Slashdot Mirror


USPS Losing Battle Against the E-mail Age

An anonymous reader writes "An article in the NY Times explains how the United States Postal Service is in dire financial straits, and will need emergency action from Congress to forestall a shutdown later this year. Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe said simply, 'If Congress doesn't act, we will default.' Labor agreements prohibiting layoffs are preventing one avenue for reducing costs, and laws forbidding postage rates from surpassing inflation rates keep income down. On top of that, the proliferation of e-mail and online bill-paying services have contributed to a 22% reduction in snail-mail volume since 2006. They're currently hoping for legislation that would relax their economic requirements and considering an end to Saturday delivery."

734 comments

  1. Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Lieutenant_Dan · · Score: 5, Funny

    All /. posters should commit to mail their comments for one week to make up the difference.

    Soulskill will provide the mailing address shortly. To verify your identity, you will have to mail your username/password, and our army of volunteers will use a special login form to verify your identity.
    This system is so brilliant, I may even patent it.

    --
    Wearing pants should always be optional.
  2. Battle? by Mensa+Babe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For at least 15 years I've been hearing that various postal services all over the world are "losing battle against e-mail age" while in fact that scary "e-mail age" (or Internet age, as I would call it) should be the best thing they should hope could possible happen. Never before in human history we were buying so many goods from remote locations all over the world to be delivered by ... postal services! And now they want an end to Saturday delivery? They should start Sunday delivery. They missed the opportunity to start the biggest online payment system in the world so they should at least focus on being the best at delivering good bought on the Internet, not being worse still.

    The "proliferation of e-mail and online bill-paying services" should have been started by USPS because they already had the infrastructure to do that and the client base. If back in the nineties everyone paying bills at USPS were told that they could do the same faster, cheaper and more conveniently at USPSpal.com then people would do that. The problem is not that the world is not friendly to postal services but that they don't want to change. They missed the train and now they want our help to survive. This has never worked in the long term before.

    --
    Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
    1. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what I was thinking! Not only do they get to do all the normal mail, but all those ebay items sent back a forth! If cheap long distance communication was to make it go down then it should have went down when phones became a house hold item, but you can't send packages over the phone.

      If they are loosing money then there is something else at work taking it from them.

    2. Re:Battle? by EdZ · · Score: 1

      The problem is, letters are easy and cheap to deliver. Hell, they can even be sorted and router automatically almost end-to-end. Parcels, however, cannot. Every bit of handling, sorting, etc is done pretty much by hand (with the possible exception of tracking). Normally, high volumes of high-margin mail would subsidise parcel rates, but this is no longer the case, hence the current problem.

    3. Re:Battle? by itsdapead · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Never before in human history we were buying so many goods from remote locations all over the world to be delivered by ... postal services!

      Except that the nationalized postal services face a lot of competition from private courier firms who aren't hamstrung with government requirements to provide a universal service and can cherry-pick the best routes.

      That's certainly the situation in the UK: the postal service is obliged to charge a ridiculously low price for the basic first-class letter, and to deliver & collect them from right out in the sticks, but has long since lost ts monopoly on postal deliveries, so faces lots of competition for lucrative business deliveries around major cities. They mainly survive by delivering vast quantities of junk mail.

      If you want a universal postal service you have two choices: give 'em a monopoly to make up for the universal service requirement, or just accept that they won't be profitable and that you are going to have to put money in and get a service out. Then tackle the remaining problems with inertia and unions head on, instead of messing about with ideology-based pseudo-free-market kludges in the vain hope that the invisible hand will make it all better.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    4. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      FedEx and UPS seem to have pretty much fully automated the processing and routing of parcels pretty much end-to-end.

    5. Re:Battle? by Kjella · · Score: 2

      Ups and downs of being a regulated business, if you are then generally you don't get to do everything else because of illegal cross-subsidies. You'd have to get a change of mandate and long before that was over they'd be too late to the party. As for packages, there's competition on those as far as I know (FedEx, UPC being a few) so the most profitable areas are served by the lowest bidder, they can't just roll out everywhere without considering cost..

      Personally, yes I do buy quite a few things online and I'm picking up a package today. But I also remember the world before e-mail and various other e-forms and e-services you get now. There were a *lot* of letters going, paperwork here and there. More and more are now offering me electronic bills, I would say 95% of what I get in my physical mailbox today is advertising. Particularly since packages don't fit. It's getting to that level that I'd be happy to not have mail delivery at all, getting any useful letters is so rare I could pick them up at the post office, like the parcels.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that the nationalized postal services face a lot of competition from private courier firms who aren't hamstrung with government requirements to provide a universal service and can cherry-pick the best routes.

      This. Many formerly-government-operated postal service are forced to serve everybody. Whereas the new competition can cherry-pick, e.g. in Germany they only deliver high-margin parcels/packages, don't offer pickup services if you weren't at home or only deliver letters in large cities.

      That's what you get when you privatise services that shouldn't be private; well that and kickbacks for the corrupt politicians involved of course.

    7. Re:Battle? by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is the US Paradox, which has always plagued the US. High Population Low Population Density. This makes any infrastructure policy in the United States very expensive and difficult to implement.

      Other countries have higher density that makes serving a large percentage easy and that gains outweighs those few outlying people.
      Countries with Low Density and Low population is still easier just because there isn't so many end points that you need to go to. And a lower population is easier to come to an agreement if they want it or not, and if they are willing to pay extra taxes or not.

      The US in terms of geography is the 3rd/4th largest country (Roughly the same size a China), Covering almost every geographical condition. Rain Forests, Desserts, Mountains....

      USPS is probably crossing or have crossed the sustainable line of demand needed to keep USPS going.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    8. Re:Battle? by andymadigan · · Score: 1

      Do you have any data to show what parts of the U.S. are not reached by FedEx or UPS (separately or together)?. As far as I know, aside from P.O. boxes (which are a USPS product for the most part) you can mail to any address on FedEx (or UPS) that you can with USPS, that should lose tons of money because they don't get to make up for it with 5lbs of junk mail per month.

      --
      The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
    9. Re:Battle? by halowolf · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well the USPS should come to Australia and see what Australia Post is doing. They saw the writing on the wall, and took steps to adapt to the internet age and keep themselves relevant by doing all they can to get themselves into the delivery chain for the influx of packages being sent to compensate for the decline in letters et all. Plus they offer so many services (government and private) to get people into their stores.

      The only real problem is that this can lead to a little more junk mail as businesses pay Australia Post to deliver their junk instead of private contractors.

    10. Re:Battle? by sarhjinian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you want a universal postal service you have two choices: give 'em a monopoly to make up for the universal service requirement, or just accept that they won't be profitable and that you are going to have to put money in and get a service out.

      This is a good point. It also explains why health care, tax gathering and education---especially, but not solely, in the United States---are similarly expensive clusterfucks.

      Either fund and administrate them adequately, or don't bother at all. Half-assing it for ideological and/or penny-pinching reasons results in the worst of both worlds.

      --
      --srj/mmv
    11. Re:Battle? by sarhjinian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This would be the case were Canada's postal service not working reasonably well, despite Canada being as problematic in terms of population distribution.

      The difference is that the Canadian postal service is allowed to run more or less autonomously, whereas the USPS is subject to constant congressional meddling. It's the American paradox: decry government involvement and authority in general, but allow four or five hundred cooks in the kitchen at all times.

      --
      --srj/mmv
    12. Re:Battle? by AnonGCB · · Score: 2

      Not going to address the free market bashing because that would end unproductively, but you should be aware that, at least in the USA, due to Lysander Spooner kicking the USPS' ass, they technically have a monopoly on delivering mail, and UPS, fedex etc only get by by paying USPS a rather large fee, and classify their services are specialty delivery services.

      --
      http://CryoLANparty.com/ A lan I'm staff on!
    13. Re:Battle? by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 1

      USPS has a government-granted monopoly over first class mail. They have no such monopoly over package delivery, and their whole infrastructure is built around the idea that most of what they deliver is letters. Compare the size of a mail truck to the trucks used by UPS or FedEx. They just aren't set up for that kind of work, and they haven't adapted to it.

    14. Re:Battle? by BStroms · · Score: 1

      that should lose tons of money because they don't get to make up for it with 5lbs of junk mail per month.

      If they want new revenue, they should offer a service where you can pay to not receive any mail that isn't addressed to people living at the address. I can guarantee you I'd pay more to never have flyers, local news, and coupon booklets stuffed into my mailbox addressed to 'Current Resident' than they'd be losing in my share of the revenue. It'd be better for the environment too with less wasted paper.

    15. Re:Battle? by Dog-Cow · · Score: 2

      The Australian Post sometimes delivers private contractors instead of junk?

      Where do I sign up?

    16. Re:Battle? by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Which part of the consitution do you think they should use claim that the Federal Government has been granted powers to do such things?

    17. Re:Battle? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      It's the American paradox: decry government involvement and authority in general, but allow four or five hundred cooks in the kitchen at all times.

      The fraction of Americans "decrying government involvement and authority in general" aren't the same as the fraction that wants to "allow four or five hundred cooks in the kitchen at all times".

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    18. Re:Battle? by The+Second+Horseman · · Score: 2

      Small-government in the US these days means privatizing the profit, but socializing the cost and risk.

    19. Re:Battle? by nschubach · · Score: 3, Informative

      Put a 3x5 note card on your mailbox door that says "No Advo please". I put a note on my box stating something along the lines of "No Current Resident mail or mail not addressed to ____ please" and the mail person replaced it with a "No Advo" symbol (like the No Smoking signs, but with Advo crossed off.)

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    20. Re:Battle? by sarhjinian · · Score: 2

      Then those people should be pushing for a downsizing of Congress and the Senate, not the administrative parts of government that actually get work done.

      As it stands right now, you're electing people on the idea that they won't meddle or pander to local interests, except that, when push comes to shove, people want their representatives to meddle when it's something they feel is valuable. This gets you the worst of all worlds: representatives who are too quick to gut programs that are holistically good, but ensure their own local pork. It also gets you systems that are compromised by design.

      Recall the famous picture of the Tea Partier holding up a "Keep your government hands off my Medicare" sign.

      --
      --srj/mmv
    21. Re:Battle? by Stormthirst · · Score: 0, Troll

      Is that because the political parties (read: Republicans) are refusing to fund the upgrades necessary to bring the USPS into relevance?

    22. Re:Battle? by TClevenger · · Score: 1

      I don't have numbers, but I have had FedEx Ground packages "Tendered to USPS for delivery" according to the tracking.

    23. Re:Battle? by compro01 · · Score: 1

      Canada doesn't have quite as much of a density problem. We have huge swaths of completely empty. 90% of the population is in a 100 mile band from the US border. And out of that 10%, 5% is Edmonton and Calgary.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    24. Re:Battle? by hedwards · · Score: 2

      I'd mod you up if I hadn't already posted. The budge problems could easily be fixed if the USPS would do what USPS and Fed Ex do in terms of charging something that reflects the amount of service provided. As it stands I could go on vacation in Hawaii and mail a first class envelope to Maine for the same cost as what I pay right now to mail that same envelope across town.

      And it gets even worse in cases where the USPS has to deliver the mail by helicopter or by horse because somebody chose to live in a place that can't receive mail by the normal means. Meaning that one delivery by horse or helicopter can easily wipe out the proceeds from thousands of other letters.

    25. Re:Battle? by repetty · · Score: 2

      The problem is, letters are easy and cheap to deliver.

      You must have grown up in a family of postal carriers.

      Transporting tangible, physical objects hundreds or thousands of miles away is not cheap. Well, maybe compared to 50- or 100-years ago it's less expensive.

      This problem is a GOOD THING.

    26. Re:Battle? by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 2

      you can mail to any address on FedEx (or UPS) that you can with USPS

      You can, but in a large amount (square mile-wise, not necessarily percentage of parcel wise) of the country, FedEx or UPS will hand the parcel over to the local USPS for final delivery.

      Honestly, love or hate the USPS, anyone who's spent a year working for FedEx or UPS can tell you that neither is even remotely close to being realistically set up to replace it, much less profitably.

    27. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hence, the quintessential inefficient government. If USPS was a private company they would have altered their business model and flourished, or gone under. But since USPS is a government agency it does nothing, goes bankrupt, and then asks for taxpayer dollars to help

    28. Re:Battle? by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Your sig would be so much more convincing if you could spell superior right... or were you being ironic? If so I would suggest making it just a little more obvious, I would suggest "souperior".

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    29. Re:Battle? by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      Do you have any data to show what parts of the U.S. are not reached by FedEx or UPS (separately or together)?.

      That's "premium" packages and document services which offer a reasonable profit margin.

      National postal services are typically obliged to make daily deliveries and collections of everyday letters and small packages for the regular cost of a stamp, which is a rather different proposition.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    30. Re:Battle? by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      Junk in a box.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    31. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'd be surprised. There is still a lot of manual sorting going on in all except for the incredibly large hubs. That's not to say it's not profitable to manually sort things (obviously it is).

    32. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your argument is stupid: consider Australia...our postal service is great, still cheap, and very well regarded.

    33. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pls mod parent up.

      The US Mail has ancient legal protections not afforded to email. I LIKE the US Post Office. It is one of the few government services I have never objected to and that has done a service for this country. I like paper documents, esp when someone "loses" a payment or letter; I have proof of delivery, a time-stamped envelope and etc.

      I'm an online person for many years, but I'd be very unhappy if the USPS was shut down.

    34. Re:Battle? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      No. It's more likely that the labor unions were busy resistng any form of automation or change. Remember, the savings that is used to justify ny changes evaporates when workers can't be reassigned or laid off.

    35. Re:Battle? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      I've always wondered why the USPS didn't set up an email system that had a box for each street address, and have people get passwords by email...so you could confirm your address by possession of such an email address.

      Or even normal person validation? Perhaps I want to confirm the person I'm conversing with halfway across the country really exists? Well, why don't I give him an email address, and he can go to a kiosk at the post office, hold up his driver's license, have a picture taken, punch in my email, and it will send me a digitally signed picture.

      Or, hell, how about an escrow service? Make it where people can send a package to a post office somewhere, and to pick it up, the recipient has to pay $X to the post office, which then sticks a check to the sender in the mail. (This is how I used to imagine COD worked when I was a kid, before finding out it basically doesn't exist.)

      The fact that there are post offices everywhere gets them in on the ground floor of all sorts of services that are not actually commercially viable for anyone else.

      And, as you pointed out, they could have done electronic bill payment before anyone accepted it, simply by printing out a money order each month and delivering it with the mail. They could have done it without bank support or biller support, back in 1980 or whenever people started getting credit cards.

      There's lots of stuff USPS could get into, and doesn't. This is because there are laws about what it can and can't do...and no one seems to care it is collapsing, because most of the things it does aren't useful, and the one part that is useful (rural delivery to the entire country) is being overused by its competitors.

      Look, we need to accept that the post office cannot make enough to keep running doing what it's doing, and either let it do more, or subsides it. (No, letting third parties operate it is not a solution.)

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    36. Re:Battle? by HiThere · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But the USPS is constitutionally mandated. It'll be interesting to see how they deal with that. My expectation is that they'll ignore it, and let the system collapse, but I'd only give that about a 60% probability, perhaps slightly lower.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    37. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either fund and administrate them adequately, or don't bother at all.

      The problem is that the government does not fund anything at all. They simply force taxpayers to fund it. When they bail out (I believe they will) USPS, they will be doing so at your expense, not the government's.

      This is the problem with ALL government run programs. There is no incentive to be efficient and profitable, all they do is if the business is failing is to take more from taxpayer and keep throwing good money after bad. Only governments can have companies like Amtrak and the USPS loosing money for 40 years. Imagine how far we could have gone if we were not dragging this dead horse for decades.

      Saving USPS from email is akin to government stepping in and saving ice making companies from refrigerators. We now have better ways of communicating, and just keeping a company for the sake of keeping it is just a waste. Free market would get rid of it by bankruptcy. For those of you claiming a postal service is essential, and we could not live without one, competitors like FEDEX and UPS could easily and more efficiently pick up the tab. The only reason they don't do it today is because the USPS enjoys a legal monopoly granted specifically because private businesses were offering cheaper alternatives profitably.

    38. Re:Battle? by umghhh · · Score: 1

      this is funny DHL is sorting their parcels automatically and I believe they are profitable as is Deutsche Post. They still missed the online payment services but had enough cash to open Post Bank. They closed almost all offices in Germany and replaced them with 'frenchized' operations, stopped delivery twice a day and on sundays and they hire sub-contractors for wages that are a shame to deliver their stuff but they are profitable. /Jacek

    39. Re:Battle? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      No shit, and the asshats did that to me. I ordered something using UPS, and UPS handed it over to USPS to deliver to my street address.

      I don't have a mailbox. I have a PO box for postal mail.

      And, apparently, USPS won't deliver any mail without a mailbox (Not even packages that wouldn't fit in said mailbox), so it went back to the post office, within ten feet of my post office box, and bounced all the way back to the sender.

      Look, you idiots writing shipping systems. You already know that you have to be willing to ship using the USPS for post office boxes, and you're smart enough to use that.

      Well, you're going to have to start fucking providing the reverse option, or at least tell people you're going to use the USPS for the last mile. Because some of us live at places that the USPS won't deliver to, you goddamn idiots. You can't just transparently switch over to them without warning us.

      I've gotten around the problem by switching my address to my PO box, at least for places where that's free or the same cost. That actually costs the sender more money, they use the post office the entire way, but I'm forced to do that until idiots figure out that you can't just randomly hand things to the post office and assume every street address can get mail.

      When I went to speak to the post office about this idiocy (And I don't want to imply is is their fault that people hand them undeliverable packages, they were just the only people I could easily talk to.), they said I could cheat and use an invalid address that had my PO box on the second line of the address, and sometimes the mail carrier, when they noticed that I didn't have a mailbox, would redirect the mail there. Yeah, I don't do 'sometimes' delivery of my packages, and that hack only works because my PO and street are in the same zip.

      Or I could buy a mailbox...but I don't want a mailbox. I don't want to get mail at my mailbox. I pay for a damn post office box, and drive over there every day for the privilege of not having to worry about people stealing my mail from my mailbox. (Packages from FedEx and UPS, OTOH, get left out of sight in my carport. Whereas I suspect packages delivered by USPS would get left at my mailbox.)

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    40. Re:Battle? by n7ytd · · Score: 1

      This shouldn't be up to any political party. The USPS is supposed to operate as an independent agency, separate from all three branches of the federal government.

      I'm curious as to how this will play out. It seems to me that pushing their hand to the point of actually cutting back on services might backfire on the USPS. Many people will quickly realize that their lives would go on just fine without a steady stream of junk mail arriving daily to their homes.

      According to this article (accuracy unknown), the postal service has actually been profitable for the last several years:

      Under federal law, only the Postal Service can handle or charge postage for handling letters. Despite this virtual monopoly worth some $45 billion a year, the law does not require that the Postal Service make a profit -- only break even. Still, the US Postal Service has averaged a profit of over $1 billion per year in each of the last five years. Yet, Postal Service officials argue that they must continue to raise postage at regular intervals in order make up for the increased use of email.

