Save the Post office from our government

[Harry Dresden]

It's a business in a competitive marketplace. Why not?
Is it better to keep it as is. A wasteful bloated agency that is in part a warehouse for employees who don't produce any work?
Forget 'protecting jobs'...That's crap. You people are all about 'save the post office' I want my Saturday mail'...Ok fine. Not the way the USPS is currently operating.
Can't have it both ways.
I'm not interested in the history of the USPS because that is immaterial to the discussion.
The USPS is on the verge of financial disaster. First class mail volume if down 25% in the last 5 years. People are SICK of junk mail.

part a warehouse for employees who don't produce any work?

they don't?......come on down and carry a few routes.....it might change your opinion.....

People are SICK of junk mail

it is considered the most effective way to advertise....which is why that stuff just keeps on coming....

I was referring to management level people.They don't do shit.
And that comes from two letter carriers I know.
One guy I used to go camping with worked at a sectional center( I think that is what's called..Or maybe a bulk center) anyway a big place that handles a lot of mail...
He said his two supervisors were lazy ass do nothings that got to management level via affirmative action. He said none of the supervisors or their managers did anything productive.

ok....so many here talk about the workers as being useless that unless they specify WHICH workers i usually go into protective mode........and you are right about a whole hell of a lot of management.....many of the front line supervisors are good people they still remember what it was like getting a route ready and carrying it...and they have to put up with the same shit we had to.....but some suck big time,they were the ones who could not carry a route so they went into supervision.and now they suck at that........ but middle management in the PO is fucking horrendous.....they are the ones who fuck the system up....

 

[Political Junky]

It's going to be very enlightening for those in favor when they spend $15 to send a letter by FedEx.

 

[JakeStarkey]

thereisnospoon using one anecdotal comment by a craft worker that two supervisors were lazy and inefficient. No examples or facts of that supposed laziness and inefficiency are given. No qualification of the craft worker's relevance is documented for him to make such a statement. There is nothing here.

 

[Nova78]

It's going to be very enlightening for those in favor when they spend $15 to send a letter by FedEx.

Won't happen , Internet ,fax machines ,electronic transfers will do in the post office ,no need for overpaid junkmail delivery personal .

 

[JakeStarkey]

It's going to be very enlightening for those in favor when they spend $15 to send a letter by FedEx.

Won't happen , Internet ,fax machines ,electronic transfers will do in the post office ,no need for overpaid junkmail delivery personal .

Your comment about the USPS is irrelevant to PJ's inference about what is going to happen to the consumer cost of those who have to rely on the private sector for 1st Class mail service.

 

[Nova78]

Post office is locked in a declining market. It can only survive with indirect taxpayer subsidies and a ban on private competition. Instead of forcing Americans to pay more for less service, Congress should open mail delivery to all comers.The USPS has a legal monopoly over first-class mail and standard mail (formerly called third-class mail). Thus, we have a postal system that encourages high costs and inefficiency, while preventing entrepreneurs from trying to improve postal services for Americans.

The USPS is in deep financial trouble as a result of declining mail volume, bloated operating expenses, a costly and inflexible unionized workforce. At the same time, electronic communications and other technological advances are making physical mail delivery less relevant.
It concludes that taxpayers, consumers, and the broader economy would stand to gain with reforms to privatize the USPS and open U.S. mail delivery up to competition.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Post office is locked in a declining market. It can only survive with indirect taxpayer subsidies and a ban on private competition. Instead of forcing Americans to pay more for less service, Congress should open mail delivery to all comers.The USPS has a legal monopoly over first-class mail and standard mail (formerly called third-class mail). Thus, we have a postal system that encourages high costs and inefficiency, while preventing entrepreneurs from trying to improve postal services for Americans.

The USPS is in deep financial trouble as a result of declining mail volume, bloated operating expenses, a costly and inflexible unionized workforce. At the same time, electronic communications and other technological advances are making physical mail delivery less relevant.
It concludes that taxpayers, consumers, and the broader economy would stand to gain with reforms to privatize the USPS and open U.S. mail delivery up to competition.

