Slashdot Mirror

USPS WAS operating in the green actually for most of the decade, up til 2007 when the increased gas prices really started to impact the bottom line. When you operate the largest vehicle fleet in the world, even a penny increase is going to be massively damaging..

http://www.usps.com/history/anrpt07/summary.htm

So yeah, it's fun to mock USPS, but it's not often warranted.

And now that rail has been taken-over by government, it's constantly on the verge of bankruptcy. Ditto the government-run post office.

The USPS have been posting significant profits for years now.

Here is an interesting link for you - USPS historical mail volume and population

Look at the late 19th century, There was a fair volume, but nothing huge, less than 100 pieces of mail per person per year. And not all that was personal correspondence. Literacy was quite high > 80%

I still think there is more writing going on now than before.

I had the *hardest* time making the overpaid vegetable manning the phone at Paypal [understand] that Media Mail shipments can't be tracked.

Not true. Delivery confirmation can be added to a Media Mail shipment. Whether or not Paypal offers this combination as an option through their mailing center is a different matter; but you can go to the post office and get it at the retail counter.

factor in how much of your tax dollars when into that and then get back to us with a valid point....

That's pretty easy to do. The USPS publishes annual reports just like a company. According to the 2008 annual report, the USPS took in about $75B in revenue, had about $78B in operating costs, and had a contribution of about $3B from the US government. That's about 3% of its costs covered by your taxes.

What's your point again?

And they still had enough cash free to run a website that says they don't depend on tax money

http://www.usps.com/communications/newsroom/postalfacts.htm

0 Tax dollars received for operating the Postal Service

factor in how much of your tax dollars when into that and then get back to us with a valid point....

That's pretty easy to do. The USPS publishes annual reports just like a company. According to the 2008 annual report, the USPS took in about $75B in revenue, had about $78B in operating costs, and had a contribution of about $3B from the US government. That's about 3% of its costs covered by your taxes.

What's your point again?

And they still had enough cash free to run a website that says they don't depend on tax money

http://www.usps.com/communications/newsroom/postalfacts.htm

0 Tax dollars received for operating the Postal Service

factor in how much of your tax dollars when into that and then get back to us with a valid point....

That's pretty easy to do. The USPS publishes annual reports just like a company. According to the 2008 annual report, the USPS took in about $75B in revenue, had about $78B in operating costs, and had a contribution of about $3B from the US government. That's about 3% of its costs covered by your taxes.

What's your point again?

And they still had enough cash free to run a website that says they don't depend on tax money

http://www.usps.com/communications/newsroom/postalfacts.htm

0 Tax dollars received for operating the Postal Service

factor in how much of your tax dollars when into that and then get back to us with a valid point....

That's pretty easy to do. The USPS publishes annual reports just like a company. According to the 2008 annual report, the USPS took in about $75B in revenue, had about $78B in operating costs, and had a contribution of about $3B from the US government. That's about 3% of its costs covered by your taxes.

What's your point again?

factor in how much of your tax dollars when into that and then get back to us with a valid point....

That's pretty easy to do. The USPS publishes annual reports just like a company. According to the 2008 annual report, the USPS took in about $75B in revenue, had about $78B in operating costs, and had a contribution of about $3B from the US government. That's about 3% of its costs covered by your taxes.

What's your point again?

None, actually. The USPS, iirc, is financed entirely by the postage paid for letters and packages. For instance, look here:

0: Tax dollars received for operating the Postal Service

"Not only that, I just checked and according to fedex it costs $7.39 to mail that same letter from coast to coast for their cheapest option. That's only what, nearly 17 times more expensive?"

factor in how much of your tax dollars when into that and then get back to us with a valid point....

Umm, the USPS is self-funded. None of your tax dollars go towards supporting their operation source

Well let's see. You claim the cost per text is zero. Obviously that's not true since maintenance plus electricity for the towers costs money, but it's obviously quite cheap. So anyway..... my cellphone provider charges just 1 cent per text. That's about cheap as a plan can get, since you can't charge less than a penny (half-pennys were discontinued a long time ago).