    41. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about the "cherry-pick the best routes" part of that. As far as I know FedEx/UPS/DHL will deliver to and pick up from ANY address (at least in the US). Usually home pick-up / delivery is more expensive but justifiably so since there is typically smaller volume going to any individual home/neighborhood compared to the volume going to a business in a business park.

    42. Re:Battle? by spire3661 · · Score: 2

      A US mailman would laugh merrily as he continued to stuff your box full of shit you didnt ask for. I begged my mailman to stop putting shit not purely addressed to me in my mailbox. He quite plainly said that they will not comply in any way and that its this junk mail that feeds his family. And they wonder why people dont leave them nice cards and money at Christmas anymore...

      --
      Good-bye
    43. Re:Battle? by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      I HATE this. The USPS should not be looked at in a profit:loss manner. Regular, steady, reliable postal service is a mark of an advanced society. I whole-heartedly support the ability to send a standard letter at a standard rate to any US address because we have to service every address ANYWAYS. The cost of each individual piece is irrelevant when you are servicing every single address. The important part of the whole system is that we can reach any single address easily and that every address is serviced in some manner.

      --
      Good-bye
    44. Re:Battle? by nschubach · · Score: 1

      A US mailman would laugh merrily as he continued to stuff your box full of shit you didnt ask for.

      I live in the US and my mail-person did, in-fact, cut back drastically on the amount of junk I got.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    45. Re:Battle? by Stormthirst · · Score: 1

      I did the same thing in the UK and the postal service and free newspapers were very respectful of it. Occasionally I'd get the odd free newspaper, but that's ok it's kinda handy to have the odd paper to stuff things with, or put on the kitchen floor after I mopped it.

    46. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its not e-mail, or the internet that is killing the USPO, its the Unions.

    47. Re:Battle? by ArsonSmith · · Score: 2

      Funny, big government in the US these days means the same thing.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    48. Re:Battle? by olau · · Score: 1

      The grass is always greener somewhere else. Get over it. :)

    49. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure that's it, maybe due to bad pricing and high loss rate? For instance, in our area, USPS refuses to deliver to our door. (we either need to put a mailbox by the closest "major" road which is approx 1.5 miles away, or pick up at the post office)

      UPS and FEDEX both deliver AND pickup to our front door...

      If it's a purely density issue why do UPS and FEDEX not have an issue with it?

    50. Re:Battle? by Stormthirst · · Score: 1

      What - like the banks?

      The only reason they can't change their model is because the government has mandated it that way. With more autonomy it might be a different story.

    51. Re:Battle? by Sleepy · · Score: 1

      Your post contains a number of factual errors. I'm not sure if your post was intended to be deliberately misleading, or just generate buzz (much of it in the form of corrections). Nearly every line in your post..

      >"For at least 15 years I've been hearing that various postal services all over the world are "losing battle against e-mail age" while in fact that scary "e-mail age" (or Internet age, as I would call it) should be the best thing they should hope could possible happen.

      Not sure what your point was here. Was it to convey that USPS etc somehow "are not" losing the communication battle, or that this was not long-ago predicted? Either are untrue.

      That we are in the "email age" being a good thing is something I would agree with... but I don't see how it follows what came before in your statement. Email is good for society, but bad for the USPS.

      >Never before in human history we were buying so many goods from remote locations all over the world to be delivered by ... postal services! And now they want an end to Saturday delivery?

      In the US, most goods purchased online are delivered by UPS, FedEx, and private freight. USPS carries some of that market segment, but it is small by comparison. Please do not put all of these carriers in a large pot, stir, and then strongly imply it has something to do with USPS. It's irreverent, actually.

      >They should start Sunday delivery. ... and you should work for USPS, for free. Oh wait, even that would not remedy the financial issues.

      >They missed the opportunity to start the biggest online payment system in the world so they should at least focus on being the best at delivering good bought on the Internet, not being worse still.

      You do not understand what the USPS -is-.
      USPS is a particular MODE of communication - shipping paper envelopes and some boxes. This is what Congress specifies in their charter (more or less).
      USPS does not have a mandate to enter into competition with PayPal and Mastercard/Visa and therefore did not fail any opportunities to innovate.

      >They [USPS] missed the train and now they want our help to survive.
      No, they did not miss the train. Congress kept USPS on a short leash, even though USPS is a quasi public/private company. USPS could -never- have innovated ahead of UPS/FedEx, nor could it have even mimicked innovations by private shipping.

      For example, USPS must deliver *everywhere* in the mainland USA, no matter how remote. UPS and FedEx can simply choose not to serve communities where it is not cost-effective.

      If it costs more fuel to deliver letters from Miami, FL to Boulder, CO then tough shit the USPS must still charge the same flat rate. UPS and FedEx can price accordingly to cost, and they can charge more for Saturday delivery also.

      USPS was never allowed to innovate much with package tracking, and as a result people simply do not TRUST them with online purchases. I never have.

      USPS has to figure out where a package is going, MULTIPLE times, with no chance for error correction or detection, rerouting, or any of that. A package sent to my work was returned before it ever got here as "no such person at address". Some USPS person simply got confused it was a business address with a "attn: [my name here]" placed below the company name and above the street address. No delivery attempt was even made (though it came to the right town); No one here refused the mail at the office.

      This would be no problem if the package were UPS/FedEx, and someone would sign for it... or the carrier would call the shipper or receiver phone number for instructions.

      USPS was doomed for a long time.. unfortunate that those who consider USPS to be "socialism" we should not have, they fought against making USPS self-sufficient because quite simply they wanted a hole dug so deep that USPS would perish. Personally I think USPS is being forced to dig a big hole so that conservatives can force it to raid the pension fund, the way many p

    52. Re:Battle? by swalve · · Score: 1

      They have an operating profit, but they have to prefund some retirement program with those profits (and more). So while they make money at their job, they have lots of bills to pay. All that needs to happen is for congress to relax the prefunding a little bit and everything will be ok.

    53. Re:Battle? by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

      I think in the specific case of the USPS they are barred by Congress to enter a lot of markets. Just like they're not allowed to raise their prices by more than inflation.
      It means their hands are tied.

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    54. Re:Battle? by jafac · · Score: 1

      Irony Alert: Government USPS service being killed due to efficient Internet delivery service, invented by US Government.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    55. Re:Battle? by AntiNazi · · Score: 1

      That is an interesting thing to suspect. I have never had nor seen anyone on any street in my neighborhood have a usps package left on the curb at their mailbox. Mine are always left between the screen door and front door if small enough, or outside the screen door on the top step if not.

      Maybe it is up the mail carrier but I have never seen that. When I have gotten packages at apartments they have never left them at the mailboxes either, always inside the building just outside my units door or at the complexes concierge if one exists.

    56. Re:Battle? by paiute · · Score: 1

      Which part of the consitution do you think they should use claim that the Federal Government has been granted powers to do such things?

      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".
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Clause

      --
      If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    57. Re:Battle? by izomiac · · Score: 1

      Except that the nationalized postal services face a lot of competition from private courier firms who aren't hamstrung with government requirements to provide a universal service and can cherry-pick the best routes.

      How are they cherry-picking? I've never seen a major courier refuse to deliver a package to a rural destination, even if that entailed a special 90 minute trip for the driver. There's no way that's profitable at ~$5 per package, yet they do it so they have universal coverage. (Not including the times the driver drops packages off at a person's place of work to avoid said trip.) While I could see couriers doing reduced frequency of delivery to unprofitable routes, they all want to deliver for companies like Amazon whom I'm sure demands they deliver everywhere.

    58. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. no they have not. The processing of parcels is very labor intensive as UPS and I would imagine FedEx as well. The loading, unloading, inbound scans picking up and moving parcels to their proper queues. outbound scans are all manual. //the computer system does of course track everything and tell people what to do, but there are not magic robots taking over.

    59. Re:Battle? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      The problem is, letters are easy and cheap to deliver. Hell, they can even be sorted and router automatically almost end-to-end. Parcels, however, cannot. Every bit of handling, sorting, etc is done pretty much by hand (with the possible exception of tracking). Normally, high volumes of high-margin mail would subsidise parcel rates, but this is no longer the case, hence the current problem.

      Not true - the front and backed (pickup and deliver) are labor intensive but the actual transit is pretty well automated - FedEx/UPS use very sophisticated software and conveyors to automatically route packages from one plane to the next. They even do it for the USPS - who no longer fly their own planes. 3D barcodes contain the needed information and are scanned automatically. Packages are weighed and measured to know how hard and where to push them off one belt to the next. humans only need to handle the problems like a broke package or one that falls off the belt by accident.

      USPS real problems are that we have this quaint notion that it should cost the same to send a letter no matter what it costs to deliver it; people want a local post office so Congress keeps them open (that is changing); and bulk mail is being replaced by email an online catalogues. As result they have high costs and lowering revenues to deal with.

      Personally, I see the USPS as a good fit for the last mile pickup and delivery of residential packages for FedEx/UPS/DHL et.al. - they have a regular enough load to make daily trips worth while - unlike package delivery companies that might have to make 3 costly trips to deliver to a home. If they could come up with a cost effective model for getting packages to the USPS it could save the USPS and reduce costs for the package delivery firms as well.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    60. Re:Battle? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      If they were supposed to carry it up to my door, then why the hell didn't they do that despite me lacking a mailbox?

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    61. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US in terms of geography is the 3rd/4th largest country (Roughly the same size a China), Covering almost every geographical condition. Rain Forests, Desserts, Mountains....

      Yum! I love the American Desserts. Delicous!

    62. Re:Battle? by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      And exactly how does that cover creating an online billing service?

    63. Re:Battle? by wondafucka · · Score: 1

      For at least 15 years I've been hearing that various postal services all over the world are "losing battle against e-mail age" while in fact that scary "e-mail age" (or Internet age, as I would call it) should be the best thing they should hope could possible happen. Never before in human history we were buying so many goods from remote locations all over the world to be delivered by ... postal services! And now they want an end to Saturday delivery? They should start Sunday delivery. They missed the opportunity to start the biggest online payment system in the world so they should at least focus on being the best at delivering good bought on the Internet, not being worse still.

      The "proliferation of e-mail and online bill-paying services" should have been started by USPS because they already had the infrastructure to do that and the client base. If back in the nineties everyone paying bills at USPS were told that they could do the same faster, cheaper and more conveniently at USPSpal.com then people would do that. The problem is not that the world is not friendly to postal services but that they don't want to change. They missed the train and now they want our help to survive. This has never worked in the long term before.

      Trust me, you don't want the post office to have had any input on the design of the internet.

    64. Re:Battle? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The fraction of Americans "decrying government involvement and authority in general" aren't the same as the fraction that wants to "allow four or five hundred cooks in the kitchen at all times".

      Wrong. The Republicans are controlling Congress right now, and constantly whine about government involvement. What have they done to make the USPS more autonomous? Nothing. Basically, the Republicans play their constituents for fools (which is easy, because they are fools); they decry government regulation to get votes and popularity, but when they're in power they pass all kinds of regulations that benefit their big-business buddies and keep smaller competitors out of the way. Plus they constantly expand the size of the military-industrial complex, while simultaneously advocating for smaller government. The Republican voters are so ridiculously stupid that they don't see this.

      The Democrat voters aren't any better. They elect a guy with no experience because he promises hope and change, and then when he gets in and keeps following the policies of the guy before him that they all hated and decried, they come up with any excuse they can to justify their vote for him and convince themselves that he's really as great as they thought he was.

    65. Re:Battle? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      I should have worded that better, I seem to have implied that the USPS isn't a community service. We'd be missing out on a lot without the USPS. Certified and registered mail are something that one doesn't think about until one needs to get a collection agency off their back. And for some things a postmark from the USPS is the only thing that counts.

      And even after the recent price hikes, it's still cheaper for many services than UPS or Fed Ex is.

    66. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is not Constitutionally mandated... Congress is given the power to create the postal service by the constitution, not the obligation. But of course, why would they ever not do something they had the power to?

    67. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Irony Alert: Government USPS service being killed due to efficient Internet delivery service, invented by US Government.

      This is not irony.

    68. Re:Battle? by redback · · Score: 1

      In Australia, they can be charged with littering for that.

    69. Re:Battle? by n7ytd · · Score: 1

      Yes. In my original post, I wasn't very clear. I said these decisions shouldn't be up to any political party, but the reality is that the USPS seems to be in a no-win situation; congress seems happy to limit their ability to make a profit, but also seems happy to dictate how to spend revenues.

    70. Re:Battle? by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      > That's certainly the situation in the UK: the postal service is obliged to charge a ridiculously low price for the basic first-class letter, and to deliver & collect them from right out in the sticks, but has long since lost ts monopoly on postal deliveries, so faces lots of competition for lucrative business deliveries around major cities. They mainly survive by delivering vast quantities of junk mail.

      So.... the sooner the government sponsored postal service goes out of business, the sooner the private companies will have to shoulder their part of the burden, the sooner people will pay the real cost of a first class letter, and the sooner companies will have to pay the real (hopefully non-profitable) cost of junk mail?

      And this is a bad thing?

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    71. Re:Battle? by Ritchie70 · · Score: 1

      There is actually a UPS service that is exactly what you describe. UPS gets it to the local post office, the USPS takes it the last couple miles.

      Or maybe it's FedEx? Or DHL? I really don't remember but they do it with one of them.

      --
      The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
    72. Re:Battle? by Ritchie70 · · Score: 1

      I would guess that they aren't allowed to deliver mail if you don't have a (USPS approved) mailbox, no doubt due to some regulation intended to force people to have mailboxes so postal carriers have somewhere to put their mail instead of strewing envelopes around their property.

      Unfortunately, that regulation probably applies whether the item in question would actually fit in said mailbox or not.

      --
      The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
    73. Re:Battle? by Ritchie70 · · Score: 1

      Don't discount the cost of figuring out the correct postage.

      If a letter from HI to ME cost more than a cross-town letter then the post offices would be filled up with old ladies asking the rate for every single thing they sent.

      Meanwhile the rest of us would make a high guess, slap too many stamps on, and get on with our lives.

      --
      The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
    74. Re:Battle? by Ritchie70 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure where you got the idea that COD doesn't exist. I haven't seen it used since I was a kid - everyone has credit cards now, but it does appear to at least theoretically still exist.

      Maybe your local PO doesn't want to deal with it?

      http://faq.usps.com/eCustomer/iq/usps/request.do?create=kb:USPSFAQ&view()=c%5Bc_usps6519%5D&varset(source)=sourceType:embedded

      --
      The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
    75. Re:Battle? by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Injecting logic into an emotional argument is always a loser.

      The private carriers provide universal coverage, with smaller volume, and at roughly the same price points for comparable shipment types. In fact, they provide some guarantees for certain shipments that national carriers are simply not able to provide at any price.

      However, the fact that they can do so and remain profitable is irrelevant to those who think that allowing them to deliver millions of letters would equal the end of civilization.

    76. Re:Battle? by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      I'd actually prefer that the number of elected officials increase, with a proportionate (actually, much more than proportionate) decrease in salary paid to each.

      Make them accountable to a smaller group of people, and you increase accountability as a whole. Decrease their salary to the average hourly wage in the district they represent, and you might not have the criminal class that currently dominates elections. Oh, and they shouldn't get any benefits after leaving office. Elected positions should never be a career option.

    77. Re:Battle? by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/world_population.htm

      The US and Australia are not analogous in population density. Not. Even. Close.

    78. Re:Battle? by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Actually, the reference was to the Post Office establishing email and online bill-paying services, not doing what they do now.

    79. Re:Battle? by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      With more autonomy they'd be more like a dreaded private entity, and it would be the end of civilization as we know it. I guess, anyway.

      Or maybe an autonomous, for-profit entity is alright as long as it has " United States" in the title, regardless of whether it acts exactly like a private entity. It's hard to tell what people really want and what they really object to. Usually some window dressing makes everything alright, so the title and affiliation would probably mollify those who are aghast at the thought of private companies doing anything.

      It's not like the US government is above bailing out private entities any more, and that's really the only difference.

    80. Re:Battle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It should be pointed out that United Parcel Service is as unionized as the US Postal Service.

    81. Re:Battle? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      It is population and density. UPS and FEDEX don't have an issue because their volume is low enough to cover those stragglers.
      USPS delivers crap to us nearly every day. UPS and FEDEX only delivers goods we really request. And normally We pay for it to be delivered to Us.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    82. Re:Battle? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Canada doesn't have close to the population the US does. it is Population and Density. Canada has Low Population and a Low Density. The US has a High Population and a Low Density. It is the double whammy of issues. Canada only had the Low Density problem

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    83. Re:Battle? by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      There's no way that's profitable at ~$5 per package.

      ...and yet the USPS is obliged to make the same trip for a 44 cent letter sent from Hawaii - and to collect mail from all areas without appointment.

      Plus, several other posters have pointed out that these firms sometimes hand packages for remote areas over to USPS anyway.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    84. Re:Battle? by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      So.... the sooner the government sponsored postal service goes out of business, the sooner the private companies will have to shoulder their part of the burden,

      Yeah, just like they've fallen over themselves to roll out high speed fiber broadband to the boondocks. I'm sure they'll offer really competitive rates for postage in areas where they offer the only coverage, just like the phone companies do.

      Private companies' only obligation is to make money: if they can make a profit serving 90% of the population, why should they throw money away serving the remaining, loss-making 10%?

      and the sooner companies will have to pay the real (hopefully non-profitable) cost of junk mail?

      No - they'd offer junk delivery to 90% of the population, which would be enough for the advertisers, and probably reduce the cost. The outliers wouldn't get junk mail... or any mail at all.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    85. Re:Battle? by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      > Yeah, just like they've fallen over themselves to roll out high speed fiber broadband to the boondocks.

      You may be talking to the wrong person. I live in an unincorporated area (we have sheriff's deputies, not police) just two blocks from farmland and I have fiber to the house. There may be something else going on there. Despite that not being a good comparison with mail delivery which doesn't require permanently installed infrastructure.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  3. Yep. Pretty standard. by Bardwick · · Score: 1

    Fedex labor cost is 32%, USPS is 80%.

  4. weekly by Blymie · · Score: 2

    Weekly delivery of bills, junk mail, offers etc is enough. Lay off 60% of the delivery workforce, the other 20% will be needed for daily "express" deliveries.

    Alternatively, deliver 3 days a week. Does anyone really need mail delivery daily?

    1. Re:weekly by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      Here here!

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    2. Re:weekly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here here!

      Are you a postal worker that is volunteering to be laid off? If so, thank you for identifying yourself. You can speed up the process by resigning today.

    3. Re:weekly by demonlapin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The mail still needs to be moved and processed six (seven?) days a week. Cutting home delivery frequency would save money, but probably a lot less than you think.

    4. Re:weekly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except their union contracts prevent them from laying off anyone. Other than the fact that they can't do it, it's a great option.

    5. Re:weekly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're speculating as much as the OP. Unless you have real numbers, you don't know what you are talking about.

    6. Re:weekly by Lieutenant_Dan · · Score: 1

      Exactly, so the only way to do this is through attrition. People retiring or finding new work.

      The interesting stat is that the USPS employed 900,000 (!) people a decade ago. They've trimmed this down by about 250,000 already.
      I wonder if the USPS is the largest US employer.

      --
      Wearing pants should always be optional.
    7. Re:weekly by Bardwick · · Score: 1

      Union shop, not allowed to layoff. Just signed new contract in May. Looking at the contract, USPS actually as no real ability to make any changes in thier business plan unless the Union leadership approves. Going to just have to suck it up and hand them 9 billion dollars (the 5+billion they need immediately is for pension payment), the other 4 billion is for little things like gas in the trucks...

    8. Re:weekly by Bardwick · · Score: 1

      Your right on, Its the labor costs that is killing them (80%). Cutting delivery to 1 day a week with the same number of people wouldn't help.

    9. Re:weekly by OzPeter · · Score: 1

      Alternatively, deliver 3 days a week. Does anyone really need mail delivery daily?

      Assume that the USPS has enough mail carriers to cope with 100% of todays deliveries (ie each carrier works a full day, and that the USPS doesn't carry excess workers). Now reduce the delivery days by 50%, but the public does not change its habits. Now each mail carrier is only working 3 days a week, but has double the amount of mail to deliver. So in the interim you have to hire another set of workers to carry the additional load, or get the current workers to work twice as hard.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    10. Re:weekly by TheLink · · Score: 1
      --
    11. Re:weekly by Custard+Horse · · Score: 1

      True. However, the current level of post is dwindling and will continue to do so.

      The model that you suggest will be required but the number of temporary workers will decline until you reach the new, lower capacity. At that point you repeat the cycle again and again until you employ only one man and a daschund, named Colin.

      At that point the man can be sent on his last job to deliver his own severance pay slip and Colin can be shot.

    12. Re:weekly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where where?

    13. Re:weekly by zarthrag · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how much mail you get, but I tend to get one letter with my actual name on it, and two handfuls of advertisements. I understand those ads are part of the revenue stream, but it's trash. 100% of it. I usually throw it away immediately after making sure actual mail isn't mixed-in. If we deliver only 3 days a week, ad volume should go down proportionally (why deliver an multiple ads to be received at the same time?). What's worse, you can't opt-out of mail marked" postal customer". If they went away, I imagine a mail-carrier's load (and work day) would become MUCH lighter.

      --
      Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
    14. Re:weekly by geoskd · · Score: 1

      Assume that the USPS has enough mail carriers to cope with 100% of todays deliveries (ie each carrier works a full day, and that the USPS doesn't carry excess workers). Now reduce the delivery days by 50%, but the public does not change its habits. Now each mail carrier is only working 3 days a week, but has double the amount of mail to deliver. So in the interim you have to hire another set of workers to carry the additional load, or get the current workers to work twice as hard.

      Its an interesting problem from a logistics standpoint. There are two separate factors that affect required staffing. The first is mail volume. (Packages letters, etc...) The second is delivery locations. Almost every delivery address gets at least one piece of mail per day, but the total volume is dropping. That means that each mail carrier is still doing all of the things that take them the longest: Walking or driving from stop to stop. If you doubled the packages for each delivery point, it would still take them about the same amount of time, because the handling of the parcels is almost completely insignificant compared to the time it takes to travel from stop to stop. So if you only delivered every other day, you cut the number of stops in half (cutting the time required in half), but the income from postage remains the same (cost per piece). Its sort of the reverse of economy of scale. The problem is that this is likely to help cause the further collapse of mail volume and shunt a large portion of their package volume to other carriers who provide a shorter end to end delivery window.

      At the end of the day, I think the post office' problems are likely insurmountable, both logistically and politically. The best bet for the economy is to make sure that the pensions are fully funded so that the workers don't get screwed any worse than they already are, and start planning the quickest viable offloading of the entire postal volume to private carriers. Then liquidate. Either that or congress needs to completely deregulate the USPS and relinquish all connections/control, and let the post office try to swim without being strapped to a concrete donkey.

      -=Geoskd

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    15. Re:weekly by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      What about making their employees not WANT to work for them?

      Worsen work conditions, cut hours to 1 hour per week, etc., etc.

      Alternately, are there any laws that prohibit them from breaking their union contract, and then hiring non-union workers?

    16. Re:weekly by hedwards · · Score: 1

      No, what's killing them is congressional mandates. If they could start charging depending upon the destination they wouldn't have that problem. They could do the same zoning system that Fed Ex, UPS and the airlines do and wipe out most of the problem right there. But, it's not something they can do without GOP support largely because it's mostly GOP supporters that are benefiting from the subsidies.

      Or if they could require folks that live in the middle of nowhere to come into town to pick up their mail rather than having to deliver it via horse, helicopter or off road vehicle, that too would help a lot.

      One of the main reasons why their labor makes up such a large percentage of the cost is that they've been raising rates at below inflation for a very long time.

    17. Re:weekly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Going to just have to suck it up and hand them

      Nope. Union contract is with USPS, not Congress. USPS can go bankrupt and renegotiate. That's how you break these Government unions; wait till financial reality appears and then negotiate. This Congress took the credit rating of the US to the wire in August. Think they wont take USPS to the wire as well?

    18. Re:weekly by technomom · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking that we'll just have to have a hiring freeze put in place. Don't hire any more carriers. As carriers die off, start merging post offices. Kill off Wednesday delivery, not Saturday because for some particularly long weekends, Friday-Tuesday is a long wait for important parcels, bills, etc. PO Boxes or mailboxes in or near the home post office (within some reasonable drive mile limit - 5? 10? 20?) should be free. Home delivery should cost an annual fee if you want it outside this range. You want to live in NowherePodunk, USA far away from any central location? Great, pay for it. Come up with a new revenue stream - how about certified e-mail address? The USPS already does a fair amount of business processing passports, why not provide, for an extra fee a CA certified .us e-mail system as well? Users who send/receive email through this should only be known, certified users. Make it a closed system specifically for instances where certification of sender and receiver are needed.

    19. Re:weekly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Based on some stories I've heard from mailmen having them work twice as hard is well within reason and should be done anyway. I very frequently see mailmen spending their day dicking around at McDonald's or some other place to get coffee and read a paper. My understanding is that they almost always finish their routes early and then spend half the day doing whatever the hell they want. As long as they don't show up back at the office it's all fine.

    20. Re:weekly by bberens · · Score: 2

      Fuel and trucks are a huge cost, they're just not considered a cost that can "go away" in the sense that labor costs can go away if you lay people off. Decreasing the truck wear/tear and fuel costs by 50% or so would be a massive savings.

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
    21. Re:weekly by bberens · · Score: 1

      It goes both ways. Here's an anecdote for you. Post offices are split up into zones. A worker in zone A will be shipped around to any number of post offices in zone A to do work depending on need. A fairly effective system when you consider they will have varying loads and such. A worker in zone A, however, cannot work in zone B even if the worker lives in/near zone B. They're not even allowed to "trade" so that a worker from zone B comes to work in zone A and vice-versa because they live closer to where the work needs to be done. Getting rid of this silly zone rule where labor cannot be used as efficiently as possible is something the union has been pushing for years. Apparently it has to go all the way up to the muckety mucks, the union will have to make it a priority and then hopefully 2-3 years down the road it'll get changed (presumably it would be a contract negotiation issue). Clearly the union causes problems in some areas (like not being able to lay people off they don't need) but the union is also sometimes a force of effective use of labor.

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
    22. Re:weekly by bberens · · Score: 1

      If you want to get rid of ads then you need to increase the cost of bulk-rate mail. The fact of the matter though, is that the bulk mail is what really pays the cost of delivering your "real" mail. So if you got rid of the bulk stuff you throw away the price of a stamp would need to go up quite a lot.

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
    23. Re:weekly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes they do. For example businesses often rely on daily mail delivery. Even for personal use though, you need daily delivery to make services such as Netflix and GameFly viable.

    24. Re:weekly by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Erm, huh?

      The amount of delivered mail is rather trivial. The time consuming part is going to each mailbox and delivering it. They have an entire vehicle to put mail in.

      I've always thought they should make things easier by simply stopping delivery to each 'address'. Buy a bunch of 10 locking mailboxes, like you see at malls, stick them at the end of the street, and give people the key to theirs.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    25. Re:weekly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The mail still needs to be moved and processed six (seven?) days a week.

      Not really. Move and process mail 5 days a week, it won't pile very much over the weekend if it stays where it was on Friday evening. Rework the delivery routes so homes get mail delivered two or three times a week; the same number of carriers could handle it based on what I see most of them delivering these days. And increase the cost of junk mail; most of what's delivered today goes straight into the trash can so increasing the cost to send it would help in many ways.

      But retirement is the biggest money pit the USPS faces. Why do they retire in their mid-fifties? Work another ten years like most of us. Granted, if I could work 30-and-out I'd love it, but no employer can afford that.

    26. Re:weekly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some congresscritters don't want this to happen. Some people way out in the boonies get their newspapers delivered via USPS. If mail delivery happens less often, those people won't get their newspapers as often and will be upset. Since congress needs to allow the USPS to reduce mail delivery days, said congresscritters who allow the USPS to do this won't get reelected. Or so they say.

    27. Re:weekly by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      Why? Be in operations 2 days a week. One to process and one to deliver. Streamline around that schedule. Want low rates and delivery anywhere, wait a week. That's the only viable option and Congress should enact it overriding all prior contracts.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    28. Re:weekly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh.. what part of legally prohibited from laying off workers leads you to believe that they can... layoff 60% of the delivery workforce?

      I mean goddamn.. the USPS wants to do something not quite as extreme, but in the same general vein of things. And can't. But your more extreme solution will work out great! Of course. If only someone else had thought "Hmm.. we need to cut costs.. maybe we could... fire some people! Brilliant! Now, lets have a Guinness."

    29. Re:weekly by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      You still need daily delivery to businesses and you still have to move it all the time. It's not that it won't save any money; it's that it's almost certainly not enough to tip the PO into profitability.

    30. Re:weekly by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      If your processing facilities aren't open every day, you can't forward mail from one place to another efficiently. If you send a letter from Key West to Point Roberts, it's not as though there's a dedicated truck that runs that route.

    31. Re:weekly by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      This is a 1996 document from the GAO, but is roughly in line with this from 2006. A little less than a third of postal employees are city carriers, and it's not going to be possible to eliminate them completely. Let us assume you could fire half of them, and that doing so would cut your labor cost in half (both big assumptions). Assuming that these are average-pay employees, you can save at most 10% of overall costs. It's not nothing, but it's also not salvation.

    32. Re:weekly by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      I wonder if the USPS is the largest US employer.

      No, I'm pretty sure that's Wal-Mart.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    33. Re:weekly by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I don't believe bulk mail has any kind of guaranteed delivery times. Therefore, mail carriers could just keep it on the side and only load it when they have room in the truck. If the truck is more full than usual that day, then some of the bulk mail just gets pushed off a day or two or twenty.

    34. Re:weekly by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Maybe they could use automatically-piloted UAVs and have them drop mail packets in the front lawns of people that live really, really far from the nearest PO.

    35. Re:weekly by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      Thank you for your thoughtful and well-written post, Mr. Anonymous Coward With No Numbers.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
  5. Junk mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would be happy if they stopped offering "bulk" postage pricing for junk mail. This would increase their revenue, or at least reduce the amount of low cost junk mail that they deliver more of then regular mail. Also, an every-other day delivery schedule would be fine by me and would lower costs (thinking Mon, Wed, Fri only).

    1. Re:Junk mail by Noughmad · · Score: 1

      an every-other day delivery schedule would be fine by me and would lower costs (thinking Mon, Wed, Fri only).

      That would be great, I could have a single reminder for both mail and XKCD.

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    2. Re:Junk mail by bberens · · Score: 1

      Bulk mail may be annoying but it subsidizes the cost of delivering "regular" mail. I support getting rid of bulk advertisement mail but that means that sending a letter will probably cost a lot more.

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
  6. What, no Saturdays? by alphatel · · Score: 1

    This continuing argument about Saturday delivery is first, highly flawed, and second, not going to save any reasonable amount of money. The Postal Regulatory Commission says it will take 3 years to implement and only save about 1.7 billion a year starting in the fourth year. And even the GAO states that "it would also reduce service; put mail volumes and revenues at risk; eliminate jobs; and, by itself, be insufficient to solve USPS's financial challenges".

    So while the PO loses its one attractive monopoly, it also fails to meet its financial obligations. The whole Saturday argument is just a scapegoat for Donahue to push along - then send the next PM over to beg for something else next year.

    --
    When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
    1. Re:What, no Saturdays? by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Bad news - the other guys deliver on Saturday, too.

      The only USPS monopoly services are media mail and cheap, lightweight stuff, neither of which are profitable.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    2. Re:What, no Saturdays? by somersault · · Score: 1

      I'd like to live in your world where $1,700,000,000 isn't a "reasonable amount of money"..

      It may not be enough by itself, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be considered among other solutions. A paltry billion here and there - pretty soon you start to see savings!

      Eliminating jobs would be a good thing by the sounds of it, unless you'd rather another "bailout" situation.

      Here in the UK I don't think we even have Saturday delivery from the Royal Mail..

      --
      which is totally what she said
    3. Re:What, no Saturdays? by Winckle · · Score: 1

      We do have Saturday delivery. If the government goes ahead with its ridiculous plans to privatise the Royal Mail, then we probably won't.

    4. Re:What, no Saturdays? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Here in the UK I don't think we even have Saturday delivery from the Royal Mail..

      We do. Most post boxes are also emptied on Saturdays, although typically only one collection rather than the two or more that you get midweek. I quite often get rented DVDs arrive on a Saturday after returning one on a Thursday (new one shipped on Friday, arrives Saturday).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:What, no Saturdays? by somersault · · Score: 1

      Okie dokie. I certainly won't miss it. I usually just get packages delivered to work.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    6. Re:What, no Saturdays? by Custard+Horse · · Score: 1

      Yeah, although the Royal Mail seems to be more flexible these days. I rarely see my postie before mid-afternoon on a Saturday. Yesterday's work post turned up at 3pm. We try to focus more on email and fax rather than cocking about with snail mail.

    7. Re:What, no Saturdays? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not in Reading we don't and they shut our sorting office so it all goes down the M4 to swindon and back everyday.

    8. Re:What, no Saturdays? by umghhh · · Score: 1

      It takes 3 years not to deliver on saturdays????? I mean they are doomed if their organisation is so inflexible. I suppose you can chose to prolong the misery and pay or just stop paying ad let it die all on its own.

    9. Re:What, no Saturdays? by fermion · · Score: 1
      The post office has no monopoly, this is one of the reasons why we are in trouble. There are other ways for people and businesses to send packages, and many use these other methods. USPS provides one simple and inexpensive means to send a package. The only monopoly that the USPS has in on the marked mail box, and the regulations involving a sealed envolope.

      The 'only 1.7 billion' number is not insignificant. By comparison, the US congress is struggling to save a mere 50 billion dollars a year on the entire federal budget. Ending saturday delivery is part of a restructuring that can keep the postal service alive. It is also about moving government jobs to the private sector, something that some conservatives are very much against as it makes the economy look worse. For instance in Texas the govenor has maximized state jobs to make the local job picture look better, and has rallied against the rationalization of NASA to keep local jobs that Texas does not have the private infrastructure to absorb.

      I think the issue is who is going to pay for mail. Previously the amount of 'junk mail' supported the USPS. Now it is mostly bills and firms and individuals paying bills. There is no competing service because no one else can do it for 40 cents. Really, if stamp prices just kept pace with inflation, we should be paying at least 50 cents per stamp.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    10. Re:What, no Saturdays? by OldeTimeGeek · · Score: 1

      Lucky you. First, last and only time I had a package delivered to work, the mailroom refused delivery of the package and I got called into my boss's office to discuss why it was a bad idea to use company resources for personal business.

    11. Re:What, no Saturdays? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Bad news - the other guys deliver on Saturday, too.

      Wrong (sorta). If you've sent anything by Fedex lately, you'd know that Fedex charges you an extra fee for Saturday delivery. The USPS doesn't get to charge an extra fee for that.

      On top of that, Fedex also charges you an extra fee for home delivery! Delivery to a commercial address is cheaper. USPS doesn't get to do that either.

      Finally, Fedex charges yet another extra fee for "rural delivery". If you live out in the sticks, they charge you more for it. Again, USPS isn't allowed to do that.

    12. Re:What, no Saturdays? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      This continuing argument about Saturday delivery is first, highly flawed, and second, not going to save any reasonable amount of money. The Postal Regulatory Commission says it will take 3 years to implement and only save about 1.7 billion a year starting in the fourth year. And even the GAO states that "it would also reduce service; put mail volumes and revenues at risk; eliminate jobs; and, by itself, be insufficient to solve USPS's financial challenges".

      How the hell is $1.7 billion not a "reasonable amount of money"? That's a good portion of NASA's yearly budget. It might not be enough to solve the problem entirely, but it's a good start.

      "it would also reduce service

      So what's wrong with that? That's the whole idea! Less service equals less cost and a better budget. If people want more service, they need to pay extra for it. If Saturday delivery is so important to you, then you can have your letters shipped by Fedex (which charges an extra fee for Saturday delivery BTW). If you're in a rush, First Class Mail is not the way to be sending things; you need to use Express Mail or Fedex/UPS and pay the $30 per letter.

      eliminate jobs

      What's wrong with that? The whole problem is that the USPS has insufficient demand for their services, but can't cut costs to make up for this (because of stupid Congress rules) and as a result has a budget shortfall. When business is slow, cutting employees is one of the first ways to reduce costs. If you personally want to save these peoples' jobs, then start sending more mail! Otherwise, stop complaining. Giving people busywork is not productive for the economy.

      So while the PO loses its one attractive monopoly,

      What attractive monopoly? Saturday delivery? Fedex will deliver it on Saturdays too, for a price. If you need something there fast, you shouldn't be using the USPS anyway (except for Express, which is actually carried by Fedex anyway). Where do you get the idea that people are entitled to ultra-cheap mail delivery on Saturdays? No one cares about getting more junk mail on the weekends.

      The simple fact is: the USPS needs to downsize. They still play a vital role, but the telephone and the internet have made their service less necessary than in the past, so they need to be allowed to downsize to meet the current demand and stay financially solvent.

  7. I find it astonishing by Timesprout · · Score: 1

    That all the postal services have been so slow to get into parcel delivery. We all order on line these days and surely it would have gone some way to offset the impact of reduced post.

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
    1. Re:I find it astonishing by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      The postal service does deliver parcels but letter volume far exceeds parcel delivery. How many parcels does an average person receive a year vs letters, bills, etc.?

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    2. Re:I find it astonishing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you mean? USPS has handled parcel delivery since at least the 1800's.

    3. Re:I find it astonishing by Chatterton · · Score: 1

      10-25$ a parcel against 0.1$ a letter. For the parcels, i also need far less people to do the sorting and distribution making it easily more profitable than letters. Moreover, letters and bills are more and more replaced by emails.

    4. Re:I find it astonishing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I receive eight bill letters per year and I'm working at moving four of those online.

      In contrast, I've ordered over 80 items from Amazon so far this year.

