3 ms·
You're being pedantic. Since the 1970s, the USPS is supposed to be revenue-neutral, by law. This is a direct rebuttal to the simplistic "I already done paid f
by timr 13y ago
You're being pedantic. Since the 1970s, the USPS is supposed to be revenue-neutral, by law. This is a direct rebuttal to the simplistic "I already done paid for it with meh tax dollers!" argument that appears to be carrying the day in this discussion. The past history and current management structure of the postal service is completely irrelevant to the debate.
The only tax subsidy the USPS receives is to fund things like free mail for the blind, election mail, and other "public good" services. They charge for the zip code database because it's a product that can make them revenue (which they desperately need), and it is, in fact, a proprietary invention of the USPS.
- toomuchtodo 13y agoYou're being disingenous. Congress maintains not only their monopoly on first-class mail delivery, but also control over key financial decisions. I don't see a lot of private companies that provide Congress with authority over themselves
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- AsymetricCom 13y agoSo, what's the problem with that, exactly?
- toomuchtodo 13y agoIt's not a problem. The argument is that if they're part of the US government, they're required to release the information requested under the Freedom Of Information Act. USPS is trying to make the case that they're a private business not connected to the US government (and hence, aren't required to comply with the FOIA), which clearly is not true.
- AsymetricCom 13y agoIt doesn't seem that clear to me. Especially considering the tax part. I'm thinking there's probably stuff the USPS knows that really shouldn't be public information.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]