That's impressive. Who's your cell phone provider and what sort of package do you need to get that deal? The carriers I know of charge 15 to 20 cents per message (although you can get a discount on the first N messages with a package).

That was hiliarious. The U.S.P.S. is losing money year-after-year and only survives because of taxes drawn from out of our paychecks (see my previous post).

No, that's completely false. If someone told you that, they were lying.

"The Postal Service is a self-sufficient agency. The cost of postal operations, including the costs to extend service to an additional 1.2 million new deliveries in 2008, must be financed by the revenue generated from the sale of postal products and services." (link)

And when I have something important to ship, I definitely don't use the government company. Instead I go to one of the private companies because (1) they cost less (2) they don't lose stuff and (3) if they did it's insured for free (upto $100). Oh and (4) they are the only ones who offer overnight package service; the government does not.

And when you need to send a letter, return a warranty card, pay a bill... do you use FedEx or UPS? I sure hope not: it'd cost much, much more and probably be less reliable. Sending packages is one thing, but private companies simply cannot provide the same service as the USPS for regular mail.

I can't think of a single government company that is as efficiently-run as its commercial counterpart.

That's because you're deliberately ignoring the prime example.

Just so you know (and I'm a FedEx Employee, so I do know this) the USPS' "priority mail" is all carried by FedEx. The Post Office bundles it, sends it to FedEx, and FedEx gets it to the nearest airport to its destination, turns it over to the Post Office there who carries it the last few miles.

I was all set to call BS, but the AC is correct:
http://www.usps.com/communications/news/press/2006/pr06_048.htm

Don't joke. What if the real purpose of 5 day delivery is because they've already begun doing it?

It's called a "poor man's copyright," it involves only copyright, not patents, and it's a myth. The U.S. Copyright Office has a note on this. Don't waste your money, especially with the cost of Registered Mail these days.

As for the original submitter, he's likely safe as long as a "substantial" amount of University resources aren't used, and if there isn't an existing contract between him and the University (work-study, faculty/TA, or regular employee) covering intellectual property. My school has a similar policy. And what I found on the SUU site turned up this:

In the Southern Utah University Student Handbook, for instance, you will find the [...] Intellectual Property Policy.

Which seems to be listed here.

A zone chart subscription in a clearly documented format is available for $50 a year here:

http://www.usps.com/ncsc/addressmgmt/zonechart.htm

We use it for our rate calc, in fact it's all local based calculation since the rate tables are public:

http://www.usps.com/prices/downloadable-pricing-files.htm

I understand that using the API means no work when there is a rate change, but the rates change 1-2 a year with 60 days notice. Not a huge deal.

-aaron

A zone chart subscription in a clearly documented format is available for $50 a year here:

http://www.usps.com/ncsc/addressmgmt/zonechart.htm

We use it for our rate calc, in fact it's all local based calculation since the rate tables are public:

http://www.usps.com/prices/downloadable-pricing-files.htm

I understand that using the API means no work when there is a rate change, but the rates change 1-2 a year with 60 days notice. Not a huge deal.

-aaron

See Wikipedia.

Sure, but it would have been easier if you had provided a link at least.

The motto will also continue to be mistaken for the motto of the USPS so long as the USPS does nothing to correct that.

The motto is prominently carved over the U.S. General Post Office in NYC

The building prominently bears the inscription: Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds, which is frequently mistaken as an official motto of the United States Postal Service. It was actually supplied by William Mitchell Kendall of the firm of McKim, Mead & White, the architects who designed the Farley Building and the original Pennsylvania Station in the same Beaux-Arts style. The sentence is taken from Herodotus' Histories (Book 8, Ch. 98) and describes the faithful service of the Persian system of mounted postal messengers under Xerxes I of Persia. The USPS does not actually have an official motto or creed, but nonetheless the inscription on the building is often recognized as such. The inscription was carved by Ira Schnapp, who later designed the Action Comics logo and many other iconic logos for DC Comics.

and the USPS even used it in their own television spot (albeit in an altered form):

The commercial, which ran after the September 11, 2001, attacks and the anthrax mailings, featured no voiceover, only the following text interspersed on title cards:
We are mothers and fathers. And sons and daughters. Who every day go about our lives with duty, honor and pride. And neither snow, nor rain, nor heat, nor gloom of night, nor the winds of change, nor a nation challenged, will stay us from the swift completion of our appointed rounds. Ever.[2]

Note that the [2] link in the above quoted Wikipedia article takes you to this page on the USPS site quoting the exact text of the tvspot.