Congress should open mail delivery to all comers.

so how many people do you want opening your mail box?....small packages are easy to steal.....who you going to blame if there are 7 delivery services with a key?.....and i am still waiting for you to tell me what you do for a living?....

 

[Nova78]

Then there’s the massive and heavily unionized workforce. With more than 600,000 career employees, the Postal Service has the second largest workforce behind Walmart, 85 percent of whom are covered by collective bargaining agreements. That’s driven average compensation for Postal Service workers to $83,000 per year. Today, compensation and benefits account for almost 80 percent of the Postal Service’s costs, a figure that hasn’t changed in years "despite major advances in technology and the automation of postal operations," notes the Government Accountability Office.

On top of that, as a government enterprise, the Postal Service is subject to congressional meddling. Last year, for example, the Postal Service proposed consolidating 3,000 postal outlets, but following a congressional outcry, the number under consideration was cut to a derisory 157. UPS and FedEx, it’s worth noting, don’t share the Postal Service’s bleak future because they don’t face the same constraints as a government enterprise.

Even the band-aids the Postal Service is proposing today — mail delivery reduced to five days, longer delivery times and increased postage-stamp prices — aren’t likely to get congressional approval. Moreover, such measures will only push Americans further away from physical letter delivery and toward greater use of electronic tools.

A better approach would be for lawmakers to follow the lead of other countries and privatize the post office.

 

[Truthmatters]

the founders wanted the post office and were willing to pay for it.

Its in the constitution.


There is NO reason to privatize the post office.

Just stop treating it like NO OTHER entity in the world and FORCING it to fund retirement in an INSANE way

 

[Truthmatters]

why is it the all Constitutiony party doesnt like this part of the constitution?

 

[Truthmatters]

Postal Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution, known as the Postal Clause or the Postal Power, empowers Congress "To establish Post Offices and post Roads".

 

[Truthmatters]

we later designed the Post office to be able to pay for its self.

Pretty smart huh?


Now the right has USED this fact to OVERBURDEN this constitutionally mandated service so they can KILL IT and Sell it off to the highest bidder.


The dupes who support killing this part of the constitution are the tea party tards who are the very people who will be refused service in their rural homes if this ever gets done.

It wont because its in the constitution.


You scumbags will keep trying though

 

[Truthmatters]

The right is Just So impressively CONSTITUTIONY huh?


Never say another word of lie about how you care about the founders and the constitution IF you support privatizing the Post office.

me and the founders will spit the facts at you again

 

[JakeStarkey]

Post office is locked in a declining market. It can only survive with indirect taxpayer subsidies and a ban on private competition. Instead of forcing Americans to pay more for less service, Congress should open mail delivery to all comers.The USPS has a legal monopoly over first-class mail and standard mail (formerly called third-class mail). Thus, we have a postal system that encourages high costs and inefficiency, while preventing entrepreneurs from trying to improve postal services for Americans.

The USPS is in deep financial trouble as a result of declining mail volume, bloated operating expenses, a costly and inflexible unionized workforce. At the same time, electronic communications and other technological advances are making physical mail delivery less relevant.
It concludes that taxpayers, consumers, and the broader economy would stand to gain with reforms to privatize the USPS and open U.S. mail delivery up to competition.

Stop the plagiarism, please.

Postal Bankruptcy | Cato Institute
Postal Bankruptcy | Cato Institute
by D Bandow - 2012
The post office already has borrowed roughly $13 billion from Uncle Sam. At the end of 2009 ... The USPS is in crisis. It is locked in a declining market. It can only survive with indirect taxpayer subsidies and a ban on private competition. ... Today there is competition only in packages and urgent delivery. For regular mail, you ...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Then there’s the massive and heavily unionized workforce. With more than 600,000 career employees, the Postal Service has the second largest workforce behind Walmart, 85 percent of whom are covered by collective bargaining agreements. That’s driven average compensation for Postal Service workers to $83,000 per year. Today, compensation and benefits account for almost 80 percent of the Postal Service’s costs, a figure that hasn’t changed in years "despite major advances in technology and the automation of postal operations," notes the Government Accountability Office.