    5. Re:I find it astonishing by geoskd · · Score: 1

      The postal service does deliver parcels but letter volume far exceeds parcel delivery. How many parcels does an average person receive a year vs letters, bills, etc.?

      The problem for the USPS, when it comes to parcel delivery, is that they are very bad at it. They cant touch the private carriers in terms of cost or reliability. Even DHL did a better job of parcel delivery than the USPS, and those were the people who didn't think twice about blowing away a couple billion a year for a decade to "test the waters" of US domestic package delivery.

      Long story short, the USPS cant compete on price, service, or time in transit. They are bottom of the stack in everything they do, and their continued existence serves as a warning to the other would be package delivery companies of what not to do.

      -=Geoskd

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    6. Re:I find it astonishing by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Yes parcels are more in price but if you are like me, I easily get 500:1 letters vs parcels. Also how much volume or weight of letters will fit into that one parcel. As for sorting, a lot more letters are sorted by machines than parcels especially when they are standard size envelopes.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    7. Re:I find it astonishing by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      You=!average person. Also remember whether you get a letter or not everyday, the mailman drives passes by your house unless you are in the middle of nowhere as your neighbors get mail. That person has to be paid and fuel and fleet costs don't change. Because of the structure of USPS, people cannot be laid off so labor costs are fixed.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  8. not sure it's the email age specifically by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The USPS is losing a long, drown-out battle against the impossibility that it's supposed to be both an unsubsidized "private-sector" corporation that's "run like a business", but also is micromanaged by Congress and not permitted to make sane business decisions. They are required to deliver six days a week; have exact stamp prices down to the penny for many services mandated by Congress; are required to provide certain extra-subsidized services, e.g. cheap shipping at "media mail" rates; are not permitted to levy surcharges for delivery to expensive locations (e.g. remote areas); and they even have their pension plan micromanaged by Congress, which is one of the current cash-flow pressures (Congress changed how the pension accounting has to work).

    Basically Congress needs to decide if the USPS is going to be a government-mandated service that delivers flat-rate mail to every corner of the country six days a week, and subsidize it accordingly, or if it's going to be a private-sector business that will neither be subsidized nor micromanaged.

    1. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      In other words, Congress is incapable of performing even the simplest of its enumerated duties in the Constitution.
      Just wait 'till Obamacare kicks in. I'm sure everything will work out great.

    2. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my country, we have a national postal service with a six-day delivery service that treats everyone equally - so there's no need to drop those. It's even makes significant profits thanks to internet shopping.

      Just let USPS become independent, allow them to increase postage costs iteratively, yet dramatically and allow them to fix any employee/manager/pension/union problems that often hurt nationalised services. It might take a decade or two to sort the problem.

    3. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It will be the former. With blacks hovering around 27% unemployment rate, anyone who objects will be labeled as racists. I'm in favor of it anyways as it will keep their ass from forming flash-mobs and staying out of prison. Which is an added expense anyways.

    4. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just wait 'till Obamacare kicks in. I'm sure everything will work out great.

      Currently, the US is spending almost twice the amount on health than Japan and Norway with good, universal health care systems - as part of the GDP. That's despite a good part of the population in the US not being covered. The current way of running health services in the US is not working.

    5. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by SlippyToad · · Score: 1

      Obamacare has already kicked in, retard. And it is working out pretty well, thanks.

      --
      One day I feel I'm ahead of the wheel / the next it's rolling over me / I can get back on / I can get back on
    6. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think this is a major problem. I'm almost never home when USPS attempts to deliver packages, so the best they can possibly get out of such a run is being not wasted by having packages for others in my building. I'm guessing this case is rare and that most times, it ends up being a waste.

      I asked them if there was some registry that I could add myself to to get a text or email or whatever when I have a package and then I'll just take care of it myself. They said nope. So what they directly told me is that they don't want to save money. They want to waste it. This is, of course, logically inconsistent with running a business. I know there are up-front costs to such a system and continued training and maintenance costs, but I'd think that the benefit would be a net positive.

      I alone got roughly 15 packages earlier in the year and I had to go to the post office for every one of them. They attempted to deliver each one. It takes about 10 minutes to get to the post office from my place. If they had just sent me a text, they would've saved 150 minutes of time in driving. That's almost 3 hours of pay for somebody that can actually be spent doing something worthwhile. They probably would've wasted another 50 minutes waiting for me to answer the door. So that's definitely 3 hours. They would've saved gallons of gas, which is worth both money and some minute amount of environmental impact and time. They might not need as much staff with reduced blue milk runs, which is huge for savings. Even being able to cut one employee would recoup much of the cost of developing the solution in the first place.

      And I'm just one person. I suspect a lot of people are in the same position that I'm in (working roughly 9-5 or 8-4 or something like that), so those savings would be multiplied across the number of people participating. Would it end up being worth more than the initial cost of implementing a notification system via text or email? I think so.

    7. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      working horribly, costs are through the stratosphere. Because the healthcare bill didn't have a robust public option, the positive feedback spiral of insurance, healthcare chains, big pharmy can rocket up.

      even for a politician, Obama is the biggest lying sack of shit to get shat into the white house. he's a corporate bitch even worse than Bush/Cheney

    8. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obamacare has already kicked in, retard. And it is working out pretty well, thanks.

      Yeah, if you discount the fact that we're saddled with the highest unemployment rates since the Great Depression. Oh, I am SO sure that the costs of MANDATING health care for employees has NOTHING to do with the fact that no one's hiring new workers. Of couse not - Hopenchange can also MANDATE repealing economic laws. Didn't you know Hopenchange can, with just a few words read off a teleprompter (without "Uhh" and "Umm", even!), make hiring workers more expensive and STILL ensure employers will do it!!! It's AMAZING - he can make things more expensive and more in demand! Utterly repealing simplistic, outdated, downright reactionary ideas like "supply and demand".

      Hopenchange is AMAZING!

      Don't forget those multi-TRILLION dollar deficits. Gotta ignore those, too, when you're creating entire new expensive entitlement programs.

      What fucking planet are you living on, anyway?

    9. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by jpapon · · Score: 2

      Because the healthcare bill didn't have a robust public option, the positive feedback spiral of insurance, healthcare chains, big pharmy can rocket up.

      You can't really blame Obama for the lack of a robust public option... he tried for it, but Republicans blocked it. Perhaps he compromised too readily, but at least Obamacare mandates coverage. That's a step in the right direction... the real problem is that they didn't put in provisions to strictly control costs...

      --
      -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
    10. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by compro01 · · Score: 1

      It's not so much the republicans as the "blue dog" democrats that shut down a public option. The republicans weren't going to support anything regardless of what appeasement was added.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    11. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the healthcare bill didn't have a robust public option, the positive feedback spiral of insurance, healthcare chains, big pharmy can rocket up.

      You can't really blame Obama for the lack of a robust public option... he tried for it, but Republicans blocked it. Perhaps he compromised too readily, but at least Obamacare mandates coverage. That's a step in the right direction... the real problem is that they didn't put in provisions to strictly control costs...

      WHAT?!?!!?!

      "he tried for it"?!?!?!

      Like fucking HELL he did - Obama tries for NOTHING.

      Obama had nothing to do with "Obamacare" except for signing the damn thing.

      Where the fuck is the "comprehensive jobs plan" Obama's been talking about - for LITERALLY several years? Remember the "hard pivot to jobs" from 2-0-0-FUCKING-9??!?!

    12. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by Viewsonic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, it is working quite well. Tens of thousands of children with various types of cancer who were previously denied any coverage have been fully covered and begun treatments. You cannot put a price on that figure. Ever. Monetary concerns must never be brought up in the same sentence as health care. Health care comes first, finding out where the money comes from is secondary. If taxes need to double, triple, then so be it. We need to put peoples health above all else.

    13. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by Mr.+McGibby · · Score: 1

      You do realize that they didn't make a trip specifically just to deliver *your* package right? It gets delivered with all the other mail. The extra cost is negligible. Certainly not enough to setup your notification system.

      --
      Mad Software: Rantings on Developing So
    14. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by umghhh · · Score: 1

      it can also chose to let it adjust to changing world but I guess your politicians in US are even worse than ours in Europe and are incapable of changing anything besides increasing subsidies to their own protectorates. US may still be a world power and one of the richest countries in the world but this will not last if you f*k up everything you have and do not allow it to adapt to modern world.

    15. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      You can't really blame Obama for the lack of a robust public option... he tried for it, but Republicans blocked it.

      The total number of Republicans that actually voted for the health care bill in both House and Senate combined is 1. Thats it. One fucking Republican.

      Are you suggesting that this one fucking Republican blocked the public option? The reality is that you are fucking embarrassingly wrong about everything here. The Democrats own that fucking pig health care bill that you don't like. If you have a problem with it, take it up with them you fucking moron.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    16. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by DavidTC · · Score: 2

      Where the fuck is the "comprehensive jobs plan" Obama's been talking about

      You mean the 2009 stimulus, which the Republicans threatened to fillibuster unless most of the jobs stuff was removed? (Although there's still enough jobs stuff in there that's it's still creating jobs.)

      Or the 'jobs through infrastructure' plan in 2010, which the Republicans rejected?

      But, um, if you're talking about his current jobs plan....try watching TV two days from now?

      I agree with you about Obama's idiotic health care stuff. He 'pre-compromised' away 90% of the ground. He should have started with proposing to nationalize the entire medical industry, and compromised to single payer, or, if worse came to worse, a public option.

      Instead, he not only started with crap, and ended up with even bigger crap, he let them rig it where it wouldn't start for years.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    17. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In order to privatize it into a business, you must first make it fail in an embarrassing and public way. So you create ridiculous and arbitrary rules while slashing funding. Then you write off unrelated debt and unload it onto the thing you're trying to destroy. When the cards finally fall, you cry "government doesn't work! Let's privatize it!". You see the same pattern going on in public education, social security, medicare, hundreds of programs to help the poor, etc. The government institutions that work well are either not hot button (e.g. Forest Service) or fit into the particular ideology of those trying to destroy the other parts of government (e.g. Army).

    18. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by paiute · · Score: 1

      What fucking planet are you living on, anyway?

      A planet not called Rock Ridge.

      --
      If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    19. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by couchslug · · Score: 0

      "We need to put peoples health above all else."

      Precisely why?

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    20. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The current way of running the US is not working.

      FTFY.

    21. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by jpapon · · Score: 1
      Hey, are you a little angry buddy? Relax a little, I was mistaken, I should have said independents and conservative Democrats. I personally do like most things in the bill, and frankly am amazed that anyone can hate them as much as you seem to.

      For instance, it mandates that insurance companies cannot charge you more for insurance based on most pre-existing conditions. This is simply the right thing to do.

      --
      -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
    22. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by ResidentSourcerer · · Score: 1

      Here in Rural Canada we have clusters of post boxes every few miles. Delivery is only 3 days per week.
      Small packages are left in the mailbox. For larger ones they leave a card that directs us to pick it up at the post office, 7 miles away. They even use laminated cards so they can slap another sticker on it, and reuse them until they get frayed at the edges.

      In some places you have to present the card to get your package or jump through hoops to prove who you are. But our town is small enough that all the posties know everyone so they are reaching for the parcel as we come in the door.

      An earlier poster commented that Canada has the same problem of 'surplus geography' that the U.S. does. Not so. Canada is overall more urban than the U.S. Generally the transportation networks out ran the settlers, so settlers were concentrated around the railways. So there are bunches of tiny towns (1000 people) and large cities, with the vast majority of people in the large cities. 90% of Canadians live within 100 miles of the US border.

      There are very few midsize towns -- towns with 10 to 100 thousand people. What few there are, are pretty much on direct routes between larger centres.

      The postal systems have an opportunity: Lower price parcel delivery that isn't in as much hurry as courier. In Canada we have Purolator which is run by the post office, and we have UPS which works pretty well. DHL is also pretty much nation wide, but they don't have the same access network, so they are mostly limited to commercial accounts.

      I use greyhound a lot for the 20 to 80 lb size of shipment. It's basically about $30-50 bucks anywhere west of the Lakehead, and will get there in 48 hours.

      --
      Third Career: Tree Farmer Second Career: Computer Geek First Career: Teacher, Outdoor Instructor, Photographer.
    23. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      bullshit, I can put a price on having *my* family's health insufficiently financed because I have to pay for my family while ALSO I'm supposed to support others. I CAN bring up cost and money because I'm paying for it! Your spawn of ghetto whores who spread their legs for every man that comes along because the state pays them to do it, are not my first priority.

    24. Re:not sure it's the email age specifically by newslash.formatblows · · Score: 1

      That's the first slashdot post I read today that makes me want to throw up.

  9. Actually, it's being killed on purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    To what purpose, I don't know, but making them fund pensions and expenses in a way never budgeted and that no other Government Sponsored/Sourced/Seeded Corporation has to, it is designed to fail.

    Anyone know why, other than to break the unions and piss away the pension money?

    1. Re:Actually, it's being killed on purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.", Hanlon's razor

    2. Re:Actually, it's being killed on purpose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of the USPS pension money is structured that way because they're making the USPS fund the pensions for their employees who are military veterans, for the retirement benefits earned while in the military. That is, rather than the military budget taking the hit for the retirement benefits for vets who later worked for the post office, they're making the post office pay it. (Even worse, the military pays pensions as the people retire, while the post office is being forced to prepay pensions in advance.)

      Thus the military looks a bit better, and the post office looks a hell of a lot worse, financially speaking.

  10. duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And this is a surprise?

    Lets see:
    Can't raise the price of stamps faster than inflation regardless of actual cost to deliver.
    Can't layoff employees
    Can't reduce the delivery days
    Must deliver to everyone

    How many people see a positive outcome for this 'business'.

    1. Re:duh by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Must deliver to everyone

      Maybe the USPS needs an "Opt Out" plan, for folks who do not wish to receive any unsolicited snail mail at all? Just add your address to the USPS "Do not deliver to" list.

      Bills? Send them to me by email, thank you. Packages? I'll choose the deliverer from your list when I order.

      Unsolicited stuff and junk mail? Why should the government pay for something to be hauled to my home, which will land in a recycle bin, which the government will pay to pick up at my home.

      Someone really wants to send me something physical? Have your pick from FedEx and their pals.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:duh by vlm · · Score: 3, Informative

      Unsolicited stuff and junk mail? Why should the government pay for something to be hauled to my home, which will land in a recycle bin, which the government will pay to pick up at my home.

      My wife, the retired postmasters daughter, has explained, and I have verified, that the most profitable segment of delivery is junkmail due to intense automation, and frankly, zero insurance claims (who really cares?). The next most profitable market segment was magazines. Commercial bills break even, more or less. Finally they lose money, big time, for each handwritten envelope. He retired in the 80s, supposedly not too much has changed since then.

      To be honest, the simplest and least painful way to balance the books for the USPO would be to make the sale of greeting cards and postcards illegal. So few handwritten/homemade ones would be created and sent that it wouldn't matter.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    3. Re:duh by hrvatska · · Score: 3, Informative

      You missed can't fund its pension plan at the same lower level as its private competitors.

    4. Re:duh by jpapon · · Score: 1

      Or just mandate that envelopes must have a machine readable label, either printed from an automated machine at the post office or from a printer at home. There... now every letter can be routed by an automated system.

      --
      -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
    5. Re:duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      None of those is the problem. Being inflexible and having an entitlement culture is.
      Most of those semi government enterprises are monopolies that either run by politicians or by people appointed by politicians. As a result, their primary objective is to help in reelection of those officials rather than making necessary changes. Since they are monopolies they don't need to make changes, they can just milk the government for more money.

    6. Re:duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. Seriously, if they just raised the prices on everything, and maybe added a value added feature like delivery confirmation on everything, they would be fine. When you set up arbitrary hurdles to business success, and then expect success the term to describe that is delusional.

    7. Re:duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much sums it up.

      Anecdotally, and I realize this is a broad generalization although I've dealt with Post Offices in many cities and counties and several countries - going to a USPS office in anything other than a two-cow town is an exercise in frustration and incompetence. The speed with and attitude with they perform their duties is reminiscent, to me, of day-to-day business practice in the former East Germany.

  11. I pity the USPS by Gideon+Wells · · Score: 2

    From everything I have seen over the years they are between a rock and a hard place. They either need to be set free to be a private corporation or be yanked back in to be a complete government service. Both political parties over the years have successfully pushed the USPA into a situation where it has the worst traits of a government organization and a private corporation.

    --
    by Anonymous Coward: I, for one, welcome the shift from car analogies to pizza analogies. um.. overlords?
    1. Re:I pity the USPS by DarkOx · · Score: 0

      You know what the *worst* part is. This will be held up, just like Fanny and Freddy as more prove that there is something wrong with capitalism. When it the Postal service is anything but an independent actor in a free market.

      This is the insidious way the socialists are taking over this nation. First they interfere in the free market, making it unfree and then when things go badly, the use it as an excuse for still more regulation and central planning. Government IS THE PROBLEM. The USPS should be sold and CONgress should stop regulating it at all.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    2. Re:I pity the USPS by SlippyToad · · Score: 1

      Both political parties over the years have successfully pushed the USPA

      I hate to be a dick, but really show us where "both" parties have done this. Actually provide links, quotes, bills, etcetera.

      Because whenever I hear "both parties" I usually see Republicans fucking things up the way they are genetically programmed to do.

      --
      One day I feel I'm ahead of the wheel / the next it's rolling over me / I can get back on / I can get back on
    3. Re:I pity the USPS by jpapon · · Score: 1

      Socialists are taking over this nation? Since when? You clearly need to read up on the definition of socialism. Government regulation does not socialism make.

      --
      -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
    4. Re:I pity the USPS by Duradin · · Score: 1

      The Free Market totally would have brought us Rural Electrification and Telephone service, provided it was only [m|b|tr]illionairs living in rural areas. Let them eat cake, no?

    5. Re:I pity the USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The US Postal Service is written into Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution. Privatization of the USPS would likely require either a successful Supreme Court challenge or an amended Constitution.

    6. Re:I pity the USPS by GodInHell · · Score: 1

      Shh.. facts make the tea-trolls unstable.

      -GiH

    7. Re:I pity the USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This thread is full of comments that point out the various things that are hamstringing the USPS. You're on the internet - look it up yourself. He's not required to push past your retarded confirmation bias to make a point.

    8. Re:I pity the USPS by andymadigan · · Score: 1

      Congress has the power to establish a Post Office, they're not required to. Congress is by no means required to exercise all of their enumerated powers. For instance, they haven't declared war in over 50 years, despite multiple 'wars' with U.S. involvement in the interim.

      --
      The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
    9. Re:I pity the USPS by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      What exactly have the Democrats done to help the USPS? They had a golden opportunity to fix a lot of things when they were in control of Congress, and especially when they had both Congress and the White House. What did they get done, besides giving a lot of taxpayer money to poorly-managed corporations with no strings attached?

      There's nothing different between the Democrats and the Republicans. The Reps are just a lot more obvious about their corruption.

  12. The effect of unions.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Being a psuedo-government entity, when the unions demand more than the business can sustain, the business fails instead of just making the people take it in the shorts like the true government entities. If you want America to recover and prosper again, abolish unions and shrink government and "entitlement" programs.

