re: Post office beats UPS and FedEx for packages

quote:

---

Which is the problem with government planning. Market based industry >>> govt funding.

---

If there is such an inherent problem, how was it able to work successfully for over a century? And how would the market handle the unprofitable nature of the requirement of universal postal service? Here's how: government funding.

And in this case, government planning is working perfectly. Because the plan was to destroy the USPS in order to privatize it.

quote:

---

If Congress was passing laws that severely crippled UPS or FedEx's ability to remain afloat, I promise you I would be backing the package delivery companies.

---

If there was a better solution available, no.

Letter mail should disappear anyway and save some trees.

quote:

---

And in this case, government planning is working perfectly. Because the plan was to destroy the USPS in order to privatize it.

---

That really SHOULD be the plan. There's literally no reason to publicly fund it.

quote:

---

Letter mail should disappear anyway and save some trees.

---

I agree with you here, but that will take a long time to happen.

quote:

---

Top: UPS 
Medium: Fed Ex 
Worst: USPS

---

Same for me and I also buy nearly everything online and have packages almost daily.

quote:

---

It didn't. It was a failure from the start. In early US history the post office management was a place for political leaders to place supporters (the spoils system).

When private alternatives popped up in the 1800s they were squashed by laws designed to make them non competitive. The post office had govt on their side. The private start ups had no chance.

---

Ah, right, the American Letter Mail Company. The company that delivered all of the profitable mail in order to prove a point (private enterprise does it better rar rar!), leaving the government service to handle the expensive deliveries and place a huge burden on taxpayers.

quote:

---

Ah, right, the American Letter Mail Company. The company that delivered all of the profitable mail in order to prove a point (private enterprise does it better rar rar!), leaving the government service to handle the expensive deliveries and place a huge burden on taxpayers.

---

Why is it so important to have a public mail service?

quote:

---

As already mentioned, it doesn't have to be publicly funded. It operates break-even as designed. The only reason taxpayers are bearing the burden now is because the plan to destroy it has been put into effect.

---

Oh pahleez.

The USPS revenues are declining and anyone paying a lick of attention can tell that's going to continue. Alas, their costs are NOT declining. Forcing the USPS to pre-pay into the retirement fund is basically an attempt to avoid the OBVIOUS reality that as revenues decline, the public is liable to get stuck with the retirement bill for all those USPS employees.

Sure, we could not have them do this and right NOW, they'd remain solvent but with declining revenues with literally zero chance of reversing that trend, that would be fiscal stupidity.

Literally. Get the frick outta here with that bullshite. Subsidies in the form of roads? Get. The. frick. Out.

And yet, we have at least 3 packages that should have been delivered to us last week that are languishing in the Postal System. We won't see those till we get back home on the 4th. It doesn't really matter to me but the givers are embarrassed about them not getting there on time.