3 ms·

The USPS used to be a clear-cut government agency, but has been quasi-privatized. Congress cut its taxpayer funding, and directed it to run itself like a busine

The USPS used to be a clear-cut government agency, but has been quasi-privatized. Congress cut its taxpayer funding, and directed it to run itself like a business, not like a public service. Accordingly, you are incorrect about who are the "people paying their salaries": the USPS has not received any taxpayer money since its funding was cut to zero in the early 1980s. It now funds itself like a business, by charging fees and, like any other business, exploiting intellectual property where the opportunity arises. In that sense it's more like a regulated utility, like Comcast or PG&E, having been privatized in all but name. Ultimately whether it's a public service that should act in the public interest, or an organization that should be run as a business, is a policy decision that's up to Congress to decide. And Congress decided on the 2nd. Given that, exploiting the zipcode database as proprietary IP seems in line with the letter and the spirit of their (current) mandate.

dragonwriter 13y ago
> the USPS has not received any taxpayer money since its funding was cut to zero in the early 1980s. Not quite true, its received public funding since then, but that's specifically tied to costs associated with, IIRC, overseas absentee ballots.
- dsl 13y ago
  Yes, but that is payment for work done. At best, they are a government contractor.
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    They are, in fact, a government agency. Government agencies that are funded entirely through user fees -- which is what postage is -- aren't entirely uncommon. (Of course, given the way that it is funded in part by "loans" from the Treasury that are made without any indication that the Postal Service will ever have a business plan that enables them to be repaid, its kind of questionable to even put the Postal Service in the category of purely user-fee funded government agencies. Its really just a plain old regular tax-and-user-fee-funded government that has been cloaked in some misleading smoke-and-mirrors.)
  - AaronIG 13y ago
    No, they're an independent government agency. Federal agencies that survive on non-appropriated funds aren't uncommon, for example, The Federal Reserve, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, U.S. Mint and several DoD NAFIs (e.g. the different exchanges and various MWR programs).
- Shivetya 13y ago
  They do not pay taxes. They are also not subject to many regulations other businesses face, and of course they are more famous for not having to adhere to parking laws. They are forced to prefund their pensions unlike other government agencies but like private companies. the truth of their problem is that mail service is declining, stats show it at 213 billion in 2006 down to 160 billion letters in 2012. That is a major decline in revenue. Even if the Post Office did not have to fund its pensions it loses billions of dollars a year. If they did not fund their pensions and those pensions ended up negative the tax payers would step in. Also consider. 1. the Post Office when negotiating with its unions cannot factor in the operational costs of the contract. As in, they cannot factor in the impact of it in day to day expenditures versus revenue. 2. The Post Office also has 535 overseers, as in Congress who can stop them from closing unprofitable offices, distribution centers, and the like. They even like to interfere with vehicle purchases. Anecdote, I remember my Aunt and Cousin (both ran local offices) bemoaning the left hand drive Windstars they had to take. 3. The EU even requires member nations to open their markets to competition, the US does not permit direct competition in letter delivery. 4. They have to plead to raise stamp costs.
  - GalacticDomin8r 13y ago
    > They are forced to prefund their pensions unlike other government agencies but like private companies. Which private company has to fund 75 years of pension plans? Can't say I've ever heard of a company being forced to prefund pensions for future employees not even yet born before learning about PAEA. http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2011/nader230911.html http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2011/nader230911.html Also I wonder if you care to comment on the sabotage provision in PAEA which stipulates the PO can't engage in non-postal forms of revenue.
baddox 13y ago
The USPS has the massive benefit of government-protected monopoly on first-class mail. Even if it's not a direct infusion of funds, it's a major subsidy.
- icelancer 13y ago
  Exactly. Try delivering your own mail through mailboxes and mail slots and see what happens.
  - baddox 13y ago
    This happens: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Letter_Mail_Company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Letter_Mail_Company
- _delirium 13y ago
  Whether that's a net subsidy or anti-subsidy is an interesting question. They have both a monopoly and a fairly stringent mandate: they are required to deliver first-class mail to every mailing address in the United States (including very remote areas), six days a week, at prices that they can't set. The estimates I've seen are that the first-class mail mandate is a net money-loser, with pre-sorted bulk mail and premium services like Priority Mail the more successful products. So the USPS might actually be financially better off without this "subsidy". But Alaska and Montana senators would have a fit if rural communities lost mail service.
  - derleth 13y ago
    > they are required to deliver first-class mail to every mailing address in the United States (including very remote areas) Not even close. If you live out of town, you don't get a mailbox. You get a PO Box in the post office in the closest town.
  - jellicle 13y ago
    Indeed. We see what the market price for delivering a letter quickly across the country is: about $20 from Fedex. USPS can only charge 46 cents by law, the cheapest first-class mail service in the world.
rubyrescue 13y ago
It's always been a mix of public/private since Benjamin Franklin won the contract to deliver mail between the colonies. Perhaps more public than private but the USPS history is fascinatingly complex.
GalacticDomin8r 13y ago
> Congress cut its taxpayer funding, and directed it to run itself like a business, not like a public service. Not really. Congress forced the PO to run itself like no other business or government entity with the goal of ruining it. The 109th Congress wanted to promote the belief government can't do anything efficiently. It was called the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act and intentionally places huge burdens on the USPS which no other business has. Without those, estimates show the PO would still be hurting, but no where near its current state. So Bush can say "Mission Accomplished" about one thing and be right about it.
- drewcrawford 13y ago
  While it is true the USPS has requirements that no other business has, it also has benefits that no other business has. These include, but are not limited to: * A box for its use at every residence in the United States * A federal monopoly; it is unlawful for any company to carry a letter in the United States and charge a similar price to USPS rates. See here: http://about.usps.com/publications/pub542/welcome.htm http://about.usps.com/publications/pub542/welcome.htm
  - GalacticDomin8r 13y ago
    > * A box for its use at every residence in the United States There are plenty of places that don't have a box. That box is paid for privately and not required. > A federal monopoly; it is unlawful for any company to carry a letter in the United States and charge a similar price to USPS rates. You got that wrong, see here: http://about.usps.com/publications/pub542/pub542_ch1_001.htm#ep1029138 http://about.usps.com/publications/pub542/pub542_ch1_001.htm...
  - derleth 13y ago
    > * A box for its use at every residence in the United States Not even close. I've lived many places without a box. If you're too expensive to deliver to, you don't get a box and you have to drive to the nearest post office and pick up your mail yourself. That's what a PO Box is.
RA_Fisher 13y ago
Businesses aren't subject to FOIAs. If they're a business, why did they even respond? Given that they have responded, they are not a private business (of course). The USPS response here is shameful and we (Americans) should change it!
- _delirium 13y ago
  Did you even read my post? I said they are nominally a government agency (therefore liable for FOIAs), but have been directed by Congress to operate as a business, not to operate as public servants. Therefore it's not surprising that they exploit proprietary IP as if they were a business, since these are precisely the instructions they were given.