Yes, they have no Motto, but considering how much they use the meme, they might as well have one.

The USPS reserves the right to inspect mail... sorry.

http://www.usps.com/websites/depart/inspect/usc18/

Plenty of forever stamps here. No idea why you can't find them. They even sell them online.

If you're sending $2.56, it's not particularly nominal (to extend your pleonasm), at $1.05 ...

Whatever you do, don't research Mena, AK.

That's right, because it would be a huge waste of time trying to figure out what a town in Alaska has to do with Bill Clinton.

"AK" = Alaska. "AR" = Arkansas.

10101 is reserved for New York City, NY, a long way from Dontdropthesoap CA.

I was in logistics for twenty plus years. With my knowledge of Zip Codes, I'm the life of any party.

You can trust me. I'm not like the others.

It is a good thing I think that the government is adding this extra step of security. While I will never believe anything is crack-proof, the more layers the better, and anything is better than nothing. However, for several years it seems the U.S. Post Office has been going in the wrong direction, because (and I just checked this again) when you navigate to http://www.usps.gov you are automatically redirected to http://www.usps.com. Apparently they want people to think they're a commercial business instead of a government agency. Personally I feel better using sites like irs.gov and usps.gov, because I know they are the real deal, and not some phishing site. (In general of course.)

Instead of redirecting usps.gov to usps.com, they should do the reverse and redirect usps.com to usps.gov. Just my two cents.

If you're in the US and you have small electronics (like obsolete video cards), you can get prepaid recycling envelopes at the post office. See here: http://www.usps.com/communications/newsroom/2008/pr08_028.htm Computer cables are a big question mark for me. Unlike building wire, they don't have enough copper to be particularly valuable. Every new LCD monitor seems to come with a VGA and a DVI cable, only one of which is typically used. That's a lot of cable to be instantly obsolete. Maybe I'll put all the VGA cables in a box and ship them back to Dell.

After facing unexpected backlash from hitting the band with a cease and desist, they came up with a mutually beneficial branding agreement: they gave the the band licensing rights to their name in exchange for the rights to sell the band's single on the USPS site and having the band play a concert at one of their conferences.

I really like his ideas about living in a house which can be moved within a transportation network.

Finally, anyone with a stamp like this had to be a genius.

• Send unsolicited promotional copies to various parties. But unsolicited merchandise through the mail is presumptively a gift. So the people will then own the promotional copy, and have the right (as this recent ruling affirms) to resell the item. It would be fraudulent to mail things that say "you must pay for this!" or even "you must return this!" (thereby forcing people to pay postage for things they never requested).
• First send out a letter asking the recipient to sign a contract, where they agree that upon receiving the promotional item, they will return it, and agree not to resell or give it to others. This would work, but would be onerous for both parties. In particular, the vast majority of people wouldn't bother with that kind of hassle.

Certified Mail is really the way to go on this if you can't email it. Pop it onto a CD, then put it into package. Seal the package with a way you know if its been tampered with or not. Then request a delivery receipt. You will have a record of transmittal, to whom, when, delivery, and confirmation.

No they don't. Not at all. Not even in the middle of the day.

Do you really think that the few cents they charge per letter would fully cover the cost of snail mail?

Yes. And why the "few cents" exaggeration? IS that the only way you can hope to make your point?

http://www.usps.com/postalinspectors/fraud/merch.htm

But the post office does reserve the right to refuse to ship packages that might harm their infrastructure: http://pe.usps.com/text/dmm300/601.htm#wp1064962

certainly not based on what's in the packages

"Your analogy is in error. The US Postal Service does not receive any taxpayer money to operate"

Your entire statement is in error, the post office recieved 3 BILLION dollars in subsidies from the government in 2007. From YOUR link

"Capital contributions of U.S. government $ 3,034 (Dollars in millions audited)"

http://www.usps.com/history/anrpt07/highlights.htm

You are wrong.