    1. Re:The effect of unions.... by yourmommycalled · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      More anti-union bullshit. Try looking at what FEDEX puts into health care and retirement (80%) and then ask your self why FEDEX gave large campaign donations to the sponsors of the bill that required USPS to pay 100% of FUTURE EMPLOYEES health and retirement. Yes that is FUTURE employees. We want to make sure we can all possible contingencies you know just in case somebody we MIGHT hire might get sick or retire. Try looking to see if FEDEX/UPS actually ever deliver a package to the address on the label, or maybe they just send an email saying come pick up your undeliverable package. This is nothing more than TeaTerrorist/Libertarian/Rethuglicans attempt to destroy the functioning parts of the governement. The intent of TeaTerrorist/Libertarian/Rethuglicans is to sell the USPS for pennies on the dollar so their sponsors can buy a second gold-plated yacht.

  13. If I remember correctly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The internet has not only made letter delivery almost obsolete, it has also dramatically increased home shopping. If the US postal service is not seeing its share of that, despite not being allowed to raise prices (i.e. having very competitive prices) or letting go part of their huge workforce (i.e. having spare capacity), they're doing it wrong. Consequently it's not the internet that's doing them in, it's their management. Oh wait, that's congress, isn't it?

    1. Re:If I remember correctly by Seumas · · Score: 1

      I don't see any real benefit of the USPS. Certainly none that justify the expense.

      I am in my mid-thirties, and I have never really used the USPS in my entire adult life. If I order something, I get it shipped to me by DHL, UPS, or FedEX. If I want to order something and they only ship by USPS, I don't order from them. If I have something to ship, I use one of those three. If I have important documents that I must send or receive and for some absurd reason, I can't use email and PDF, then I use FedEX. These services are affordable, fast, and reliable.

      The only service the USPS has given me in the last fifteen years has been a constant source of spam and that's not worth paying for. I amass piles upon piles of bullshit in the mail that I have to turn around and throw away. I literally get *nothing* in the USPS that I want. And, yet, I get a hand full of junk stuffed in the mailbox outside my front door six days a week.

      Now, you *might* be able to argue that the USPS is still necessary for like a dozen people in the country who don't have access to a real courier service and don't have internet access. So, that's fine. Let's reduce the costs by reducing delivery to once per week. If time is of the utmost importance, then you're probably not using the USPS - so anything sent through the USPS can probably wait up to four business days before it's delivered.

      Seriously, trust me -- I'm going to be okay if you only deliver a fist-full of stuff that's going to go directly into my garbage can *once* per week. I'll somehow find a way to survive if I don't get a fist-full every 24 hours, six days a week. They're nothing more than a tax-payer subsidized service for businesses to spam you in the physical world. If they need more funding, raise your rates on the spammers who are spamming me.

  14. A postal service is simply too important. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A postal service is simply too important not to have, just like the roads. It is necessary for the smooth running of a country to be able to reliably move physical goods from one point to another in a moderately expedient and cheap fashion. It is so important that the very basic service should be run by the government.

    Has the US government done anything to actively sabotage the USPS?

    I know that in the UK, the Royal Mail has been sabotaged to the point of being unable to opeate profitably. The Royal Mail has been forced to outsource the only profitable part of mail, which is the bit where you take letters and charge people for the privelige. As a result, there are suite a number of companies who rake in vast amounts of money doing the easy bit. The hard bit is the sorting and delivering which the Royal Mail still has to do and is legally not allowed to charge very much for. In a sane world, the latter part would be funded by the former part. But the government has managed to separate the two so that the Royal Mail simply cannot turn a profit so that it can then be sold off. In general, though mail in the UK is still a profitable venture and the Royal Mail would run itself comfortably if the world was half way sane.

    Has the US government done something similar?

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
    1. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The US Constitution explicitly authorizes Congress "to establish Post Offices and Post Roads"; so even the Founders knew the importance of the mail!

      By the way, another name for large parts of Route 20 in Eastern Massachusetts is "Boston Post Road". One guess as to why.

    2. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have FedEX and UPS. They provide the service as well. Simply turn the USPS free, let them compete on a level playing field and be done with it.

    3. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Has the US government done something similar?

      As a poster above said:

      • Can't raise the price of stamps faster than inflation regardless of actual cost to deliver.
      • Can't layoff employees
      • Can't reduce the delivery days
      • Must deliver to everyone
    4. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by KermodeBear · · Score: 1

      Has the US government done anything to actively sabotage the USPS?

      Well, considering that the USPS is all government employees... Yes. Whomever agreed to this part is the one who really screwed things up:

      Labor agreements prohibiting layoffs are preventing one avenue for reducing costs,

      So, the USPS doesn't have enough mail volume to keep things going, but they're not allowed to get rid of excess people on the payroll that aren't needed. This isn't the only issue but it is a huge one and a great example of stupid management agreeing to equally stupid demands by the labor unions.

      --
      Love sees no species.
    5. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by Inda · · Score: 1

      I worked for the Post Office, the arm that does the delivery part in the UK. The blame on the UK government is a bit unfounded.

      There were postmen who started at 6am and finished at 9am. "Job and run" was the perk of the job, even though on my round I only ever managed to finish by 10am. Half a day's work for a full day's pay - excellent - only I often did a second round on double pay, as did many others.

      Business logic? Unionised workforce? Craptastic?

      They could have doubled productivity in an instant.

      I left after only four weeks. The place was run in a blind panic.

      --
      This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
    6. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by vlm · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Has the US government done anything to actively sabotage the USPS?

      Yes. Not every dollar of lobbying spent by UPS / DHL / fedex has been wasted.

      From the fine article

      "laws forbidding postage rates from surpassing inflation rates keep income down."

      The inflation figures are fabricated by the govt to be unrealistically low, because so many outlays depend on it being low, in addition to incumbent reelection campaigns. Realistic inflation figures would mean realistic COLA increases for SS and frankly almost all other salary expenditures. However bad our deficit situation is now, being realistic about inflation would make it even worse. Therefore the numbers are doctored up until we can sorta afford the result. (Same thing with unemployment stats)

      On top of that, the proliferation of e-mail and online bill-paying services have contributed to a 22% reduction in snail-mail volume since 2006.

      Everyone I know either got email in the 90s, or frankly never will get email. For me it was '90, at least for a globally accessible internet address, if you're counting BBS / compuserve I guess I go back to '83. For my elderly mother in law it was 99. Everyone else in between. Other than children coming of age, I have never even heard of someone in my circle of friends / family / coworkers getting email after '99. It would be like blaming myspace for a sudden drop of TV viewership in 2011. Something that did start around the latter half of the 00s was the global economic second great depression, which is still going on. I would say economic local maximum peak year was probably about '07 and we've been in decline since then. That Might have a little to do with it. Abandoned homes don't get much mail. Unemployed people don't order many packages from Amazon (who mostly deliver with UPS around here, anyway). Business that close don't send bills or get payments. There are multiple "dead malls" in my area where seemingly permanently empty storefronts will never tx or rx mail. Ditto semi-abandoned industrial parks, etc.

      Outside the article, think about it. UPS doesn't deliver on Saturdays, unless you pay some crazy rate, assuming they still offer that service. Does anyone care? Anyone? I'm told that UPS doesn't even attempt to deliver every day, in some rural areas. Like the driver gets the "north route" on even days and the "south route" on odd days and that's just how it goes. Does anyone really care? If my mailbox never got anything on Saturday, and twice the junk every other day, I really wouldn't care. Much like when they switched to "alternate week recyclable pickup", I gave a big "meh".

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    7. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by SlippyToad · · Score: 2

      Has the US government done anything to actively sabotage the USPS?

      I'd say Reaganite morons have done a lot to actively sabotage our postal service, because despite the fact that its existence is enumerated right the fuck there in the Constitution, it represents a huge item that they can sell off to their campaign contributors. And most of the 'troubles' with the postal service did start to erupt in the 1980's, when Reganism and the "privatize everything" mentality were running wild in our government -- which hasn't abated a bit since then.

      So yes, sabotage is ongoing and constant. The idea that we are guaranteed a method of communicating and moving goods throughout the nation is simply too crazy for them to tolerate -- they'd rather leave that important function up to "private industries" who just as often will lose your package, decide to drop service to your market for no reason in particular, and in all other ways take a valuable public service and fuck it up so they can make as much money as possible.

      --
      One day I feel I'm ahead of the wheel / the next it's rolling over me / I can get back on / I can get back on
    8. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A postal service is simply too important not to have, just like the roads. It is necessary for the smooth running of a country to be able to reliably move physical goods from one point to another in a moderately expedient and cheap fashion. It is so important that the very basic service should be run by the government.

      Has the US government done anything to actively sabotage the USPS?

      I know that in the UK, the Royal Mail has been sabotaged to the point of being unable to opeate profitably. The Royal Mail has been forced to outsource the only profitable part of mail, which is the bit where you take letters and charge people for the privelige. As a result, there are suite a number of companies who rake in vast amounts of money doing the easy bit. The hard bit is the sorting and delivering which the Royal Mail still has to do and is legally not allowed to charge very much for. In a sane world, the latter part would be funded by the former part. But the government has managed to separate the two so that the Royal Mail simply cannot turn a profit so that it can then be sold off. In general, though mail in the UK is still a profitable venture and the Royal Mail would run itself comfortably if the world was half way sane.

      Has the US government done something similar?

      Yes.

      First are collective bargaining agreements. When government negotiates with organized labor financial disaster ensues. In this case, it is preventing necessary downsizing and saddling them with massive healthcare insurance costs.

      Second, postage rates are fixed to inflation rates, by law.

      So yes, USPS has their hands tied by government and the traditional bad decision making of government entities. No necessary corrective actions, downsizing, changes to compensation, nor price increases, are legal... and no, Congress can't magically fix it, they only make things worse.

    9. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      It is so important that the very basic service should be run by the government.

      This statement is at odds with the only postal services I know, and the examples given here. You said it the UK government seems to be actively running the postal service into the ground. The US government has mandated so many bloody laws on the postal service that it is similar dire straits.

      The post offices I have experience with are Australia Post, and Deutche Post. Australia Post since its privatisation has branched out providing financial services such as bill payment and money orders and offer retail products such as stationary, calculators, and even mobile phones. Sounds bad but it is self sustained, generates a profit in the hundreds of millions of dollars yearly and does a damn good job at delivering the post too. Since the privatisation of the Deutche Bundespost it has changed into Deutche Post DHL, currently the largest global logistics supplier, and email sure as hell isn't threatening it's billion dollar profits.

      Maybe these services are too important to be run by incompetent governments?

    10. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by jonwil · · Score: 1

      Australia Post isn't privatized. But they ARE a government run corporation that is run like a business and they offer a LOT of services.

      Their postal shops sell everything from stamps to packing material to office supplies.
      They also offer payment for all sorts of bills including government bills and they are the place to go to pick up all sorts of government forms (Need a passport? Go to the post office and get the passport photo taken and pick up all the forms from the one place)

    11. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by btalbot+ · · Score: 1

      "in a moderately expedient and cheap fashion." That makes no economic sense. There is nothing cheap about the USPS. Look at their yearly multi-billion dollar deficits that they try to claim isn't funded by taxpayers.

    12. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by slim · · Score: 1

      I worked for the Post Office, the arm that does the delivery part in the UK. The blame on the UK government is a bit unfounded.

      From what I understand, the government has definitely crapped on the postal service as a whole.

      The point is that the end-to-end process of providing mail collection and delivery to a whole country has many sub-processes, some of which are cheap and easy, some of which are expensive and difficult. The government obliged the Royal Mail to open up every step to competition, but also obliged the Royal Mail to continue to provide every service at a capped price.

      Hence, private enterprise stepped in an grabbed all the profitable aspects -- easy things like collecting bulk mail; sorting etc. -- while leaving the Royal Mail to keep doing the difficult stuff at a loss -- like driving to remote Scottish farms to deliver a single envelope.

    13. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by GodInHell · · Score: 2

      So, the USPS doesn't have enough mail volume to keep things going, but they're not allowed to get rid of excess people on the payroll that aren't needed. This isn't the only issue but it is a huge one and a great example of stupid management agreeing to equally stupid demands by the labor unions.

      To be clear, the USPS management is looking to lay off 120,000 employees this month. That's so it can make its pension pre-funding requirement (added in 2006 under Bush) -- to the tune of $5.5B. That happens to be about the size of the shortfall. This is an old fight between the management of USPS and the labor force of the USPS -- management wants to break the union (big surprise), wants to cut healthcare benefits and drastically reduce or eliminate pensions. This crisis has more to do with politics than numbers -- take out the prefunding requirement and the USPS is not only stable, it's cash positive.

      -GiH

    14. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by umghhh · · Score: 1

      it is a common mistake to propose only two alternatives i.e. either gov body running everything or pure private sector - you may do things like hiring private enterprises to do the job gov wants to do and do it in a way acceptable for customers as well as businesses. I guess even subsidies could be good in such case as to deliver a letter or parcel to remote area say in Alaska cannot be as cheap as it is in any metropolitan area. I guess hot heads in congress would have to comprehend that but to this they are not able because they are preoccupied with fighting the great enemy of the nation i.e. their president.

    15. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by magarity · · Score: 1

      I'd say Reaganite morons have done a lot to actively sabotage our postal service, because despite the fact that its existence is enumerated right the fuck there in the Constitution

      Whoa, take it easy there, killer... "Congress has the power to establish post offices" is not the same as "Congress is required to have a post office government agency running a huge deficit that can't be questioned".

    16. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      That makes no economic sense.

      Really? Because you can use the roads in a moderately expedient and cheap fashion.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    17. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      it is a common mistake to propose only two alternatives i.e. either gov body running everything or pure private sector

      I think it is less of a mistake than you might believe.

      u may do things like hiring private enterprises to do the job gov wants to do and do it in a way acceptable for customers as well as businesses.

      That doesn't have a great track record. The trouble is that once the company gets the contract, then there is, yet again no competition. So, the company runs it in the most profitable way possible regardless of the quality of the service. The company cannot be allowed to cease trading since the service is essential.

      This happened with Railtrack in the UK. The labour government decided to privatise the running of rail infrastructure by selling it to a single company. The company always underperformed on targets, so they got fined. Then they ran out of money and had to be paid to keep the rails working. Since a hugh chunk of money came in, they gave out big bonuses, then failed to meet targets, then got fined, etc, etc. Eventually it was quietly privatised again.

      The trouble is that once the private company gets the contract, there is no free market force making them be more efficient since the contract will not be up for renegotiation for years. So, the company will simply plunder what it can.

      There are countless examples of this behaviour.

      The trouble is that people assume that private enterprise and maeket forces must necessarily go together. When large infrastructure in involved, that is not usually the case.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    18. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not that people didn't have email ten years ago. Lots more company-to-consumer interaction, particularly bill payment, is happening through email/web and electronic funds transfers. If you get your phone bill online, and pay it online, that's 24 envelopes per year that the USPS won't handle anymore. Even if you insist on receiving a paper bill, like I do, you may choose to submit your payment online (so 12 mail-pieces lost). Multiply that out by millions of people who use electronic transactions, times the multiple bills, bank statements, and other business messages each household receives monthly, and you've got a noticeable dent in first class mail volume. Meanwhile, the postal service still has to run the same routes, operate the same post offices, and they've already bought the sorting infrastructure.

    19. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by scorp1us · · Score: 1

      The USPS has enjoyed a privileged position:
      - They get to set the minimum shipping rates for UPS and FedEx, to keep the USPS in business. But they don't have enough mail volume to be competitive and raising the minimum rates would not go unnoticed, which is why it has not been done.
      - Only the USPS can use mail boxes.
      - UPS and Fed ex cannot deliver to PO boxes.

      The USPS is a required system. It is required in court proceedings for legal notice. It must remain. However we could also allow UPS and Fedex to use mailboxes, and allow tracking notices to serve as legal notice.

      Bulk mail majorly funds the USPS. Yeap USPS is a spammer.

      Also, the USPS could have a viable business model: Just offer a service that opens scans and emails you your mail in PDF format. Bonus: free OCR. Save package delivery for MWF. By scanning at the originating post office, it will reduce the transportation costs. I'd pay just to not get mail that I just dump in the recycle bin.

      --
      Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
    20. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by scribblej · · Score: 1

      > Everyone I know either got email in the 90s, or frankly never will get email

      Yeah, but that doesn't mean what they said is a lie; first off, people you know is a very biased and tiny sample.

      But ignore that; you're forgetting about all the people being born into a world with email and all the people dying having never touched it. That skews the numbers too -- a lot.

    21. Re:A postal service is simply too important. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Woopse good catch.

      In any case DHL is definitely no longer the government run German postal service and has flourished. It would seem that government ownership has little to do with how good or bad a service can be.

  15. Let's have another multi-billion-dollar bailout! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And watch how the employee's union makes huge contributions to Obama's reelection campaign....

    Imagine that.

  16. Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The post office is one of the VERY FEW enumerated duties of the government, and if this bloated bureaucratic union organization in place cannot deliver fire them and find a group who can do the job.

    I don't buy this "excuse". A decrease in volume... compared to when? 1980? 1950? 1880? 1790? Nonsense. The continuous stream of paid "junk mail" we find ourselves with now didn't exist 40 years ago. Neither did cushy retirement plans for mailmen and inefficient post offices. The vast majority of mail is presorted, and even handwritten mail is mostly sorted by OCR systems.

    1. Re:Nonsense by yourmommycalled · · Score: 1, Informative

      It's not the unions idjiot look at the bill the Rethuglicans passed to destroy the USPS so Rethuglicans could sell it of to their masters

    2. Re:Nonsense by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Somehow, you wound up at Slashdot when you clearly thought you were posting a comment on a Brietbart story.

    3. Re:Nonsense by yourmommycalled · · Score: 0

      You make not sense what so ever. Brietbart, Bachmann, Perry, Limbaugh, Coulter, Reagan, Bush, Fauxnews, ie., the Rethuglicans stated goal is to destroy the US government. The Rethuglicans/TeaTerrorist mantra is "smaller" government, meaning no government. Reagan, the Rethuglicans hero, said "Government is not the solution to our problem government IS the problem". I clearly said the Rethuglicans were trying to sell off the US government to their corporate masters. How you can draw a conclusion that the post should be on a RethuglicanTeaTerrorist website leaves me wondering if you even read the post. Try learning to read.

    4. Re:Nonsense by electron+sponge · · Score: 1

      You forgot to mention the Koch brothers, no breathless, invective-filled anti-Republican screed is complete without them.

    5. Re:Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this Media Matters? I thought it was Slashdot.

    6. Re:Nonsense by yourmommycalled · · Score: 1

      Facts bother you?

  17. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by xaxa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I joined Postcrossing last month. I liked the idea of sending random people postcards, and in return receiving cards from other random people.

    I send cards to a child in Finland, a girl in Germany, a student in Taiwan, a recent-graduate lawyer in the Netherlands and a woman in Siberia. So far, only the first two have received my cards, and I've not received one in return yet -- but it's only been two or three days. (I live in the UK, so it's no surprise that the cards to Finland and Germany arrived quickly.)