On top of that, as a government enterprise, the Postal Service is subject to congressional meddling. Last year, for example, the Postal Service proposed consolidating 3,000 postal outlets, but following a congressional outcry, the number under consideration was cut to a derisory 157. UPS and FedEx, it’s worth noting, don’t share the Postal Service’s bleak future because they don’t face the same constraints as a government enterprise.

Even the band-aids the Postal Service is proposing today — mail delivery reduced to five days, longer delivery times and increased postage-stamp prices — aren’t likely to get congressional approval. Moreover, such measures will only push Americans further away from physical letter delivery and toward greater use of electronic tools.

A better approach would be for lawmakers to follow the lead of other countries and privatize the post office.

Please stop the plagiarism.

Want Better Mail Service? Look Abroad | Cato Institute
www.cato.org/publications/.../want-better-mail-service-look-abroad
by T DeHaven - 2012 - Cited by 1 - Related articles
Then there's the massive and heavily unionized workforce. With more than 600,000 career employees, the Postal Service has the second largest workforce ...

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

In order to be self sustaining, it SHOULD turn a profit.

Incorrect. To self sustain it only needs to break even.

No....If the USPS is to grow, it needs to turn a profit.

If the USPS is to grow, it does need more than break-even revenues, yes - but my reply was not to the statement that if the "USPS is to grow, it needs to turn a profit," my reply was to the statement "In order to be self sustaining, it SHOULD turn a profit".

Look, the jobs of postal workers can no longer be protected.

Of course not. The USPS has to deal with an artificially imposed expense to the tune of billions of dollars. Not many private businesses would survive under the same circumstances.

The USPS should be cut loose and subject to the economic realities that affect any other market based business.

It has been cut loose. Its been on a separate budget since the 80's.

 

[JakeStarkey]

OohPooPahDoo just cleaned thereisnospoon's clock above.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Incorrect. To self sustain it only needs to break even.

No....If the USPS is to grow, it needs to turn a profit.

If the USPS is to grow, it does need more than break-even revenues, yes - but my reply was not to the statement that if the "USPS is to grow, it needs to turn a profit," my reply was to the statement "In order to be self sustaining, it SHOULD turn a profit".

Look, the jobs of postal workers can no longer be protected.

Of course not. The USPS has to deal with an artificially imposed expense to the tune of billions of dollars. Not many private businesses would survive under the same circumstances.

The USPS should be cut loose and subject to the economic realities that affect any other market based business.

It has been cut loose. Its been on a separate budget since the 80's.

It has? What about the pension obligation and other congressional oversight?
Can't have it both ways.

 

[thereisnospoon]

OohPooPahDoo just cleaned thereisnospoon's clock above.

Dude you going up against me is like a one legged man trying to win an ass kicking contest.
Settle down.
If I want your opinion, I'll rattle your cage.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

No....If the USPS is to grow, it needs to turn a profit.

If the USPS is to grow, it does need more than break-even revenues, yes - but my reply was not to the statement that if the "USPS is to grow, it needs to turn a profit," my reply was to the statement "In order to be self sustaining, it SHOULD turn a profit".



Of course not. The USPS has to deal with an artificially imposed expense to the tune of billions of dollars. Not many private businesses would survive under the same circumstances.

The USPS should be cut loose and subject to the economic realities that affect any other market based business.

It has been cut loose. Its been on a separate budget since the 80's.

It has? What about the pension obligation and other congressional oversight?
Can't have it both ways.

Congress has Constitutional authority to oversea governmental entities on separate budgets.