Where did that number come from? That's not true according to the National Association of Letter Carriers(my emphasis):

I'll say it again: The USPS does a fantastic job, and I find it hard to believe private industry could do any better.

Your analogy is in error. The US Postal Service does not receive any taxpayer money to operate. This link explains how the USPS operates.>

Otherwise, I agree with you that any form of socialized medicine is undesirable. A solution to the high cost of providing medical care must be found though.

One change I'd like to see is for drug companies to stop shipping to countries that artificially keep drug prices low. Canada is a good example of that. US citizens pay, in many cases, double the price for name medications, while our friends in Canada get great discounts. Example: Diovan, a widely used medication for hypertension, is available from Canadian online pharmacies at, in some cases, less than half the price in the US. Are US citizens being gouged? Or are we subsidizing the socialist Canadian medical system, which many Canadians don't like.

I have no problem with making good medications available to those who need them. I'm just tired of foreign governments imposing their decisions on the US consumer and taxpayer.

Dear Sir,

As my congressional representative and fellow U of D Graduate, I would encourage your support for HR 1201: Freedom and Innovation Revitalizing U.S. Entrepreneurship Act of 2007.

This bill amends some serious issues in past legislation regarding the copying of copyrighted materials that include some form of copy protection measures.

It has always been a concern for the producers and publishers of audio, visual, print, and other copyright works that the public will violate their copyright and illegally distribute their product. Finally, in the "information age" technology exists which allow these copyright owners to attempt to protect their work.

History has shown, repeatedly, that these copy protection measures are not only inadequate, but can often cause limitations for legitimate use of the product. For example, I would like to create a "scratch copy" of my legitimately purchased DVD's for my children to use, or copy my music collection to my portable music player or computer.

Both of these actions are considered "fair use" by copyright law. But more recent laws, such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), have made it illegal to bypass the copy protection measures that have become commonplace on modern media (CD, DVD, software, etc.).

Essentially, the bill I encourage you to support would decriminalize the act of bypassing these copy protection measures so that the copyrighted work might be used for legal purposes as defined by copyright law.

I realize that the copyright holders will argue that these measures prevent mass distribution (piracy) of the protected works. However, time has shown that these measures do not deter those interested in piracy and are easily bypassed. Therefore, the only thing they actually achieve is to prevent honest customers from using the product as allowed by fair use.

One example I would like to provide is one regularly faced by educators. If a teacher would like to create a multimedia presentation that includes clips from movies, songs, or even text from an electronic book (an use that is clearly allowed under copyright law), they must first bypass copy protection measures on all of their sources... an act which requires the use of software or hardware that is illegal to produce, distribute, and use. HR 1201 resolves this discrepancy.

Thank you for your time and efforts on behalf of myself and all of those you represent.

Truly,

Joe Fry

Sell the router.

If it was sent via the postal service, at least, you're legally permitted to do whatever the hell you want with it :-) [1].

(If it was sent via UPS/FedEx/DHL/etc., YMMV; IANAL.)

You clearly own your letterbox, but do you own your Gmail inbox? It's on their server.

Not here. In my country, the post office considers mailboxes to be federal property. That might not be technically true, but it's a federal crime to deposit mailable matter without postage into a letterbox, which suggests I don't really own it.

It's hard to argue that you have a reasonable expectation of privacy when the sender sends the correspondence in plain text and with no prior knowledge of what systems it might pass through.

I send letters to my grandparents using unencrypted plaintext, too. Also I have no "prior knowledge of what systems it might pass through". Where would I find this information? I don't want to have to teach my grandfather how to do GPG with a pencil. He likes sudoku but I think that would be a bit much.

Further, a ruling against allowing Google to scan email to target advertising would have far reaching consequences: it would effectively ban the use of spam and virus filters by ISPs as well. I suspect a court would be very unlikely to make such a ruling.

Whether a message happens to have spam or a virus or a secret guacamole recipe shouldn't be the concern of anybody but me. If we're so enthusiastic about "network neutrality", why doesn't this apply to email as well? I give you packets, you deliver them, end of story.

Is that it costs them less than $10 to freeze or unfreeze your credit.

