4 ms·
The railroads were sure funded by public money, but it most certainly has not been taxpayer money. Instead, it was money invested by private individuals. Govern
by xyzzyz 4y ago
The railroads were sure funded by public money, but it most certainly has not been taxpayer money. Instead, it was money invested by private individuals. Government did help the railroads with vast grants of lands, but most of the value of the granted land stemmed from the railroads that were built nearby. It was in fact a great deal for taxpayers, a win-win situation.
> One wonders what the US's rail infrastructure would look like had the US Government bought (and continued to operate) it outright,
US federal government certainly is not known for providing high quality service at low cost, quite the opposite in fact.
- crooked-v 4y ago> US federal government certainly is not known for providing high quality service at low cost, quite the opposite in fact. The Post Office stands as a prime example of an extremely high quality service provided at a comparatively tiny price, and one that's successful and self-sustaining even while dealing with the immense costs of reliable delivery to extremely rural areas.
- WillPostForFood 4y agoextremely high quality service Really? When's the last time you had to go do something at the post office? It is a nightmare. Dirty building with disinterested workers, and long slow lines. The bulk of the mail I receive is junk mail, and multiple times a week I get my neighbor's mail.
- Mistletoe 4y agoOk send a letter by UPS and FedEx for 60 cents to anywhere in the USA.
- kortilla 4y agoThe thread you are replying to is complaining about the quality, not the cost.
- jhgjgjfjhgjh 4y agoThe USPS loses money heavily delivering to remote areas.
- dgoldstein0 4y agoMost interaction with USPS is at (residential) mailboxes. Sure, post office service is not great but they do a decent job of moving letters, post cards, and packages in a relatively timely manner - and the service for letters and postcards is damn cheap. In now remote / rural areas of the US, no for profit company would bother providing service, as it is wouldn't be profitably - but USPS serves everyone.
- jhghgfhgf 4y agoIt's "damn cheap" because it's being subsidized heavily by US taxpayers. "The United States Postal Service (USPS) on Wednesday reported a net loss of $4.9 billion for the year ending Sept. 30."
- msrenee 4y agoThe fact that the USPS is currently operating at a loss has a lot to do with a bill that passed in 2006 requiring them to prepay their employee benefits including pensions 50 years in advance. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Accountability_and_Enhancement_Act https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Accountability_and_En...
- runarberg 4y agoAs somebody that moved from Europe to the USA, I can attest that the USPS is the best postal system I have ever encountered. The service level is far above anything I saw in Scandinavia by a long shot. In Iceland the Postal Service is declining really rapidly, so much so that there isn’t even a post office any more down town in the countries biggest city. Yet in the USA you can get a package delivered to your door in rural Washington, all while sending a mail costs a fraction of what it costs in Scandinavia.
- beebeepka 4y agoIsn't DHL run by the German government?
- johannes1234321 4y agoPartially. The German state owns 20% and is the largest shareholder. However those shares are not managed by government directly (as with Deutsche Bahn, the railway, where the traffic ministry has direct hold) but is held by the Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, which is tasked with handling it economical, not political. Of course that separation isn't complete and strict and there is political influence from that level and they have influence via specific post laws especially on the letter side (government has oversight on tarifs and requires deliver to everywhere in Germany etc. via monopoly laws)
- Symbiote 4y agoIn Denmark I receive a letter roughly every 2 months. It's not surprising that as volume has collapsed, prices have increased. However, I don't have any problem with the service, or with going to a kiosk or other shop to collect a parcel.
- justahuman74 4y agoBut they provide that same service reasonably evenly across the whole country, your zip code is the same 'value' as any other. In plenty of remote places you could easily call USPS extremely high quality service, perhaps even delivering by horse which a private company would never do without high cost
- ethbr0 4y agoHistorically (pre-1900ish), the US Post Office was the quintessential American government sinecure. The qualifications for postmaster general had more to do with campaign contributions than talent or interest. Thankfully, largely reformed with the merit based civil service changes, but passing those was a struggle! So I'd be hesitant to assume than anything lucrative and government-run won't face substantial corruption pressures.
- musicale 4y ago> successful and self-sustaining There was a Postal Service Reform Act of 2022[1], which apparently allows USPS to avoid funding pensions in advance, which had led to billions of dollars of debt. It also shifts new retiree health insurance to Medicare, which may be a zero sum game of sorts but good for the USPS budget. Then there's that ongoing reliance on fees for delivering junk mail... I am somewhat disappointed that there isn't a junk mail non-delivery option. At least FedEx and UPS don't deliver junk mail. Yet. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Service_Reform_Act_of_2022 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Service_Reform_Act_of_2...
- adgjlsfhk1 4y ago> US federal government certainly is not known for providing high quality service at low cost, quite the opposite in fact. Medicare is a great example to the contrary. They provide healthcare to the sickest groups, and do so with roughly 3x less overhead than the private healthcare industry.
- jhghgfhgf 4y agoMedicare has a $768 billion budget per year. No US healthcare company comes close.
- bobkazamakis 4y agoNo other country pays more per capita for healthcare -- ofcourse it has a huge budget...
- adgjlsfhk1 4y agothat's because Medicare covers all the old people that actually need healthcare while all the private companies cover much younger and therefore healthier populations