Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
Postal Service doing great...or not
Monday, September 5, 2011 9:27 AM
NIKI2
Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...
Quote: The U.S. Postal Service does not have the money to meet an obligation to a retiree health care trust fund coming due at the end of the month, but if there's a default, officials promise no interruption in the mail, the payroll, or payments to suppliers. http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/09/05/postal.default/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
Monday, September 5, 2011 9:46 AM
KWICKO
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)
Monday, September 5, 2011 10:40 AM
FREMDFIRMA
Monday, September 5, 2011 10:44 AM
Monday, September 5, 2011 3:15 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Fremdfirma: Bah, I don't mind subsidizing the postal service, it might not be the most effective or efficient method, but having it as a baseline with the option to pay someone else more for better service is a damn good system, one well WORTH investing tax money into. You could almost say the effectiveness of that system sets a good precedent for my medicare-expansion option, yes ? And think about it, isn't it better to invest tax money into serving the people who pay taxes than bombing the fuck out of folks ? -Frem I do not serve the Blind God.
Monday, September 5, 2011 4:48 PM
DREAMTROVE
Tuesday, September 6, 2011 2:04 AM
GEEZER
Keep the Shiny side up
Tuesday, September 6, 2011 3:58 AM
ANTHONYT
Freedom is Important because People are Important
Quote:Originally posted by Geezer: Also remember that the Post Office is required by law to deliver just about anything. Imagine if they didn't have to lug those newsprint "Merchandiser" and "Coupon Clipper" junk mail deliveries, or the bulk mailings from Citibank, etc. that cost them half of what you pay to mail a first class letter. "Keep the Shiny side up"
Tuesday, September 6, 2011 12:18 PM
Quote:Originally posted by AnthonyT: They set the rates. It is their job to be competitive AND profitable.
Tuesday, September 6, 2011 1:49 PM
Tuesday, September 6, 2011 2:04 PM
Tuesday, September 6, 2011 6:04 PM
Quote:I do feel they need to be given the freedom to re-define their hours and days of operation as needed, in addition to tailoring all other aspects of their business model. They can't be expected to adapt to changing conditions if they aren't allowed to change with the times.
Tuesday, September 6, 2011 6:14 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Geezer: Quote:Originally posted by AnthonyT: They set the rates. It is their job to be competitive AND profitable. Afraid not. Per the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006, they can set their own rates, but these rates cannot exceed the rate of inflation and may be not be set for the purpose of earning a profit. Instead, the Postal Service may only charge enough to more-or-less break even. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.06407: "Keep the Shiny side up"
Wednesday, September 7, 2011 6:34 PM
RIONAEIRE
Beir bua agus beannacht
Thursday, September 8, 2011 2:46 AM
Quote:a $5.5 billion payment due on Sept. 30, intended to finance retirees’ future health care, won’t cause immediate disaster. But sometime early next year, the agency will run out of money to pay its employees and gas up its trucks, officials warn, forcing it to stop delivering the roughly three billion pieces of mail it handles weekly.
Quote:After running up billions of dollars in losses subsidized by the federal government from 1942-71, the postal service was made a quasi-independent non-profit enterprise (the United States Postal Service, or USPS) that no longer receives any direct government subsidy. Financially, USPS held its own until 2007, but since then cumulative losses have amounted to about $20 billion, and it is expected to lose another $8 billion this fiscal year. Obviously, this cannot continue much longer without a resumption of government subsidies, so this is an excellent time to consider major changes in the postal service and the economic environment in which it operates. The most important factor behind its worsening financial fortunes is the sizable drop during recent years in the total volume of mail delivered. First class mail alone, although protected by a legal monopoly, fell by about 30% from 1998-2008, and has continued to fall rapidly during the past 3 years. The Great Recession is responsible for part of the decline in mail deliveries in recent years, but most of the fall has been due to the growing use of the Internet to pay bills, and to deliver newspapers, magazines, and books. The recession will end, but Internet use will only get more widespread, so the challenges facing USPS will continue to grow. Defenders of the postal service correctly point out that part of its troubles is due to regulations that significantly raise its costs of operation. These include the requirements to deliver first class and some other mail 6 days a week at uniform prices to about 150 million residences, mailboxes, and businesses, including very remote locations that are costly to serve. Most mail prices can only be raised according to a formula fixed in 2006, and the USPS is restricted from entering new businesses. The postal system would like to reduce costs by eliminating regular delivery of mail on Saturday, and by closing about 10% of it’s over 30,000 post offices. It would also like greater freedom in setting prices of first class and other mail delivery. The postal system should be given these and other requests to operate more freely. Regular Saturday delivery of mail is an expensive luxury that is no longer needed, and the cost of operating post offices in remote areas cannot be justified, especially given the growing use of the Internet to pay bills and receive news and advertising. However, greater freedom for the USPS should be part of a sweeping reform of the environment in which the postal service operates. Certain major advantages given to the USPS should also be removed. The post office has had a monopoly for over 100 years on the daily delivery of first class letters and other mail, a monopoly that includes exclusive access to customer mailboxes. Eliminating this monopoly, and allowing the postal service to operate as a private for-profit company, would force the USPS to try to compete more fully against Fed Ex, UPS, and perhaps new companies that would enter the mail business. Competition would do wonders for mail delivery in the United States since it would make the USPS improve its operations if it wants to survive against competitors. We have seen how the 1971 law that required the postal service to be financially self-sufficient forced the postal service to eliminate losses. It did this by cutting costs through large reductions in the number of postal workers, and by closing many small and uneconomical post offices. More at http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2011/09/in-trouble-once-again-what-to-do-about-us-post-office-becker.html]
Thursday, September 8, 2011 6:20 PM
Thursday, September 8, 2011 7:04 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Kwicko: Niki, read my semi-snarky response above about the act passed in 2006, then re-read the article you posted, paying close attention to the mention of what happened in the years 2006 and 2007. Do you see it? The USPS was set up to fail by a GOP-led Congress (both houses) and White House. The legislation was sponsored by a Republican. WHY would they want the USPS gone? Because it provides a service at a significantly lower price than the "free market" does. So they had to strangle it. Really, when was the last time you heard Republicans arguing for MORE regulations, STRICTER regulations, stringent price fixing, and making it all but illegal to turn a profit? The ONLY time you'll hear these kinds of arguments from Republicans is when these actions are being taken against an entity they want to be rid of. Planned Parenthood comes to mind. "Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL