Taibbi wrote about this last week... I didn't know/forgot the bold part:
"The U.S. Postal Service is staring down the same barrel trained at our magazine and newspaper businesses, i.e. its revenue model is being wiped out by the internet.
But politics also plays a huge part in this. In 2006, in what looks like an attempt to bust the Postal Workers' Union, George Bush signed into law the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006. This law required the Postal Service to pre-fund 100 percent of its entire future obligations for 75 years of health benefits to its employees – and not only do it, but do it within ten years. No other organization, public or private, has to pre-fund 100 percent of its future health benefits.
"No one prefunds at more than 30 percent," Anthony Vegliante, the U.S. Postal Service's executive vice president, told reporters last year.
The new law forced the postal service to come up with about $5.5 billion a year for the ten years following the bill's passage. In 2006, before those payments kicked in, the USPS generated a small profit. Not surprisingly, the USPS is now basically broke.
The 2006 law also bars the Postal Service from offering "nonpostal services," which means the USPS can't, say, open up a bank, or an internet cafe, or come up with any new entrepreneurial ideas to generate new income, as postal services do in other countries.
The transparent purpose of this law, which was pushed heavily by industry lobbyists, was to break a public sector union and privatize the mail industry...."
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/dont-let-business-lobbyists-kill-the-post-office-20120423
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
doomed
― iatee, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
I understand why you bolded the passage you did, but the pre-funding requirement is even more shocking to me.
― i don't believe in zimmerman (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
This law required the Postal Service to pre-fund 100 percent of its entire future obligations for 75 years of health benefits to its employees – and not only do it, but do it within ten years.
this seems deeply insane xp
― johnny crunch, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
Yeah, Congress has created a political problem and dressed it as an economic one, but USPS is probably doomed. Of course, one ironic upshot is that UPS and FedEx will have to cease serving customers in some rural and out-of-the-way places, since USPS is their last-mile carrier. But hey, the free market, right?
― i love the large auns pictures! (Phil D.), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
yup
― iatee, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
salvageable, mainly because its a legit public good and thus doesnt need to be economically feasible.
― Rachel Profiling (jjjusten), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
The problem with going 100% to private delivery companies like UPS and FedEx is that they are not required to serve the entire country, as PhilD said. The more you cut off rural dwellers, the more you create tiers of citizenship, with the rural people turning into ignorant, poverty-stricken peasants, living in degradation. Not quite the thing, imo.
― Aimless, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
a national subsidy for mailing shit to people in the midddle of nowhere isn't really a legit public good
― iatee, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
^^ needs more thought
― Aimless, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah wth
― TracerHandVEVO (Tracer Hand), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah lets take away their schools too! xpost
― Rachel Profiling (jjjusten), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
I can't figure out your politics sometimes iatee
― i don't believe in zimmerman (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
he hates people that dont live like he does
― Rachel Profiling (jjjusten), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
post very much in character
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
i mean thats the cliff notes version i am sure it is more nuanced but
actually those ignorant, poverty-stricken peasants in rural areas need to factor the lack of mailable shit access into their cost-benefit analysis
― the late great, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
― how's life, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
^ a little video I'd like you to watch iatee
farmers should quit growing food, move to the city and work in private equity
― i don't believe in zimmerman (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
again w/ the farmer thing
― iatee, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
almost nobody is a farmer!
and yet we still pretend like half the country is
You can farm just as easily in queens, amirite?
― how's life, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
literally as i clicked on this thread a mail truck stopped hard in front of my window. the mailman got out to retrieve a box that had escaped the truck and was lying in the middle of the street.
― call all destroyer, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
― iatee, Wednesday, May 2, 2012 4:32 PM (47 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
That's why they all live out in the middle of nowhere!
― how's life, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
Mandatory victory gardens should have been part of Obamacare
― L'ennui, cette maladie de tous les (Michael White), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
fewer than 1% of americans are farmers
― iatee, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
iatee, the numbers of farmers are shrinking, but they are still required, bcz, you know, food.
― Aimless, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
yes
― iatee, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
all those people in the middle of nowhere are just getting books sent in the mail that teach them how to build bombs to blow up post offices anyway.
― scott seward, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
I do think its kind of terrifying to start measuring these sorts of things per economic viability tho - its a sad insight into the creepy economic mental sludge that is going on across the board in politics these days, and makes it even clearer that the neocons have won even while losing.
― Rachel Profiling (jjjusten), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
do you even know what the word neocon means
― iatee, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
mail service is a constitutional issue. if you live in the middle of nowhere you still get, like, due process. sending off a letter is the same deal. so what if it's expensive!
― goole, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
Get govmt out of my Medicare!
― L'ennui, cette maladie de tous les (Michael White), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
yes you insufferable little dude xxpost
― Rachel Profiling (jjjusten), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
nah the congress has the *ability* to create a postal service, not a requirement
― iatee, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
l-r: ilx threads that even obliquely involve rural vs urban, iatee
― heated debate over derpy hooves (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
The internets are making everything else privatizable, it seems
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
iatee just curious b/c I have not paid attention to this kind of shitstirring before -- have u lived in a rural area?
― Silky Slim (dan m), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
is there anything in section 8 that congress "shall have the power to" do, that it doesn't?
― goole, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
iatee, you realize that that's the whole point, that there's a minority of people who wouldn't be able to get service in the free market, but who need it, and whose services, in turn, we need.
Anyway "1% of Americans" is kind of a dumb stat to cite. It's more like 3+% of the labor force.
― i don't believe in zimmerman (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
no I considered moving to one but then I remembered I was not a farmer xp
― iatee, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
If the real point is to kill the unions and prove 'they don't work', the Republicans could just mandate that UPS and FedEx, etc..., serve rural areas which they could argue is a justifiable use of the commerce clause and totally wouldn't make them look like Mammon-worshipping hypocrites.
― L'ennui, cette maladie de tous les (Michael White), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
iatee what about all the people that need to live in rural areas to serve those farmers - grain silo storage/operators, farm implement sellers, harvest season laborers, grocery stores, etc etc?
― heated debate over derpy hooves (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
the post office is kinda crazy for sending letters thousands of miles for, like, 50 cents. who does that? crazy people, that's who.
― scott seward, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
^
― iatee, Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
p simplistic view of what the post office does imo
― Silky Slim (dan m), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
tbh guys theres plenty of decent stuff to talk about here and i know its hard to resist but this is kind of a do not feed the iatee sorta situation
― Rachel Profiling (jjjusten), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
They could just order their John Deere combines off of Amazon. Except nobody would deliver them. RIP farmers.
― i love the large auns pictures! (Phil D.), Wednesday, 2 May 2012 16:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
don't see why less mail means usps has a long term problem. it can just ramp down slowly. also stamped, first-class is probably not its key profit center?
like that's def the category of mail that is disappearing most thanks to internet stuff, but is the decline in that particular category key to the ability of the postal service so sustain itself?
― s.clover, Thursday, 28 March 2013 21:41 (1 month ago) Permalink
first class mail totally was its profit center, now it's shifting to junk mail
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 21:52 (1 month ago) Permalink
the usps is profitable were it not for the pension funding requirement which was basically designed to kill the usps
it still has the best package delivery system around, given the ubiquity of online commerce I say we should save the usps
― 乒乓, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:00 (1 month ago) Permalink
the problem with a slow ramp down is that your mail carrier bringing you one letter a day isn't half as cheap as your mail carrier bringing you two. it was benefitting from huge economies of scale and a monopoly on a certain service and it's losing both.
what seems most likely is delivery service keeps gets chopped down one day at a time. this limits its ability to compete for parcel delivery, which is where the business is gonna be. ie saving the post office (saving it...from operating as a competitive business) just means killing it slowly.
xp
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:08 (1 month ago) Permalink
...or getting rid of the pension requirement and restoring those appropriated funds to the post office
― My Chemical Romance did 9/11 (jjjusten), Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:25 (1 month ago) Permalink
again it's only making money because it's an advertising company now
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:34 (1 month ago) Permalink
http://business.time.com/2012/03/22/why-the-post-office-loves-junk-mail/
or a 'jobs mail' company I guess
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:36 (1 month ago) Permalink
who cares
― My Chemical Romance did 9/11 (jjjusten), Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:37 (1 month ago) Permalink
i don't really care that it sends me junk mail as long as it also sends me packages and provides me with a way to send packages for cheaper than UPS and also lets me pick up packages at the many convenient post offices located near the places I live
― 乒乓, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:38 (1 month ago) Permalink
who cares that the government is currently running a program to send 100 billion pieces of junk mail out?
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:39 (1 month ago) Permalink
i don't really see what the concern is
― 乒乓, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:41 (1 month ago) Permalink
The USPS is created as a government agency under Title 39, Section 101.1 of the United States Code which states, in part: (a) The United States Postal Service shall be operated as a basic and fundamental service provided to the people by the Government of the United States, authorized by the Constitution, created by Act of Congress, and supported by the people. The Postal Service shall have as its basic function the obligation to provide postal services to bind the Nation together through the personal, educational, literary, and business correspondence of the people. It shall provide prompt, reliable, and efficient services to patrons in all areas and shall render postal services to all communities. The costs of establishing and maintaining the Postal Service shall not be apportioned to impair the overall value of such service to the people.Under paragraph (d) of Title 39, Section 101.1, "Postal rates shall be established to apportion the costs of all postal operations to all users of the mail on a fair and equitable basis."
(a) The United States Postal Service shall be operated as a basic and fundamental service provided to the people by the Government of the United States, authorized by the Constitution, created by Act of Congress, and supported by the people. The Postal Service shall have as its basic function the obligation to provide postal services to bind the Nation together through the personal, educational, literary, and business correspondence of the people. It shall provide prompt, reliable, and efficient services to patrons in all areas and shall render postal services to all communities. The costs of establishing and maintaining the Postal Service shall not be apportioned to impair the overall value of such service to the people.
Under paragraph (d) of Title 39, Section 101.1, "Postal rates shall be established to apportion the costs of all postal operations to all users of the mail on a fair and equitable basis."
― My Chemical Romance did 9/11 (jjjusten), Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:41 (1 month ago) Permalink
i mean thats pretty clear
― My Chemical Romance did 9/11 (jjjusten), Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:42 (1 month ago) Permalink
and again any benefit compared to ups/fedex is gonna be going away as this advertising company ends up operating on 4 and 3 day schedules
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:42 (1 month ago) Permalink
that's not some impossible problem that can't be solved
― a monolithic testament to shiftlessness and lost productivity (dan m), Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:43 (1 month ago) Permalink
get rid of the pension funding requirement and it can remain an advertising company that delivers 5-6 days a week
― 乒乓, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:44 (1 month ago) Permalink
ya for example we could turn it into a bank, but that's not gonna happen
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:44 (1 month ago) Permalink
i don't see what the connection is
― 乒乓, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:45 (1 month ago) Permalink
that was an xp
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:46 (1 month ago) Permalink
currently the taxpayer input into the postal service is about $100 million, which pays for free mailing service for the blind and mail in ballots. good luck getting fedex or ups to take that on for that kind of money.
― My Chemical Romance did 9/11 (jjjusten), Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:47 (1 month ago) Permalink
there are alternatives such as blind people using computers and also voters using computers
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:49 (1 month ago) Permalink
yes of course it would cost way less than $100 million dollars a year to ensure that everyone who is blind and every overseas absentee voter has full access to a computerized system that can do everything the postal service does, great point
― My Chemical Romance did 9/11 (jjjusten), Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:51 (1 month ago) Permalink
well as the 3-day-a-week-advertising company post office continues to collapse into irrelevance the costs of replacing its remaining capabilities will certainly go down
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:53 (1 month ago) Permalink
lol u r so dumb
― My Chemical Romance did 9/11 (jjjusten), Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:57 (1 month ago) Permalink
yes one could get rid of the free mail for the blind and mail-in ballot services (not that i advocate it but whatever) and at that point it would have a fractional impact on the revenue of the postal service and wouldn't matter about the viability of it one way or the other.
post office is fine. it ships packages good. i like my mail. its year-over-year volume + revenues are actually increasing in "competitive sectors" (i.e. its services that go head-to-head vs. ups etc are gaining). its structurally the "market dominant sectors" that are in a decline. but the extent of the decline remains to be seen. things that go up don't keep going up. things going down don't necessarily go down forever. sometimes they just... adjust.
but fuckit we should all pay landlords half our income and pay the rest to private enterprise because the goverment is just the... worst, man.
― s.clover, Thursday, 28 March 2013 22:59 (1 month ago) Permalink
iatee you should print out this trenchant piece of advice from noted thinking mans comic "zits" and staple it to your forehead:
― My Chemical Romance did 9/11 (jjjusten), Thursday, 28 March 2013 23:00 (1 month ago) Permalink
why do you think I hate government when I'm suggesting a public option for personal banking
anyway while its true that there might be a bottom, we are at the moment not anywhere close to 'everyone pays and receives all their bills electronically' but we will continue to go down that path and its effects will be felt. iirc the post office actually tried to get involved w/ electronic payment systems and was prevented by congress? again, it's not that it's run by incompetent people, it's that it's not allowed any flexibility.
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 23:09 (1 month ago) Permalink
its true it has its hands crippled by lobbyists yah, that's a huge issue. but the idea that mail is just vanishing is ridiculous. also it wouldn't have needed to be a bank to be a payment clearinghouse anyway.
― s.clover, Thursday, 28 March 2013 23:16 (1 month ago) Permalink
it wouldn't have needed to be no, but it happens to have locations in every city in america and we have shitty banks so
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 23:18 (1 month ago) Permalink
again most of the arguments I'm making (allow it operational efficiency and to diversify its business) are made by the people who run the post office so the idea that I'm some secret libertarian or w/e is kinda lol
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 23:23 (1 month ago) Permalink
the best way to ensure that it dies is to pretend like the post office in 2025 should or can operate like the post office in 1940
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 23:27 (1 month ago) Permalink
― iatee, Thursday, March 28, 2013 6:39 PM (52 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― 乒乓, Thursday, March 28, 2013 6:41 PM (50 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
i think there are some pretty legitimate environmental concerns tbh
― k3vin k., Thursday, 28 March 2013 23:38 (1 month ago) Permalink
this thread is interesting. my parents worked for the post office. i hope it continues to exist. what could it conceivably look like, other than a PO/bank hybrid? (also, why does this have to be about rural v. urban?)
― eaumaille, Thursday, 28 March 2013 23:45 (1 month ago) Permalink
bcz iatee
― set the controls for the heart of the sun (VegemiteGrrl), Thursday, 28 March 2013 23:46 (1 month ago) Permalink
because the entire postal service is run as an urban->rural transfer program.
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 23:48 (1 month ago) Permalink
and are the distances between people really at the heart of the matter/the main thing to consider? (not a rhetorical q, just haven't thought about that way)
― eaumaille, Thursday, 28 March 2013 23:54 (1 month ago) Permalink
yes. it costs more money to get things to remote places and to keep offices open in places fewer customers. the post office isn't given much flexibility here to adjust like a normal business.
― iatee, Thursday, 28 March 2013 23:58 (1 month ago) Permalink
places with
but the solution must surely be more complicated than asking people to not live remotely?
― eaumaille, Friday, 29 March 2013 00:02 (1 month ago) Permalink
USPS should become the facebook public option
― max, Friday, 29 March 2013 00:03 (1 month ago) Permalink
sry the social network public option
― max, Friday, 29 March 2013 00:04 (1 month ago) Permalink
I've asked before it never works xp
― iatee, Friday, 29 March 2013 00:04 (1 month ago) Permalink
People have a right to get things delivered to remote places by the federal government. It is a just use of state powers.
And while we're at it, FedEx and UPS should be penalized more for competing against the state. Their competition lowers the efficiency of the state's economies of scale.
― I am only able to build things if Obama helps me (dandydonweiner), Friday, 29 March 2013 00:05 (1 month ago) Permalink
We should outlaw email too, because that really ruined economies of scale for the USPS.
― I am only able to build things if Obama helps me (dandydonweiner), Friday, 29 March 2013 00:06 (1 month ago) Permalink
i have no idea if those posts are serious or not
― k3vin k., Friday, 29 March 2013 00:15 (1 month ago) Permalink
new board description
― s.clover, Friday, 29 March 2013 00:16 (1 month ago) Permalink
'competing against the state'
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Friday, 29 March 2013 00:16 (1 month ago) Permalink
iatee too literal
― eaumaille, Friday, 29 March 2013 00:55 (1 month ago) Permalink
clover otm
― I am only able to build things if Obama helps me (dandydonweiner), Friday, 29 March 2013 01:27 (1 month ago) Permalink