at the DMV would reduce everyone else's wasted time, so they can go back to being productive. It's not enough to analyze just the DMV's side of the equation, you have to look at both sides to get the whole story. It's the same story with, e.g. traffic. Minimizing traffic repair costs, at a cost of longer repair times, forcing every single person in town take longer to get to work is a huge net loss.
- alttag 15y ago
  Efficient for whom? Most grocery stores I frequent have replaced several lanes of "efficient" cashiers with the much slower (for shoppers) self-checkout systems. Yes, the lines may be shorter, and the store needs fewer checkers (one can cover multiple self-check lanes), so the store is saving money. But I feel a loss in service quality and am not convinced my checkout time (waiting + service) has been shortened. So, yes, it's more efficient for the _store_, but not for _me_ as a customer. Maybe that's what you're saying—there are two sides to efficiency. Corporations maximize it for themselves, sometimes at the expense of customers. Every once in a while one is enlightened enough to realized that improved customer efficiency is a long-term win.

supersetgreg 15y ago

"the post office is one of the most unpleasant retail locations anyone could imagine -- filthy counters, grudging employees, and long lines." i'm within a post office that is about 5 years old and clean. just because your post office is crap doesn't mean that every post office is.

grandalf 15y ago
Every post office I've been to has been dingy, depressing, poorly lit and has had very long lines. It's cruel to make people work in this environment, and so it's no wonder that occasionally an employee "goes postal". Sure there will occasionally be a new post office built, but I don't think this says anything about the values of the institution.

markzip 15y ago

I send small parcels through mail every day. They go all over the world and the error rate is less than 1one percent. I am consistently amazed that I can put something in a slot in Woodstock NY and have it turn up in the correct slot on the other side of the world in just a few days. They even come to my house and pick up. When I do go to my local post office the only surly people are the people behind me in line. As to junk mail, I opt out where I can and recycle the rest. And quietly thank the spamming businesses for subsidizing mine.