dragonwriter 13y ago

> the USPS has not received any taxpayer money since its funding was cut to zero in the early 1980s. Not quite true, its received public funding since then, but that's specifically tied to costs associated with, IIRC, overseas absentee ballots.

dsl 13y ago
Yes, but that is payment for work done. At best, they are a government contractor.
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  They are, in fact, a government agency. Government agencies that are funded entirely through user fees -- which is what postage is -- aren't entirely uncommon. (Of course, given the way that it is funded in part by "loans" from the Treasury that are made without any indication that the Postal Service will ever have a business plan that enables them to be repaid, its kind of questionable to even put the Postal Service in the category of purely user-fee funded government agencies. Its really just a plain old regular tax-and-user-fee-funded government that has been cloaked in some misleading smoke-and-mirrors.)
- AaronIG 13y ago
  No, they're an independent government agency. Federal agencies that survive on non-appropriated funds aren't uncommon, for example, The Federal Reserve, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, U.S. Mint and several DoD NAFIs (e.g. the different exchanges and various MWR programs).
Shivetya 13y ago
They do not pay taxes. They are also not subject to many regulations other businesses face, and of course they are more famous for not having to adhere to parking laws. They are forced to prefund their pensions unlike other government agencies but like private companies. the truth of their problem is that mail service is declining, stats show it at 213 billion in 2006 down to 160 billion letters in 2012. That is a major decline in revenue. Even if the Post Office did not have to fund its pensions it loses billions of dollars a year. If they did not fund their pensions and those pensions ended up negative the tax payers would step in. Also consider. 1. the Post Office when negotiating with its unions cannot factor in the operational costs of the contract. As in, they cannot factor in the impact of it in day to day expenditures versus revenue. 2. The Post Office also has 535 overseers, as in Congress who can stop them from closing unprofitable offices, distribution centers, and the like. They even like to interfere with vehicle purchases. Anecdote, I remember my Aunt and Cousin (both ran local offices) bemoaning the left hand drive Windstars they had to take. 3. The EU even requires member nations to open their markets to competition, the US does not permit direct competition in letter delivery. 4. They have to plead to raise stamp costs.
- GalacticDomin8r 13y ago
  > They are forced to prefund their pensions unlike other government agencies but like private companies. Which private company has to fund 75 years of pension plans? Can't say I've ever heard of a company being forced to prefund pensions for future employees not even yet born before learning about PAEA. http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2011/nader230911.html http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2011/nader230911.html Also I wonder if you care to comment on the sabotage provision in PAEA which stipulates the PO can't engage in non-postal forms of revenue.