    I like travelling and meeting people from other countries, so hopefully I'll like reading the cards I receive too.

  18. Inflation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a place where the bogus Fed inflation measurement tools which help reduce pension and disability payment increases comes around to bite the US government in the tail. Inflation measurement is about as accurate as the unemployment stats with much cherry picking to make the picture look much better than it is.

  19. Remove free mail for non-profits and religion by assemblerex · · Score: 1

    Problem solved

    1. Re:Remove free mail for non-profits and religion by characterZer0 · · Score: 1

      And politicians.

      I am sick of getting pounds of thinly-veiled campaign ads from incumbents every fall at my own expense.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    2. Re:Remove free mail for non-profits and religion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ummm... mail is not free for non-profits and religions. http://pe.usps.com/businessmail101/rates/nonprofit.htm

  20. an engineered crisis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Strange that /. is missing the real crux of the problem; a bad 2006 law:

    >In 2006, Congress passed a law requiring the Postal Service to wholly pre-fund its retirement health package – that is, cover the health care costs of future retirees, in advance, at 100%.

    most organizations are allowed to fund retirement and pension funds in a graduated manner that provides funding at the time of need rather than decades in advance. Its almost like this crisis has been engineered...

    Source:
    http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/18/is-benefits-law-dragging-down-the-postal-service/

    1. Re:an engineered crisis by vlm · · Score: 0

      Irrelevant. Look at it from the point of view of the govt.

      Either the USPS can fund their retirement and pension package, or it can get funded by a govt bailout. Either way, the cash more or less comes out of the same wallet. Also at least some of the pre-funding is going to be invested in .... govt bonds ... keeping demand high, and rates low. Its a win win situation. Less pointless paper shuffling, better economic outlook.

      The private businesses situation is completely different. You can fund your pensions / retirements out of the executive bonus fund, or you can let the govt bail them out so your former employees don't have to die eating cat food. Hmm, I wonder which option private business executives would lobby for?

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    2. Re:an engineered crisis by Chowderbags · · Score: 4, Informative

      This really is the single largest problem that the USPS has. They basically have to pre-fund 75 years of retirement benefits and they were only given 10 years to do it. There is no other business or government agency that has to do anything even remotely similar to that and without that their financial situation would be impeccable.

    3. Re:an engineered crisis by King_TJ · · Score: 1

      I was going to point out the same thing ... that their massive retirement health package was a huge boat-anchor weighing down the ability of the USPS to function profitably. Still, I'm not sure that even without that, they'd be successful at this point?

      The problem I have with the whole thing is the same issue I've had with the USPS for decades. It doesn't seem like there's any good reason to keep them around, vs. allowing existing package delivery services to deliver the rest of the mail as well?

      For starters, the entire concept of a "mailbox" regulated by federal govt. laws and restrictions is rather ridiculous in this day and age. I can go out to the local Home Depot and buy myself a new mailbox right now, but immediately, I'm subject to a number of rules and regulations when I go to put the thing up in my front yard. It must be no more or less than a specific height, no more or less than a certain distance from the curb, must have my house numbers placed on it following certain rules, etc. And then, it's still considered "government controlled property" despite the fact I *bought* it myself and put it on *my* own land. It's illegal for a passer-by to open it and place any form of advertising inside. (Why?! Only plausible reason they'd care is to protect their monopoly status on delivery of such items!)

      For years now, the U.S. govt. has been privately contracting with FedEx to help them deliver the USPS Express and Priority mail -- showing they're not even as capable of doing that as the private competitors are. Why not just END the entire thing? If the UPS or FedEx or DHL truck is driving down my street practically every day anyway to drop off or pick up a box, it'd be more fuel efficient for them to deliver the rest of my mail while they're at it -- vs. the USPS running another truck to do the same thing.

    4. Re:an engineered crisis by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 2

      The law assumes that the postal service is going to go bankrupt and be closed down. It makes perfect sense that they fully fund the pensions under those expectations. Congress doesn't want to advert the postal services collapse. The collapse is the solution in their eyes.

    5. Re:an engineered crisis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish I had mod points.

      This is precisely correct. They have 45 BILLION in a trust fund. The "default" is over whether they can pay into the fund. It has nothing to do with skeery unions and everything to do with Congress.

    6. Re:an engineered crisis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The union has also engineered a crisis by forcing the "no layoffs at all" provision into the contract. They're inventing a shared sacrifice scenario where instead of laying off a few employees, they'll have to lay off all the employees.

      Unions are choking the fucking life out of this country.

      Posting anon because I've recieved deaththreats from browncoats for daring to not suck union dick.

    7. Re:an engineered crisis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This gets it exactly right. No other company, no other government organization has been required to fund their pension programs in advance to anywhere even close to the extent that the USPS, the country's largest single employer, has been required to. The fact that they're even close to making their ends meet in the circumstances in which they operate is something close to a miracle.

    8. Re:an engineered crisis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I just bet you have, you conservative victim you. ::eyeroll::

    9. Re:an engineered crisis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you reduce retirement to say 1.5 Billion they are still 5 Billion in the red.
      That's one penny for every junk mail item delivered to my mailbox.
      There must be something else going on to suck up that much cash.

    10. Re:an engineered crisis by SlippyToad · · Score: 1

      Yes, just like the debt limit crisis was engineered, the Iraq crisis was just made up . . .

      --
      One day I feel I'm ahead of the wheel / the next it's rolling over me / I can get back on / I can get back on
    11. Re:an engineered crisis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >In 2006, Congress passed a law requiring the Postal Service to wholly pre-fund its retirement health package – that is, cover the health care costs of future retirees, in advance, at 100%.

      most organizations are allowed to fund retirement and pension funds in a graduated manner that provides funding at the time of need rather than decades in advance. Its almost like this crisis has been engineered...

      OTOH, unfunded/er pension obligations kinda suck too. This is bankrupting California. The plan offered to fund them when the enhanced benefits (public employee union bribes) were introduced, was apparently based on harvesting Unicorn farts.

      So rather than finding out at a later date that the benefits package was nuts and unaffordable, they found out up front. Gosh, maybe THAT was the point of the law.

    12. Re:an engineered crisis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its almost like this crisis has been engineered...

      It has. Most of our current crises have been. The express goal has been to "shrink the federal government until it is small enough to drown in a bathtub. It seems that the adjunct goal is to arrange things in such a way that organized labor, people's retirements, and other safety nets are blamed for the crises. Considering how stupid it is, and how absurd the labor/"entitlements" narrative is the degree of success is truly astonishing.

    13. Re:an engineered crisis by Nightwraith · · Score: 1

      Ah, but how many of these other businesses are still paying their pensions? Too many simply went bankrupt or just closed up shop and the benefit recipients were told to pound sand.

      Most people would be thrilled to have a pension for retirement, but most would rail against the idea that part of their benefits they EARNED were simply stripped away years later due to a cash flow problem.

      Here, with this law, the problem has simply presented itself earlier in the life cycle.

    14. Re:an engineered crisis by PhinMak · · Score: 1

      On this pension issue... Defined Benefit pension plans are ripe for financial manipulation. They're a gun to your head. See my comment: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2414046&cid=37320404

    15. Re:an engineered crisis by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      I was going to point out the same thing ... that their massive retirement health package was a huge boat-anchor weighing down the ability of the USPS to function profitably. Still, I'm not sure that even without that, they'd be successful at this point?

      If you look at the numbers, they would be.

      The problem I have with the whole thing is the same issue I've had with the USPS for decades. It doesn't seem like there's any good reason to keep them around, vs. allowing existing package delivery services to deliver the rest of the mail as well?

      You sound like a Teabagger. Fedex and UPS have profit motives and charge extra fees for rural and/or home delivery. Go read the Constitution and try to understand why the Founding Fathers put the USPS in there.

      For starters, the entire concept of a "mailbox" regulated by federal govt. laws and restrictions is rather ridiculous in this day and age. I can go out to the local Home Depot and buy myself a new mailbox right now, but immediately, I'm subject to a number of rules and regulations when I go to put the thing up in my front yard. It must be no more or less than a specific height, no more or less than a certain distance from the curb, must have my house numbers placed on it following certain rules, etc. And then, it's still considered "government controlled property" despite the fact I *bought* it myself and put it on *my* own land. It's illegal for a passer-by to open it and place any form of advertising inside. (Why?! Only plausible reason they'd care is to protect their monopoly status on delivery of such items!)

      Again, you sound like a Teabagger. Those rules and regulations are there for a good reason, so the postman can drive by and put the mail in the box without having to get out of his truck.

      Do you complain about rules requiring certain standards for house numbers, or rules requiring those house numbers to be painted on the curb so that the Fire Department can find your house when it's on fire? Or do you think fire protection should be privatized too?

      As for not allowing passers-by to open it, do you really want people coming and stealing your mail? The rule is probably there because any items in the box are supposed to be MAIL, either incoming or outgoing. Not all mailboxes have flags (mine doesn't; it's on the side of my house next to the front door). If it wasn't put there by the Postman, he'll have to waste time looking at it to see it's another stupid flyer by the local landscaping businesses, making his route take twice as long. If you want to give people flyers, put them in their newspaper box or on their front door.

      If the UPS or FedEx or DHL truck is driving down my street practically every day anyway to drop off or pick up a box, it'd be more fuel efficient for them to deliver the rest of my mail while they're at it -- vs. the USPS running another truck to do the same thing.

      The UPS man can't carry all the packages for the entire street in his arms, plus all the mail too. Where I live (in a subdivision), the mail carrier does not drive to every house, he stops at the end of the street and walks to every house with all the mail for that street. It'd take far longer to drive, as the mailboxes are on the front of the houses, not near the curb.

      The simple fact is that the USPS and Fedex/UPS are optimized for totally different types of delivery. The USPS is optimized for small pieces of mail (letters and junkmail) which don't have to get there at any particular time, and usually aren't tracked at all. Fedex/UPS is optimized for higher-value shipments that go to far fewer destinations (not everyone on the street gets a package or urgent letter every day, but everyone gets junk mail and bills every day). You can't just merge the two together easily.

    16. Re:an engineered crisis by TClevenger · · Score: 1

      Pre-funding 75 years' worth of pensions in 10 years is not reasonable. It's the direct cause of the current crunch.

  21. Funny that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ....state-owned monopolies in countries commonly decried as "socialist" by the American right wing got out of this mess decades ago and are raking in the cash now.

    Last time I heard, Deutsche Post and TNT were making a nice, sustainable profit. Amusing to see that the motherland of capitalism's own postal service never got out of the 1970s way of thinking.

    1. Re:Funny that... by sarhjinian · · Score: 2

      A colleague of mine calls this Government Cheese Syndrome. To whit: the US would never do something like, eg, France or Switzerland and regulate the production of cheese to ensure quality and regional branding. That would be socialism and Interfering With The Free Market. On the other hand, they have to have something to sell to fill in a spot on the food pyramid and the dairy boards have a strong lobby, so they legislate a lowest-common-denominator product.

      And this is why Europe has Gruyère, Emmental or Jarlsberg, and the US has American Government Cheese.

      Sales tax gathering is my personal favourite. Other countries have a flat VAT; the US has a balkanized mess of city, county and state taxes, all with their own administrative boards, all of which American businesses have to deal with. Objectively the US sales tax system is insane---it costs more to run and returns less---but a Federal VAT would go over like a lead balloon because somehow it's worse to have a hundred thousand curtain-twitchers and pencil pushers at every level of government than just one central group.

      --
      --srj/mmv
    2. Re:Funny that... by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 1

      Why should the sales taxes be flat accross the whole of the United States? Costs of goverment are not the same evenly accross the country. In cities you have extra costs. Those costs don't scale evenly with population. A flat VAT is nuts. You wind up taking tax money from region A to give to region B. Region B has no incentive to control its costs becuase short falls come from region A. Because the rate is flat and national it become very hard to get it changed.

    3. Re:Funny that... by sarhjinian · · Score: 2

      Region B has no incentive to control its costs becuase short falls come from region A.

      You're thinking like an American tax planner: penny-wise and pound (dollar?) foolish because you're spending more trying to figure out how to precisely make it fair than if you just made blanket policy.

      In most nations, the central authority (sometimes state/province, sometimes federal, often both) doles out funds as needed using a known and documented process (eg, region B needs roads this year, etc, whereas A might need a hospital ten years from now) and/or uses transfers and/or equalization payments. Yes, this ends up being redistributive, but so what? Redistribution is at least effective, whereas redundant administration just wastes time and money.

      Local tax gathering is just plain nuts. It makes some sense for property taxation, but for sales or income the inefficiency ends up wiping out anything saved through fairness.

      --
      --srj/mmv
    4. Re:Funny that... by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 1

      The benifits of centralizations don't scale to nation the size of an empire. Most countries are small. The USA isn't. Federalism and republicanism are methods of deviding the work to the proper scale. The state of Texas is big enough that you don't have redundant administration. That administration would need to exist regardless of whether Texas set the sales tax rate. Technology has moved the bar of what the proper size is. The USA might benifit if some states were merged and others were split.

  22. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by maxume · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Fedex doesn't have a legal mandate to provide service to most addresses 6 days of the week. The comparison isn't particularly useful.

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  23. +1 for the USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Of course I live in exosuburbia so I have never experienced the horror stories that usually come from the city but when you think about it they do a pretty darn good job. I can put a piece of mail in a box at the end of my driveway and have it delivered relatively timely to anyplace in the USA for $.50, that's freaking amazing.

    1. Re:+1 for the USPS by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but for the cost of the existing internet service that almost everyone already has, I can put something in email and have it delivered any time any place in the world instantly. Being cheap and good at an outdated service is kind of meaningless. It's like telling me that I can have huge blocks of ice delivered six days a week reliably and cheaply -- which is great if it's 1910 and I don't have a refrigerator . . . but not so much in the 21st century.

  24. Unions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can thank the labor unions for the down fall of another company.

  25. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Our company dropped 250,000 pieces of mail at the regional sorting center the other day. It took 3 days for it to actually go out, and some articles have just "disappeared."

    A sudden influx of mail won't save them, they don't have labor where/when they need it and poor planning over the last decade is just causing their system to slowly implode. A bailout will postpone the inevitable, IMHO I think it is time for private industry to start bidding on mail regions.

  26. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by ByOhTek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is (and why I am starting to use epay rather than check+snail mail)... The USPS loses too much stuff

    In the four years since I've moved into my current residence, they've lost one mortgage check (eff that, from now on I drop the damn thing off in person), and one electric bill.

    That may not seem like a lot, but it is enough for me.

    Translation: they aren't losing my service because of competition, rather their own inability to reliably provide their offered service.

    --
    Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  27. It's true by dj245 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The USPS doesn't want to change, or can't. They are an supertanker with 2 steering wheels- the USPS leadership on one and congress on the other. They already do USPS money orders, why not make them electronic? They feed letters into automatic sorting machines at various points along the delivery route, why can't they have a scannable barcode with tracking information on each piece of first class mail?

    One point that I would make is that a first class envelope usually carries a lot more weight than an email. Somebody has to open it up, and read it, and then physically put it in the garbage, or write back. E-mails to companies too often disappear into an abyss or are replied to with a generic form letter. Companies lately have been burying their e-mail addresses too behind e-mail forms, support forums, etc. Their postal address is usually wide open. Sometimes e-mail support is offshore to India or who-knows-where, but will they really forward my postal mail to India? I doubt it.

    By the time I write a quick letter, put postage on it, print it out, and walk it out to my mailbox, I would have just found the e-mail address in some cases. While the delivery is slow, the time for me to get it out may be the same or faster. And the response will probably be better.

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    1. Re:It's true by laird · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The big problem for the USPS has is that they are required to do whatever Congress says, and prohibited from doing anything else. And, in particular, Congress has its own agenda, so even when the USPS knows what to do, it takes them years to decades to be allowed to make changes. For example, they were recently authorized to change smaller post offices from being dedicated buildings to being a service provided within an existing business - that took YEARS to pass, because congressmen didn't want to lose a "real post office" for their constituents, so the USPS was required by Congress to lose money on hundreds of tiny post offices. And if they need to raise the rates, or streamline operations, they are routinely blocked by Congress, because the voters don't care if the USPS is losing money, but they do care if the rates go up, or if people are laid off. Ideally the Congress should give the USPS more autonomy, to be able to manage itself without Congress imposing political concerns.

    2. Re:It's true by ScentCone · · Score: 2, Informative

      They are an supertanker with 2 steering wheels- the USPS leadership on one and congress on the other.

      You're forgetting the third steering wheel that congress built, and turned over to: the labor union that has the USPS by the short hairs, fiscally. Their contract prohibits any layoffs, even when they close down an under-used post office. Those union employees don't pay as much for their own health care or contribute to their own retirement plans as do normal government employees, and so on - and there's nothing the USPS management can do about it, except hemorage money in that general direction.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    3. Re:It's true by Narcogen · · Score: 1

      The USPS doesn't want to change, or can't. They are an supertanker with 2 steering wheels- the USPS leadership on one and congress on the other. They already do USPS money orders, why not make them electronic? They feed letters into automatic sorting machines at various points along the delivery route, why can't they have a scannable barcode with tracking information on each piece of first class mail?

      How would that help the current situation? Nearly every kind of improvement you can make here either increases the quality of the service (which does not address the problem, as nice as it would be) or only realizes cost reductions by reducing head count-- which they cannot do because of labor agreements. The kind of automation that usually makes operations better and more efficient here can't make things cheaper because they can't lay off the extra workers; in fact, it only makes things worse, because you have to invest capital into the automation but can't realize the savings-- and you can't gain more revenue.

      The ability to either reduce costs or increase revenue would solve this problem, but both are legally prohibited in this case. Increased automation probably isn't necessary to see cost reductions if layoffs were allowed; decreased volume per capita in the system, as email has taken over, would probably achieve that all by itself. That's why the only proposals on the table are things like curtailing Saturday delivery-- keep people on the payroll, but have them work fewer days or fewer hours. Fewer days of delivery means lower fixed costs for utilities and fuel for vehicles.

    4. Re:It's true by devotedlhasa · · Score: 5, Informative

      Congress and the Bush Administration passed the 2006 PAEA law which forced the USPS to submit over $5 billion a year in trust fund payments. This trust fund serves the purpose of transferring federal deficit to the USPS and artificially lowering the government's accumulated debt. This is really a story about bad government policy and not about how technology is replacing the need for a post office.

    5. Re:It's true by blueg3 · · Score: 2

      Part of the reason is that they're legally barred from entering into other lines of business. It came hand-in-hand with the substantial legal protections they get.

    6. Re:It's true by Viewsonic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nice Fox News banter. If you did any research yourself instead of listening to Palin and her Tea Party rantings, you would know there are trade offs for paying less for health care and pensions. Salaries are less to compensate for better benefits. The Unions negotiate all of this through free market Capitalism. The government agreed to it. This is what happens in a free market. The unions were once private and negotiated to become public. They didn't force anyone to do that. It was the free market acting as it should. Now that people don't like it, they want to throw Capitalism out the window and remove "Evil Unions". Stuff it.

