Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I'd be surprised if a USPS bailout got through the House, maybe not through the Senate. Bailouts are extemely unpopular these days. Far as I'm concerned, they should fire all their asses and privatize the damn thing. Fine with me if they go to mail delivery 3 times a week, M-W-F or T-TH-S.
yes, another Quango ( a brit term) for quasi-autonomous non-governmental organization needs a cash infusion...why? lets see...
The Coming Postal Bailout
snip-
$2.2 billion loss
$15 billion line of credit
$42 billion in additional losses
$50 billion to $75 billion life raft
yes, another Quango ( a brit term) for quasi-autonomous non-governmental organization needs a cash infusion...why? lets see...
The Coming Postal Bailout
snip-
The odds of a multibillion-dollar rescue package went way up this week when Postal Service management reported a $2.2 billion loss for the first quarter, more than 25% higher than last year despite the economic recovery. It now appears that the $15 billion line of credit the feds have offered USPS will be used up by the end of this year, with low odds on ever being paid back.
If that isn't ugly enough, the Postal Service expects $42 billion in additional losses over the next four years. Mail volume and revenues have suffered what Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe concedes are "unprecedented declines" since 2006, with projections of another drop of 20 billion letters mailed by the end of the decade, down from 171 million this year, thanks to competition from electronic mail.
If this were a private business, the obvious response to these losses would be urgent cost-cutting to avoid insolvency. Instead, Postal Service management recently concluded negotiations offering the 205,000-member American Postal Workers Union a new four-and-a-half-year contract that will provide a 3.5% pay raise over three years, dole out automatic cost of living wage hikes after 2012, and expand no-layoff protections.
Postal officials say this is the best deal they could get and that, had they not agreed to it, an arbitrator would have been even more generous to the union. But given that 80% of postal costs are for wages and benefits, this contract is unhinged from all fiscal reality.
snip-
Even worse is a bill co-sponsored by Senators Tom Carper of Delaware and Susan Collins of Maine, the Chairman and ranking Member on the postal oversight committee. They want to toss a $50 billion to $75 billion life raft to USPS by having the feds underwrite pension obligations for currently retired postal workers. We hope the tea party folks are paying attention because this bailout would cost about three times the first-year savings from the just-completed 2011 federal budget deal.
and so it goes, more at-
Review & Outlook: The Coming Postal Bailout - WSJ.com
yes, another Quango ( a brit term) for quasi-autonomous non-governmental organization needs a cash infusion...why? lets see...
The Coming Postal Bailout
snip-
The odds of a multibillion-dollar rescue package went way up this week when Postal Service management reported a $2.2 billion loss for the first quarter, more than 25% higher than last year despite the economic recovery. It now appears that the $15 billion line of credit the feds have offered USPS will be used up by the end of this year, with low odds on ever being paid back.
If that isn't ugly enough, the Postal Service expects $42 billion in additional losses over the next four years. Mail volume and revenues have suffered what Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe concedes are "unprecedented declines" since 2006, with projections of another drop of 20 billion letters mailed by the end of the decade, down from 171 million this year, thanks to competition from electronic mail.
If this were a private business, the obvious response to these losses would be urgent cost-cutting to avoid insolvency. Instead, Postal Service management recently concluded negotiations offering the 205,000-member American Postal Workers Union a new four-and-a-half-year contract that will provide a 3.5% pay raise over three years, dole out automatic cost of living wage hikes after 2012, and expand no-layoff protections.
Postal officials say this is the best deal they could get and that, had they not agreed to it, an arbitrator would have been even more generous to the union. But given that 80% of postal costs are for wages and benefits, this contract is unhinged from all fiscal reality.
snip-
Even worse is a bill co-sponsored by Senators Tom Carper of Delaware and Susan Collins of Maine, the Chairman and ranking Member on the postal oversight committee. They want to toss a $50 billion to $75 billion life raft to USPS by having the feds underwrite pension obligations for currently retired postal workers. We hope the tea party folks are paying attention because this bailout would cost about three times the first-year savings from the just-completed 2011 federal budget deal.
and so it goes, more at-
Review & Outlook: The Coming Postal Bailout - WSJ.com
Not defending the Post Office, just ran into a counter point article and remembered it from the other day.