What I'm curious about is the certified mail
It doesn't prove anything about the sender, merely that it got received.

Taxes don't fund the USPS, its 100% privately funded.

From the USPS website:
"The Board of Governors approved a fiscal year 2008 appropriation request totaling $153.4 million. This annual request to Congress, as provided under current law, includes $83.5 million in reimbursement for free services the Postal Service is required to provide, including free mail for blind persons and for overseas voting. This appropriations request also includes reconciliation adjustments for previous years based upon final audited mail volumes, which are $24.9 million for fiscal year 2005 and $16 million for fiscal year 2006. In addition, the request includes $29 million for the latest annual installment from the Revenue Forgone Reform Act of 1993."
Sources:
http://www.usps.com/financials/#H7
http://www.usps.com/financials/_pdf/Appropriations-2008_Public.pdf

If you check out the 2006 Cost and Revenue Analysis you'll also note that they recieved at least $99 million in appropriations.
http://www.usps.com/financials/_pdf/fy06cra.pdf

Sure sounds like they are recieving taxpayer funding to me.

Taxes don't fund the USPS, its 100% privately funded.

From the USPS website:
"The Board of Governors approved a fiscal year 2008 appropriation request totaling $153.4 million. This annual request to Congress, as provided under current law, includes $83.5 million in reimbursement for free services the Postal Service is required to provide, including free mail for blind persons and for overseas voting. This appropriations request also includes reconciliation adjustments for previous years based upon final audited mail volumes, which are $24.9 million for fiscal year 2005 and $16 million for fiscal year 2006. In addition, the request includes $29 million for the latest annual installment from the Revenue Forgone Reform Act of 1993."
Sources:
http://www.usps.com/financials/#H7
http://www.usps.com/financials/_pdf/Appropriations-2008_Public.pdf

If you check out the 2006 Cost and Revenue Analysis you'll also note that they recieved at least $99 million in appropriations.
http://www.usps.com/financials/_pdf/fy06cra.pdf

Sure sounds like they are recieving taxpayer funding to me.

Taxes don't fund the USPS, its 100% privately funded.

From the USPS website:
"The Board of Governors approved a fiscal year 2008 appropriation request totaling $153.4 million. This annual request to Congress, as provided under current law, includes $83.5 million in reimbursement for free services the Postal Service is required to provide, including free mail for blind persons and for overseas voting. This appropriations request also includes reconciliation adjustments for previous years based upon final audited mail volumes, which are $24.9 million for fiscal year 2005 and $16 million for fiscal year 2006. In addition, the request includes $29 million for the latest annual installment from the Revenue Forgone Reform Act of 1993."
Sources:
http://www.usps.com/financials/#H7
http://www.usps.com/financials/_pdf/Appropriations-2008_Public.pdf

If you check out the 2006 Cost and Revenue Analysis you'll also note that they recieved at least $99 million in appropriations.
http://www.usps.com/financials/_pdf/fy06cra.pdf

Sure sounds like they are recieving taxpayer funding to me.

Just found out a couple of days ago for certain, yes the postal service IS doing it. They have access to government computers do they not?

http://www.usps.com/purchasing/purchasingpubs/pubsmenu.htm

I know that doesn't say they have to do it, but they do, I found out from a friend of a friend. As for proving without hear say? I don't know, I can find the form saying all government employees who access a government computer have to do it. I challenge you to find the exemption.

Uhm, no. You need to do your homework.

FACT: your mailbox is NOT your property! FACT: The US Postal Service has the exclusive right to take/put mail in all mailboxes.

"Mailboxes are considered federal property, and federal law (Title 18, United States Code, Section 1705), makes it a crime to vandalize them (or to injure, deface or destroy any mail deposited in them)."

"Except as excluded by 3.1.2, every letterbox or other receptacle intended or used for the receipt or delivery of mail on any city delivery route, rural delivery route, highway contract route, or other mail route is designated an authorized depository for mail within the meaning of 18 USC 1702, 1705, 1708, and 1725."

http://www.usps.com/postalinspectors/tipvandl.htm
http://pe.usps.gov/text/dmm300/508.htm