    7. Re:It's true by jackbird · · Score: 1

      Well, congress could have passed universal health care and made that problem largely go away; but for some reason the drag on the economy that is private health insurance companies can't be talked about by Republicans for some reason.

    8. Re:It's true by Anon-Admin · · Score: 1

      So what you are saying is that USPS is a great small scale example of Socialism and it's shortcomings.

    9. Re:It's true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And, there's also the - far worse, IMO - problem of low business rates imposed by Congress in response to business lobbying. I wish there were a junk mail filter equivalent to SPAM intercept.

    10. Re:It's true by ScentCone · · Score: 0

      Nice Fox News banter.

      Actually, it occurred to me to mention this because of reading on the subject in the Washington Post and the New York Times. Excellent attempt to distract from reality, though, and come out swinging with a lame ad hominem maneuver.

      ... there are trade offs for paying less for health care and pensions. Salaries are less to compensate for better benefits

      Not even close, if you run the numbers. Combine that with being completely unfireable, and obliging your employer to keep paying you even when they have absolutely no need for you, and it's there's a reason that people who work there have no interest in leaving for another gig.

      It was the free market acting as it should.

      No, it was an entirely political process surrounding a government mandated monopoly. You can't get less free-market than that.

      "Evil Unions"

      As tempting as it is to use that phrase rhetorically, and in a snarky way, it's now becoming simply descriptive. But then, I suppose you'rehere to provide cover for people like Hoffa, right? If the people for whom you have so much venomous disdain actually said anything approaching what the union bosses say on a regularl basis, you'd be pitching an absolute lefty fit of even more faux unctuous umbrage. You're completely transparent, here.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    11. Re:It's true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The big problem is that the USPS is horribly inefficient. They have been in "dire straights" for years and yet they are constantly building new facilities, hiring lazy ass employees, and don't even provider the services they charge for (delivery confirmation more often than not doesn't seem to actually work).

    12. Re:It's true by anyGould · · Score: 1

      They are an supertanker with 2 steering wheels- the USPS leadership on one and congress on the other.

      You're forgetting the third steering wheel that congress built, and turned over to: the labor union that has the USPS by the short hairs, fiscally. Their contract prohibits any layoffs, even when they close down an under-used post office. Those union employees don't pay as much for their own health care or contribute to their own retirement plans as do normal government employees, and so on - and there's nothing the USPS management can do about it, except hemorage money in that general direction.

      The no-layoff clause struck me as completely stupid - if you don't need the staff, you don't need the staff. Although I suppose in a country that practices "at will" employment, you need that for any sort of job security.

    13. Re:It's true by CuriousGeorge113 · · Score: 1

      Read TFA. The New York Times, who (I assume) did their research, writes out the specifics of the union contract. Not once does the NYT (or ScentCone) quote Fox New, Palin, or anyone else in the Tea Party.

      But, I agree with your premise that we should let the free market run its course. As it appears, this means everyone working under the Postal Workers union contract will not be laid off. They will be fired, because their employer will be unable to pay them.

      Or, do we sacrifice some to save the lot?

      --
      No man is an island, But if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie them together, they make a pretty good raft.
    14. Re:It's true by Rockoon · · Score: 0

      Well, congress could have passed universal health care and made that problem largely go away; but for some reason the drag on the economy that is private health insurance companies can't be talked about by Republicans for some reason.

      Combined in both House and Senate, the healthcare bill got exactly 1 Republican vote.

      Amazing that you blame the Republicans for the shitty healthcare plan we got, when it was drafted by the Democrats with no input from Republicans, and forced through by the Democrats with no help from the Republicans.

      The Democrats got exactly what they wanted. Obviously the Democrats are far more corrupt than you perceive them to be. The Republicans would have never passed such a monstrosity, yet you blame them for it. Simply amazing.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    15. Re:It's true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not "Fox News banter" to believe that government unions are a sham. These union members are heavily protected from performance-based termination and receive guaranteed pensions for life. The only reason these unions are allowed to exist is because the politicians realize that this ever-growing group of people can help get them elected.

    16. Re:It's true by ericfitz · · Score: 1

      The Unions negotiate all of this through free market Capitalism.

      Uhhh, there's nothing free market or capitalism about USPS and unions of quasi-governmental workers. There's nothing free market about laws that prohibit companies from firing striking workers.

      Government (and quasi-government, the USPS is effectively a government agency) employee unions have a unique position in that the "business" can't choose to go out of business and go elsewhere. So it's forced to capitulate to any demand, however unreasonable, that is not illegal and that the union is unwilling to budge on. Government employee unions are a bad idea for this reason.

      There's another issue- moral hazard. When management of a private company make concessions during union bargaining, they are directly responsible (to their board and the marketplace) for paying the consequences of making those decisions. Politicians and government managers have much less accountability for making decisions that are not in the government's interest- managers are often shielded by law from retaliation (like firing for incompetence), and elections are often long away and often unions funnel more money to candidates who favor them in lawmaking and negotiations. So there's not much incentive to be adversarial in government employee union negotiations.

    17. Re:It's true by xigxag · · Score: 1

      I guess it's true that to a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. But no, in a socialist economy, the USPS would have no competition and so it would still be flourishing. Plus, the notion of failure would itself be an absurdity, since it would not be required to be "self-sufficient" to begin with. To the extent that that there is a problem with the USPS today, it's not one of socialism but of representative democracy -- due to which it is required to maintain levels of inefficiency that a neither a private company nor a thoroughly socialized institution would. It finds itself in the worst of all possible worlds.

      --
      There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
    18. Re:It's true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually it was the USPS debt all along. Instead of the tax payer just blank checking every debt the USPS held it was required to set up its own accounts and save money for its retirees. There is nothing hinky about this as the USPS is supposed to be a separate entity from the government. The real problem is the USPS is not separated enough from the gov and still has congress imposing stupid union rules that have slaughtered other industries.

    19. Re:It's true by chill · · Score: 1

      Not really. They used to operate as a savings bank, back in the early 20th Century. The reason they stopped had nothing to do with legal protections.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Savings_System

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    20. Re:It's true by xigxag · · Score: 1

      If there is one type of company where having a "union" for workers is most appropriate, it's a monopoly, isn't it? After all, if the bosses don't have to compete, why should the workers? That was the original rationale for government unions in the first place, which are not the same animal as private unions, where the anti-competitive behavior is in theory only on the part of the worker cartel, and where the government sets its own rules of engagement in the first place. The "problem" with the union, to the extent that there is a real problem here, is not one created by an overly strong group of workers who were able to extort a lopsided contract (a la, allegedly, the UAW), but by poor Congressional oversight which has mandated every action that the USPS management can take, even with respect to its own staff, and now has found itself unsatisfied with the results. This whole situation is ridiculous. Does NASA have to turn a profit? Does the Air Force? Does Congress itself? So why should the USPS, in its performance of a necessary Constitutionally-mandated function? Plus, despite the fact that there is a no-layoff clause in the current contract, the USPS has still managed to downsize by hundreds of thousands of employees. It would gladly put its remaining employees to more productive work except it is barred from doing so.

      Also, you accuse your grandparent of an "ad hominem" attack, and then...your last paragraph, what is that? "Lefty fit?"

      --
      There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
    21. Re:It's true by SlippyToad · · Score: 1

      Thank you for that. Because yes, the same vandals who cooked up all of our other troubles can yes, there they are, be identified at the scene of this massive ripoff as well.

      --
      One day I feel I'm ahead of the wheel / the next it's rolling over me / I can get back on / I can get back on
    22. Re:It's true by Purpleslog · · Score: 1

      You have it backwards. It forces USPS to not underfund its obligations. The underfunded obligations will have to be made up by US taxpayers in the future. I believe that legislation also transferred a billions of pension/health obligations from USPS to the the regular USGOV. I think that was for USPS retirees who also had military benefits.

    23. Re:It's true by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      you accuse your grandparent of an "ad hominem" attack, and then...your last paragraph, what is that? "Lefty fit?"

      Oh, that. Well, it's because he was already having exactly that. I extrapolated to assume that if he heard the people he's complaining about using the sort of language that we saw Hoffa using at Obama's event yesterday, that he'd saying more things along the same lines. Not a stretch.

      As for competition ... if you want to drive around in a truck and deliver things all day, or sort packages, or manage people that do, there absolutely are competing employers who certainly do want to pick and choose from the best recruits. The USPS has the monopoly on specific services, but people who want to do that sort of work can shop around for employers. Though plainly many don't want to, because if they've got that gig at the USPS, they know they can't get layed off, even if there's absolutely no reason to keep them employed there.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    24. Re:It's true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In addition to that in most union "companies" (Government especially) its impossible to get hired and opt out of being in the union even if the employee wanted too and was willing to sign all necessary documents.

      So much for "free" market.

    25. Re:It's true by obsess5 · · Score: 1

      "like firing for incompetence"

      Yes, that happens all the time in the private sector. Now excuse me while I go read those postings about the HP tablet and the HP CEOs who've walked away with multi-million-dollar compensation packages.

      "often unions funnel more money to candidates who favor them in lawmaking and negotiations"

      Quick, let's make up a name for them ... hmmm .... "Lobbyists"? Evil unions - you'd never see businessmen stooping to such tactics.

    26. Re:It's true by rdbiker · · Score: 1

      Most importantly, The USPS is not allowed by Congress to charge astronomical prices for delivery services as its competitors, namely UPS and FedEX, do.

    27. Re:It's true by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      No, the USPS is a great example of government inefficiency and its shortcomings. It has nothing to do with socialism, which is an economic system where means of production are owned collectively by people who are directly using them.

    28. Re:It's true by Grishnakh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, actually it's a great example of how well government-owned corporations can work. Despite all the problems Congress gives them, they still manage to have very reliable mail service to every address in the country for a very cheap price. If they didn't have our stupid Congress blocking every improvement they try to make, there's no telling how great they could be.

      The problem is that our Federal government is so utterly corrupt that they're hamstringed in their operations. They could save a ton of money by cutting Saturday (or better yet Wednesday) service, but Congress won't allow it. Basically Congress is setting them up to fail. Another poster pointed out that Congress passed "the Postal Act of 2006 which requires USPS to pre-fund 80% of future retiree health-care obligations by 2016. This costs USPS 5.5 billion $ per year. If not for this, USPS would have shown a 600 Million $ profit over the last 4 years." Since none of their competitors (or any other company) has this burden, it sure appears that this is the result of lobbying by USPS competitors. What do you call that? I call that corruption. The government of this country is even more corrupt than the government of Mexico.

    29. Re:It's true by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Congress could have also passed a health care reform bill that eliminated the special Cadillac health insurance for life that Congresscritters receive that the rest of us don't, but obviously the Democrats and Obama weren't too interested in doing that.

    30. Re:It's true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Those union employees don't pay as much for their own health care or contribute to their own retirement plans as do normal government employees, and so on - and there's nothing the USPS management can do about it, except hemorage money in that general direction."

          Say what? Look up FEHBP (health care) and FERS (retirement) - the same as other government employees.

    31. Re:It's true by patscii · · Score: 1

      That's not what anyone is saying.

    32. Re:It's true by Buelldozer · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what kind of twisted bizzaro land I've entered here but it makes my brain hurt.

      Are you seriously proposing the idea that saving money for a future cost you KNOW is coming is a bad thing?

      The mind, it boggles.

    33. Re:It's true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not the union that's the problem here, As other noted without the obligation to fund future retires by 2016, the usps would be making a profit.

      In fact they seem to be understaffed if anything. At my workplace we have several postal deliveries every day. 10 years ago the largest delivery was in the morning now its late afternoon. They simply can't sort the mail fast enough with the poor staffing levels they have now.

      Once again big corporate media perpetuates the myth that labor unions are a great weight on business when its simply not true.

    34. Re:It's true by laird · · Score: 1

      "The big problem is that the USPS is horribly inefficient"

      While this might be consistent with right-wing anti-government ideology, in reality the USPS is extremely efficient - they deliver a stunning volume of mail rapidly and reliably, at extremely low cost (15-30 cents/letter, vs $18 for a FedEx package). Their big problem is that Congress regulates the USPS, forcing them to lose money and then complaining that they're losing money. So, IMO, it's not the USPS that is broken, but Congress.

    35. Re:It's true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Unions negotiate all of this through free market Capitalism.

      You have no idea what you are talking about.

    36. Re:It's true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congress gets exactly the same "special Cadillac health insurance" that all other Federal employee's receive. Once they retire they probably get the same deal as other Federal retirees get.

  28. Funny, I get ten times the mail now than I used to by Assmasher · · Score: 1

    ...with literally 3 letters and 2 catalogs a day being shipped to my home address.

    Of course, my wife spends money at a reedonkulous rate through catalogs like this, but my neighbors seem to get 'bundles' of mail every day just like we do as well.

    --
    Loading...
  29. Get off my lawn by F69631 · · Score: 1

    I'm still waiting for /. to start supporting IPoAC... RFC 1149 came out 21 years ago and was built on well established technology. It was updated over 12 years ago and the latest, IPv6-compatible version came out this spring.

    1. Re:Get off my lawn by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 1

      It seems clear that IPoAC is a layer 2 protocol. The endpoints shouldn't have to support it at all. If you want it to be used more frequently then what you need is for e.g. Comcast to support it, but given their level of latency and packet loss it is likely that they already do.

    2. Re:Get off my lawn by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Abstractions are leaky, in particular for most higher level protocols to work IP over avian carriers you would almost certainly need to crank up the timeouts.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  30. In court... by crankyspice · · Score: 2

    It's much easier to get evidence of delivery in if it's USPS ("official records" don't need the testimony of a custodian of records in, e.g., California state courts, unlike FedEx/UPS "business records"); that, and statutes requiring USPS (e.g., CCP section 1013), are pretty much the only reason I use the postal service anymore...

    --
    geek. lawyer.
  31. Lousy service by Overzeetop · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They've got a delivery route to every single household in America every single day, and yet they can't seem to track a package through their system or guarantee a delivery day. Even their "Next Day" service is "We'll do our best, but it's not really a guarantee, and even then there are some places where we charge you the "next day" rate but we know it will be two days."

    Fedex and UPS do essentially a semi-custom route each day, and they drivers are pretty well taken care of (though they have long hours certain times of the year), and they can track and guarantee your delivery dates, for essentially the same price as USPS. USPS needs to be a value option, or a better/more reliable service. Right now they're neither, and they cannot compete.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:Lousy service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Fedex and UPS cost more. I get packages in 2 days from NJ and NY regularly, and when I order something, even UPS and FedEx often deliver ONLY to the local post office, and USPS does the last bit -- it's how a lot of online companies save money. The rates can't be beat. I NEVER had trouble tracking a package, and have had trouble with FedEx and UPS ALL THE TIME, who will update as "delivered" days before I get my expensive package.

    2. Re:Lousy service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      UPS costs are substantially dearer than USPS for basic packages. I'd like to know where your figures are coming from.

    3. Re:Lousy service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly this. The USPS service in my area is so horrible, I go out of my way not to use them for package delivery. I will/have paid more to have delivery from UPS or Fedex.

    4. Re:Lousy service by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      for essentially the same price as USPS

      There's your problem. This is simply not even close to true.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    5. Re:Lousy service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ^^^This^^^^

      The funny thing was around 2000-2001 they actually could track packages. Their system worked. Now it is updated once a day. If you are lucky. I have seen it update 2-3 days after I get the package. Seriously?

      It is sorted a few dozen times and you can not really tell me where it is?

      They have to compete with UPS, FedEx, and sometimes DHL. If they dont they will go under.

    6. Re:Lousy service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      True, they do not have the infrastructure to allow the tracking of individual packages. Is this from a lack of planning or another congressional road block?

      The company my wife works for ships 100% of their packages via USPS to customers on every continent. They would love true tracking like FexEx or UPS but can't affort the prices. Generally they get excellent service from USPS, most of their issues are from "customs" officials in select countries.

      They have had their share of challanges dealing with USPS and a few carriers that should be but cannot be fired. Again is this because of the rules they are forced to live with?

    7. Re:Lousy service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fedex and UPS do essentially a semi-custom route each day, and they drivers are pretty well taken care of (though they have long hours certain times of the year), and they can track and guarantee your delivery dates, for essentially the same price as USPS. USPS needs to be a value option, or a better/more reliable service. Right now they're neither, and they cannot compete.

      I guarantee you that UPS drivers may have a different number of stops each day, but they do get fairly regular routes that they learn and follow relatively well. I don't have personal experience with FEDEX, but UPS I have worked for, and they do things like I said.

      And no, the USPS's problems are not what you think. They are hamstrung by being a mandated service provider. They don't get the option to pick and choose, they have to provide mail to you at a given cost. UPS and FedEx they can say "Fuck you, that's too much damn work" and leave you to handle it yourself.

    8. Re:Lousy service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but on the other hand UPS cannot guarantee what time the package will get there so you essentially have to stay home the whole day waiting for the doorbell to ring. I guess with current unemployment some people can sit around all day waiting for a knock at the door but I have things to do. If I miss the postman I can just go to the post office around the corner the next morning and pick it up. If I miss UPS delivery the place to pick up missed packages is like 45 minutes away. Screw that. We can't all live in doorman buildings, ok. I have actually bought products from vendors with higher prices specifically because USPS is so much more convenient than the "delivery some random time between 8am-6pm" that UPS shafts you with.

    9. Re:Lousy service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "for essentially the same price as USPS"
      For shipments under one lb, USPS is almost always much cheaper than UPS/Fedex

    10. Re:Lousy service by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 1

      Your comment reminds me of a lazy imbecile international student which reflects poorly on the Chinese race (another reason why we need to severely limit F-1/F-2 visas in general, but that is off the scope of this comment)

      He is funny enough to mail a piece of letter, large envelope weighted no more than 2 ounces, and he show me the receipt, complained how expensive that is.... it was UPS 3-day and cost like $15.

      I physically show him that I can get the same kind of service from the Postal Service for $3.85, signature required. (If you need return receipt, $2.30 extra)

      So, USPS is indeed a value option.

      As far as guaranteed service, if you use USPS Express mail, the delivery is guaranteed on or before the indicated date (determined at the post office, usually next day anywhere within the U.S. lower 48 states).

      Time to move away from costly private alternative and use cheaper public or non-proft service. Privatization will damage economic recovery and DOOM this country.

    11. Re:Lousy service by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      I should have said "Parcel Service", which is what most of the money shipments seem to be.

      Example:
      37lb package, Roanoke, VA to Cleveland, OH, Ground service (2-3 days)
      FedEx Ground: $30.48
      USPS $64.65
      (checked today on USPS, price from Fedex from last Wednesday when I had to mail a tire back to the manufacturer)

      Sure, for packages less than 2lb, USPS will be cheaper usually. 2lb or more, you may as well send them UPS or Fedex and actually get real tracking data, not just a delivery confirmation. As a bonus, UPS/Fedex include $100 of insurance with the base fee; with USPS, you pay separately (and dearly, I might add). $100 in insurance is $2.30. Want a confirmation that the package was delivered? $0.80 more. Want a signature with that? That's another $2.45. Fedex gives me all three as part of the package, and for $7 I can send a package to Richmond, Virginia or Raleigh, NC and Fedex will GUARANTEE next day delivery. USPS will "hopefully get a parcel package there in 2-4 days" and will offer to charge you double for "priority" service which will speed that up to 1-3 days, but with no guarantee.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    12. Re:Lousy service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [UPS/FedEx] can track and guarantee your delivery dates, for essentially the same price as USPS.