Fox says that if it wasn't for Congress, the Post Office would be running at a profit.
After Another Quarterly Loss, Postal Service Licks Its Wounds - FoxNews.com
>>>>
But USPS faces three statutorily mandated requirements unique to it. First, the agency is required by law to prepay $5.5 billion each year for future retiree health benefits. “No other organization in the country is required to fund at that level,” Joe Corbett, the Postal Service’s chief financial officer, told Fox News. “Government agencies do not fund, and parcel companies don't fund, anywhere near that level.
Why don't they just nix Saturday service and get it over with.
They're so desperate to save money, they contracted with Seimens for real-time monitoring of facility energy usage. Yet, I walk into my local P.O. and there's the sun beating in with the A/C running full bore.
"Why don't they just nix Saturday service ..."
1. In 1971, the Post Office Department was turned into a quasi-governmental corporation, the US Postal Service, which has a federally mandated monopoly on regular mail delivery. The majority of the USPS board are presidential appointees. There are no government appropriations, and a Postal Rate Commission that determines rates. In the 70s the USPS tried to close 12,000 underperforming or underutilized post offices, but politicians amended the Postal Reorganization Act to prohibit the closings. In 77 the same thing happened when the USPS tried to suspend Saturday delivery. The result lost $2.8 billion in 08 and expects to lose another $3 to $6 billion in 2009.Who will ultimately be responsible for paying these debts? The taxpayer. Such is it when government masquerades as free market entities.
http://jcrw.us/system/files/ruth/pdf/Glen Beck Arguing with Idiots.pdf
And the reasoning is pretty much the same reason they can't get subsidized rail service to raise prices and close underutilized station.
Us.
2. If actual corporations are allowed to perform under free market capitalism rules, where the decisions are based on profit, productivity, and efficiency, the taxpayer is not left holding the bag. By its nature, government in a democracy cannot act in this manner: there are too many special interests that must be accommodated.
In 'Demosclerosis:: The Silent Killer of American Government', Jonathan Rauch points out that 7 out of 10 Americans belong to an interest group, and one out of four belong to at least four!
>
RE: The Constitution:
The Constitution does not mandate that the federal government must maintain a Post Office. Article I Section 8 Item 7 states that Congress has the power to create a Post Office, it does not require such a system be created.
Competition:
United States Code Title 39 § 601 (Letters carried out of the mail) mandates that letters carried outside the mail system must, by law, charge a rate equal to 6 times the rate charged by USPS for a one ounce letter. In the interest of competition I would support the repeal of that section of the law as long as the Non-USPS carrier was required to deliver to all addresses like the USPS is.
>>>>
>
RE: The Constitution:
The Constitution does not mandate that the federal government must maintain a Post Office. Article I Section 8 Item 7 states that Congress has the power to create a Post Office, it does not require such a system be created.
Competition:
United States Code Title 39 § 601 (Letters carried out of the mail) mandates that letters carried outside the mail system must, by law, charge a rate equal to 6 times the rate charged by USPS for a one ounce letter. In the interest of competition I would support the repeal of that section of the law as long as the Non-USPS carrier was required to deliver to all addresses like the USPS is.
>>>>
>
RE: The Constitution:
The Constitution does not mandate that the federal government must maintain a Post Office. Article I Section 8 Item 7 states that Congress has the power to create a Post Office, it does not require such a system be created.
Competition:
United States Code Title 39 § 601 (Letters carried out of the mail) mandates that letters carried outside the mail system must, by law, charge a rate equal to 6 times the rate charged by USPS for a one ounce letter. In the interest of competition I would support the repeal of that section of the law as long as the Non-USPS carrier was required to deliver to all addresses like the USPS is.
>>>>
They could never make a profit for he same reason the USPS does not make a profit. Everyone wants to bid on the Manhattan routes, nobody wants a part of the Podunk Alaska routes