baddox 13y ago

The USPS has the massive benefit of government-protected monopoly on first-class mail. Even if it's not a direct infusion of funds, it's a major subsidy.

icelancer 13y ago
Exactly. Try delivering your own mail through mailboxes and mail slots and see what happens.
- baddox 13y ago
  This happens: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Letter_Mail_Company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Letter_Mail_Company
_delirium 13y ago
Whether that's a net subsidy or anti-subsidy is an interesting question. They have both a monopoly and a fairly stringent mandate: they are required to deliver first-class mail to every mailing address in the United States (including very remote areas), six days a week, at prices that they can't set. The estimates I've seen are that the first-class mail mandate is a net money-loser, with pre-sorted bulk mail and premium services like Priority Mail the more successful products. So the USPS might actually be financially better off without this "subsidy". But Alaska and Montana senators would have a fit if rural communities lost mail service.
- derleth 13y ago
  > they are required to deliver first-class mail to every mailing address in the United States (including very remote areas) Not even close. If you live out of town, you don't get a mailbox. You get a PO Box in the post office in the closest town.
- jellicle 13y ago
  Indeed. We see what the market price for delivering a letter quickly across the country is: about $20 from Fedex. USPS can only charge 46 cents by law, the cheapest first-class mail service in the world.

rubyrescue 13y ago

It's always been a mix of public/private since Benjamin Franklin won the contract to deliver mail between the colonies. Perhaps more public than private but the USPS history is fascinatingly complex.

GalacticDomin8r 13y ago

> Congress cut its taxpayer funding, and directed it to run itself like a business, not like a public service. Not really. Congress forced the PO to run itself like no other business or government entity with the goal of ruining it. The 109th Congress wanted to promote the belief government can't do anything efficiently. It was called the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act and intentionally places huge burdens on the USPS which no other business has. Without those, estimates show the PO would still be hurting, but no where near its current state. So Bush can say "Mission Accomplished" about one thing and be right about it.

drewcrawford 13y ago
While it is true the USPS has requirements that no other business has, it also has benefits that no other business has. These include, but are not limited to: * A box for its use at every residence in the United States * A federal monopoly; it is unlawful for any company to carry a letter in the United States and charge a similar price to USPS rates. See here: http://about.usps.com/publications/pub542/welcome.htm http://about.usps.com/publications/pub542/welcome.htm
- GalacticDomin8r 13y ago
  > * A box for its use at every residence in the United States There are plenty of places that don't have a box. That box is paid for privately and not required. > A federal monopoly; it is unlawful for any company to carry a letter in the United States and charge a similar price to USPS rates. You got that wrong, see here: http://about.usps.com/publications/pub542/pub542_ch1_001.htm#ep1029138 http://about.usps.com/publications/pub542/pub542_ch1_001.htm...
- derleth 13y ago
  > * A box for its use at every residence in the United States Not even close. I've lived many places without a box. If you're too expensive to deliver to, you don't get a box and you have to drive to the nearest post office and pick up your mail yourself. That's what a PO Box is.

RA_Fisher 13y ago

Businesses aren't subject to FOIAs. If they're a business, why did they even respond? Given that they have responded, they are not a private business (of course). The USPS response here is shameful and we (Americans) should change it!

_delirium 13y ago
Did you even read my post? I said they are nominally a government agency (therefore liable for FOIAs), but have been directed by Congress to operate as a business, not to operate as public servants. Therefore it's not surprising that they exploit proprietary IP as if they were a business, since these are precisely the instructions they were given.