4 ms·

Unfortunately the law doesn't align with that view. USPS is not being funded by government, but by postage. Unfortunately, the volume of mail has dropped by abo

Unfortunately the law doesn't align with that view. USPS is not being funded by government, but by postage. Unfortunately, the volume of mail has dropped by about 50% in the last two decades. And since USPS can't cut unprofitable routes and can't raise postage prices above inflation, again because of legislation, there are only few options left. Unless the Congress decides to directly fund USPS, or let them raise more money, the cost cutting is the only way forward.

hackernewds 5y ago
Find it hard to believe mail has declined. We're shipping packages at record rates through online shopping, which at the unit level can be charged more than pennies like letters were. First, the USPS as a US service need not be profitable. They were also fiscally sound _until_ the Bush administration abruptly changed the rules of establishing pension liabilities as current https://theweek.com/articles/767184/how-george-bush-broke-post-office https://theweek.com/articles/767184/how-george-bush-broke-po...
op00to 5y ago
"The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA) required the USPS to create a $72 billion fund to pay for the cost of its post-retirement health care costs, 75 years into the future. *This burden applies to no other federal agency or private corporation*." [1] [1] https://ips-dc.org/how-congress-manufactured-a-postal-crisis-and-how-to-fix-it/ https://ips-dc.org/how-congress-manufactured-a-postal-crisis...
- TMWNN 5y ago
  >This burden applies to no other federal agency or private corporation." Pensions for retired employees are, generally speaking, paid by the contributions of today's employees. No other federal agency has a business that is guaranteed to continue declining in volume and revenue. Congress recognized this in 2006; this is why said law was passed near unanimously. Better a decade of pain, than to not have USPS pensions fully funded in the future. And as for the private companies that are also guaranteed to be declining in revenue, I bet a lot of retirees of newspaper publishing companies wish that their employers had been required to similarly bulk up their pension plans c. 2005.

hackernewds 5y ago

Find it hard to believe mail has declined. We're shipping packages at record rates through online shopping, which at the unit level can be charged more than pennies like letters were. First, the USPS as a US service need not be profitable. They were also fiscally sound _until_ the Bush administration abruptly changed the rules of establishing pension liabilities as current https://theweek.com/articles/767184/how-george-bush-broke-post-office https://theweek.com/articles/767184/how-george-bush-broke-po...

op00to 5y ago

"The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA) required the USPS to create a $72 billion fund to pay for the cost of its post-retirement health care costs, 75 years into the future. *This burden applies to no other federal agency or private corporation*." [1] [1] https://ips-dc.org/how-congress-manufactured-a-postal-crisis-and-how-to-fix-it/ https://ips-dc.org/how-congress-manufactured-a-postal-crisis...

TMWNN 5y ago
>This burden applies to no other federal agency or private corporation." Pensions for retired employees are, generally speaking, paid by the contributions of today's employees. No other federal agency has a business that is guaranteed to continue declining in volume and revenue. Congress recognized this in 2006; this is why said law was passed near unanimously. Better a decade of pain, than to not have USPS pensions fully funded in the future. And as for the private companies that are also guaranteed to be declining in revenue, I bet a lot of retirees of newspaper publishing companies wish that their employers had been required to similarly bulk up their pension plans c. 2005.