      Not to rural areas, they can't. Try living in Alaska or Hawaii sometime, and see what the shipping difference is between UPS and a USPS Flat Rate Box. Many online retailers charge almost 100% of an order in shipping costs, and often don't even offer USPS shipping to us, despite Alaska being home to both UPS and FedEx shipping hubs.

      If there was suddenly no USPS, living in rural places would become much much harder, economically.

    13. Re:Lousy service by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      And you're USPS guy comes at the same time every day? Hell, my UPS driver is nearly always at my house between 5:30 and 6:30. At work he hits the office at 1pm, give or take a bit. Same with my USPS guy, but the time can vary.

      If I need a package somewhere by 10am, I can select that with Fedex. I can't with USPS (though you pay dearly for that service).

      When I lived "off the beaten path, I had a 1/2 mile long driveway. The USPS guy never brought any package to my door, I just got a slip that says he took it to the PO. Fedex and UPS both drove up to my front door.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  32. Go to your PO... by mulvane · · Score: 1

    I don't think we need 6 day delivery. I really don't think we need even 4 day delivery. Mon/Wed/Fri should be enough. There used to be a time in American history where people were expected to go to the local post office and check if they had mail. With USPS tracking, people could sign up to get mail waiting emails or voice mails. Then, if the mail was important enough, they could go and pick it up or wait for the next scheduled daily delivery. Would provide a vastly more efficient system in the long run I believe.

    1. Re:Go to your PO... by scharkalvin · · Score: 1

      If mail delivery is cut back will the due date of my bills be extended?

    2. Re:Go to your PO... by mulvane · · Score: 1

      The bill is due on its dude date even if you never get the bill to begin with. I've fought this battle before when I never received a bill. You are just supposed to remember to pay them. And with most things going paperless for billing anyway, its a moot point.

    3. Re:Go to your PO... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Totally agree. Cut the number of drivers in half and give them different routes on different days. I don't expect garbage pickup 6 days a week, and I can do the same with mail.

    4. Re:Go to your PO... by mulvane · · Score: 1

      To further this, people could sign up for 3 or 6 day delivery with 1 day delivery guaranteed with the option of local PO pickup offered. Then you could possibly quarter your drivers and keep an extra for guaranteed postage delivery in a set amount of days (like 3 day delivery).

    5. Re:Go to your PO... by goldspider · · Score: 1

      Great idea, and the USPS can then use e-mail to their advantage. Send customers an e-mail letting them know when they have a letter/parcel waiting for them at the Post Office.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    6. Re:Go to your PO... by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Frankly, there's no reason not to reduce service to ONE day a week. If it's that important that it gets there quickly, you're not using USPS in the first place. And this is a good compromise for those who are so adamant that they must have some sort of USPS service, just in case their 102 year old aunt wants to send them a post-card from across the country once every year at Christmas.

    7. Re:Go to your PO... by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Even better, let people opt out of USPS service. I literally get NOTHING from the USPS that I want. It's 100% garbage. If you gave me the option of not receiving USPS service *ever* at my address, I would opt into that in a heartbeat.

    8. Re:Go to your PO... by vlm · · Score: 1

      The bill is due on its dude date even if you never get the bill to begin with. I've fought this battle before when I never received a bill. You are just supposed to remember to pay them. And with most things going paperless for billing anyway, its a moot point.

      Also as the second great depression marches onward, there are simply fewer bills to pay. Think of magazine subscriptions, mail order catalogs, credit cards...

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    9. Re:Go to your PO... by vlm · · Score: 1

      Great idea, and the USPS can then use e-mail to their advantage. Send customers an e-mail letting them know when they have a letter/parcel waiting for them at the Post Office.

      Naw box 'em up and send out via UPS or fedex. That way you can guarantee delivery via a tracking number.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    10. Re:Go to your PO... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you can get your bill on time electronically. Unless of course you're Luddite or Amish (at which point I would question your 5 digit /. ID)

    11. Re:Go to your PO... by Matheus · · Score: 1

      Ya... I certainly don't need my postal mail any more often than my XKCD!

      Just don't make me have to go to my post office to GET my XKCD!

    12. Re:Go to your PO... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plus it could really cut back on all the &*()@#$) junk mail. If everyone just left the junk crap at the post office, I'm sure someone would sit up and notice once the post offices started exploding in a shower of ads, thinly disguised as 'personal' letters.

    13. Re:Go to your PO... by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      > If mail delivery is cut back will the due date of my bills be extended?

      Does it matter? You would still pay them on midnight the day it was due.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    14. Re:Go to your PO... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had to fight this as well, only their due date fluctuated wildly and it was hard to tell when something was due without the physical bill.

      The response I got from them was so ridiculous that I refused to pay it and no longer received their service.

    15. Re:Go to your PO... by quetwo · · Score: 1

      In our town, they consolidated all the post offices into a single office and a "distribution center". The distribution center is only open 10am to 4:30pm M-F (closed for lunch from noon to 1). They are also the ones that hold your package hostage if it is larger than your mailbox.

      If I had to pick up my mail on a regular basis with the current situation, I'd be miserable. At least UPS/FedEx is open until 7pm if they have to hold my packages...

    16. Re:Go to your PO... by ShavedOrangutan · · Score: 1

      Just take down your mailbox. It's the easiest opt-out ever.

      --
      Godaddy is a scam and a ripoff.
  33. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by yourmommycalled · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Yeah that's because a rethuglican Congress required that the USPS fund both the retirement program and the health plan at 100%. The average for the S&P 500 funding is 80%. Other federal employees is 41%; the military is 24%; and the SAME GOVERNENT bureau which requires the USPS to fund at 100% does not fund its retirement and health plans at all. The $75 billion dollars needed to fund both the retirement program and the health plan at the 100% level is equal to a year's income at the USPS. The stated intent of these rules chages were to make the USPS look like it was losing money. Not so strangely the year the rule changes were enacted FEDEX/UPS were complaining that USPS had an unfair advantage because they had to fund their employees healthcare and retirement at the 80% level, but the USPS was only at 41%. Strange that the sponsors of the bill requiring 100% funding received large campaign donations from FEDEX/UPS. Futher you might check the FEDEX labor cost. FEDEX says it's higher and they don't include the costs of all the part timers they hire around christmas. USPS is has far better service than the FEDEX/UPS. At least USPS delivers the package rather then sending you an email that says come pick up your package since it couldn't be deliverd. USPS actually pays for damages to a package rather than telling you to f**k off which I ALWAYS get from UPS when UPS punctures packages

  34. Mismanagement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only a few short years ago, the USPS was boasting of profits and windfalls. It's present demise is clearly not due to email, but rather it is due to mismanagement.

    If email were the problem would private sector package delivery services not be suffering the same fate? Yet, they are growing and expanding; FedEx. UPS, DHL, Sonic Courier and many many more smaller operations are still viable and will remain so long into the future. Despite email, people still need to move physical missives and packages across the globe.

    Blaming email is either a pathetic excuse or further evidence that USPS management doesn't have a clue.

    1. Re:Mismanagement by Qzukk · · Score: 2

      Only a few short years ago, the USPS was boasting of profits and windfalls. It's present demise is clearly not due to email, but rather it is due to mismanagement.

      Yep. Now if only Congress would stop passing laws telling it what to do and how to do it, it might be able to manage itself. Bonus points if Congress repeals the laws they already passed.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  35. Get AOL involved. by Lose · · Score: 1

    So they can ship their free trial discs again. That's easily 20% added mail volume nationally.

    1. Re:Get AOL involved. by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Along those lines, I would think that Amazon choosing UPS as their primary service speaks volumes. They deal in bulk where fast and reliable shipping and good customer service is important and their solution is *not* USPS, for a reason.

    2. Re:Get AOL involved. by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      Funny, it's anecdotal but I've received nothing but grief from UPS. They've delivered my package to the wrong address a dozen times in the past several years (these were expensive packages, mind you, not some trivial affair), their tracking of my packages often read "Delivered" days in advance of delivery, and their customer service was unhelpful to me when I would address concerns.

      These days I avoid UPS like the plague if at all possible.

  36. No kidding by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    Look at the bulk of mail you get over the week in the mailbox.

    For us, it's about 80% junkmail.
    Of the 20% that matters, probably 17-18 points of that are bills, which could easily come as email, but in any case don't (or shouldn't) require first-class handling.
    The other 2 points are miscellaneous mail that matters for one reason or another - magazines, notifications, netflix, etc.

    Do the postage charges for junk mail really cover the costs? I'd definitely agree that the bulk rates can float above inflation - that's a commercial enterprise.

    NONE of our mail is urgent enough that we need daily delivery. We could easily live with 1/week.
    In fact, we personally have discussed that we wouldn't be put out if mail delivery stopped entirely - we could stop by the post office on the way home from work 1/week.

    Now, I understand that knocking off deliveries 6 days a week will NOT eliminate 6/7ths of the costs....with the fixed costs of buildings, trucks, etc. I'd guess that a 80% reduction in deliveries probably will only net a savings of 50%. But that's 50%.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:No kidding by vlm · · Score: 2

      In fact, we personally have discussed that we wouldn't be put out if mail delivery stopped entirely - we could stop by the post office on the way home from work 1/week.

      My wife is a rural postmaster's daughter, and lets just say the local retailers loved him and his post office... Guaranteed the entire village walked past their storefront at least once per week, if not daily. I'm told the "new urbanist" types have a similar line of thinking, to encourage downtown walking foot traffic.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    2. Re:No kidding by xaxa · · Score: 1

      In the UK, I think the Post Office offers junk mail services from "next day" (which is relatively expensive) to "when we have some other mail to send to that address, or else in 7 days", which is cheap. This doesn't just cover "junk", I sometimes get non-urgent information from my bank using this service.

    3. Re:No kidding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see how reducing to once-weekly delivery would present any savings. Actually, it could add to costs.

      All that your approach does is focuses the delivery fleet onto one particular set of addresses each day.

      The total volume to be delivered is the same, but now requires storage infrastructure to hold-over mail due for delivery later in the week.

      They still have to deliver n letters to your house, but now they cannot do so ad hoc, they have to bunch your mail until Friday. They'll deliver to the next street over on Thursday, possibly driving-past your house to do so.

    4. Re:No kidding by Libertarian001 · · Score: 1

      At least you didn't just make up that 50% figure. For a moment there I was pretty worried.

    5. Re:No kidding by TClevenger · · Score: 1

      Obviously you've never lived in a rural area where curbside delivery isn't offered and had to cram into a tiny post office parking lot, along with most of the population of your ZIP code, in the 2-hour window the post office is open on Saturday, since they close at an unreasonable 4:30pm Monday through Friday.

  37. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Hatta · · Score: 2

    Neat idea. Should have called it Post Roulette.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  38. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by BitZtream · · Score: 0

    Sunds more like theft than loss. Most people would go there entire lives without losing anything. Have you made them aware of the losses or are you just complaining for no reason.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  39. They are in default by roman_mir · · Score: 1, Interesting

    There is no such thing as: "If Congress doesn't act we will default", this means they are bankrupt, that's all there is to it.

    At the risk of being moderated down further I must say anyway that this does not surprise me at the least, I've said that on multiple occasions that this is what is coming to the USPS

    Quote:

    When somebody says that government can do things efficiently, and they use the postal office as an example, they should really go back to that premise and realize, that the US post office is out of cash - it's selling 'forever stamps' today, and assuming it doesn't just dissolve over the next few years, it won't be able to make any money at that time and it will be in a worse fiscal shape than it is today, because the stamps sold today are basically protection against the 10% (current level) of monetary inflation that US Fed and Treasury are incurring on US population. Today the postal office cannot function already and they sell the forever stamps, tomorrow, they'll have to raise the prices but people will use those forever stamps and the postal office will either have to default on that stamp or dissolve, or there will be another bail out, and people use that as one of 'better' examples of government 'efficiency'.

    Then people say things back to me that make no sense about how USPS is not or used to not have problems. Well yes, as long as there is a way to print more money the gov't will keep subsidizing these money losing programs, like military and wars, USPS, SS, Medicare, bank bail outs, stimulus programs, anything that is subsidized by government borrowing, printing and spending can go on for a while until the currency is destroyed.

    The S&P downgrade was not just downgrading US debt risk, it was downgrading US CURRENCY.

    --

    Everything goes back to the question of fiscal responsibility, and there is no such thing in USA at all anymore.

    Do you know what a USD is? Ben Bernanke does not. He believes a dollar is what it buys, though in USA the dollar has precise meaning (certain weight in gold or silver).

    USD is a federal reserve note. Do you know what a "note" means? Note means an IOU. It's a promise note to give you gold or silver for your currency. But since 40 years ago when Nixon decided to default on the dollar (they did it a few times in history of USA, defaulted I mean), the IOU stopped being a promise note. It's not a promise by the Federal reserve bank to give you anything for that piece of paper/cotton/computer record.

    Since the Federal reserve promises to give you nothing, that IOU is worthless, that is what S&P downgraded. They should have downgraded it to JUNK, because that's what US federal reserve note promises to you - nothing.

    Because USD is a note, which now gives you nothing, it's worth 0, and this means that anything that the Fed buys is actually STOLEN by the Federal reserve. That's right, any asset they buy (and gov't "economists" are now suggesting that the Fed just buys out any assets - houses, businesses, etc), this means that Fed is completely openly STEALING those assets.

    The US T-bills that are bought by the Fed, what do you think this does? This means that nobody else wants them, so Fed monetizes the debt and thus inflating the value of whatever USD denominated assets you have.

    The USPS is suffering because it does not generate any revenue that is real. It's subsidized, and it was selling so called "forever stamps", and people were buying them, thinking that they would be able to USE those forever stamps in the future, thus protecting themselves from inflation, because stamps

    1. Re:They are in default by holdme · · Score: 0

      nothing wrong with little crock. nothing wrong with a large crock either. crock is good. Hold me, oh wise one.

    2. Re:They are in default by DogDude · · Score: 1

      Wow. You must have a *very* shiny hat!

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    3. Re:They are in default by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just as a nitpick; the S&P downgrade to AA+ was on sovereign debt risk only; they specifically said in the report that announced the downgrade that they did not believe currency conversion would be an issue - i.e. they were NOT downgrading the currency. If they were, they'd have downgraded every business that holds USD - i.e. every single rating they had would go down, because everyone holds USD.

    4. Re:They are in default by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, thanks, I love a good laugh in the A.M.

    5. Re:They are in default by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      When sovereign debt gets downgraded for a country that PRINTS its own currency (and in this case for a country that prints reserve currency), what is really downgraded is not the ability to PRINT money to give back whatever nominal interest and even principal.

      What is downgraded is the very fact that the government of the country CAN print money and thus monetize the debt thus destroying the value of currency.

      It may be subtle for you to understand, but that's what it is.

      It also means that the entire country is downgraded, because national debt is the REFERENCE debt, all other debts of the States, cities, businesses and people in that country now MUST be downgraded, because the government can always tax anything, confiscate any asset from anybody in the country - business, state or individual, to pay back the debts/interest.

      All of the US ratings are now absolutely below the AA+, there is no way to escape that little fact.

      Also it makes no sense that the downgrade took US rating only to AA+ and not to junk, based on the fact that USA will print its currency to junk to "pay back" the nominal debt value.

      Also it makes no sense that ratings of other countries, who hold large amounts of US debt are lower than US rating (even now). After all, before Japan or China or Germany can default, USA MUST default, because those countries hold Trillions of USD in T-bills or just currency.

    6. Re:They are in default by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      It's a promise note to give you gold or silver for your currency.

      No, it's not. It hasn't been for fifty years. You may not like the fact that it's not, but it doesn't change the fact.

    7. Re:They are in default by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd moderate your post down too for spreading pure conspiracy theory fud.

    8. Re:They are in default by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      No, it's not. It hasn't been for fifty years. You may not like the fact that it's not, but it doesn't change the fact.

      - 40 years actually. It's just a bit over 40 years.

      But that's what I said!

      Federal reserve NOTE is an IOU. It used to be an IOU, that's what the definition of the word NOTE is.

      No, they won't give you anything for it (though the "official" rate is 42 USD/troy ounce of very pure gold). They won't give you that stuff, that's exactly why when they print any more USD they counterfeit money.

      Gold is money.
      USD is currency.

      Those are 2 different things. Currency - notes that promise to pay money. Once the notes are invalid (will not be fulfilled), any newly printed currency is counterfeit.

      US has defaulted on the promise to fulfill its obligations to pay gold for Federal reserve notes, that's when the value of printed USD became nothing and the rating of the debt became junk.

      It's just US has a lot going for it, especially the fact that USD is still used as the reserve. But it's a false reserve, it has no value, so anybody buying US debt and/or holding US dollars is in trouble.

    9. Re:They are in default by dhawton · · Score: 0

      Actually, the US Government does not print its money. Might want to check out who actually owns/is the US Federal Reserve. Hint, the term Federal doesn't have anything to do with the US Government beyond a few regulatory policies from Congress.

    10. Re:They are in default by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Oh, come on. Federal reserve bank is about as independent as the SCOTUS.

      When? When was the last time that the Fed did not do what the white house wanted from it and didn't print? In fact it's even worse than Congress, because Fed gave secret loans without any authorization of Congress all over the place since 2008 ( and likely before that time as well, we don't know, do we?)

      Federal reserve bank is a front for all the banks and large monopolies/oligopolies in USA and other places, it does whatever it does to steal your purchasing power and to concentrate the wealth in the hands of selected few - those people are really the thieves.

      The system is set up to "regulate" businesses, but in reality it only regulates competition out of business for those, who set it up - very large banking interests (military, agriculture, communications, energy, health, they are all in there, but the banks are running the place.)

    11. Re:They are in default by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Do you know what a USD is? Ben Bernanke does not. He believes a dollar is what it buys, though in USA the dollar has precise meaning (certain weight in gold or silver)."

      That's what it was, as you point out. But you seem to imply there would be some value in maintaining a link to gold, silver, or some other tangible good. Good luck with that. It's a common myth that somehow currency was better when fixed to a physical material like gold or silver, but in a practical sense there isn't enough gold or silver in the world to match the value of the currencies in circulation in the US or the rest of the world, and the price of gold and silver fluctuates anyway. The only tangible goods of any real intrinsic value are food and water and anything you can build or labor to produce them. You can't eat gold or silver and therefore the only value in them is what people attach to them and what other things you can buy with them ... just like paper money.

      You are right that the US government has basically run the country on cheap debt for about the last 10 years or more, whether by selling debt or via allowing inflation and devaluing currency. They've borrowed from the future to pay for the excesses of today. No wonder the economy is experiencing a prolonged drag. Only banks do well when borrowing is out of control, at least until they start collapsing because they've gotten too greedy and loaned too much. Returning to a "gold standard" wouldn't fix that at all, but it is an irrelevant obsession with people who think they know the magical answer to the economic problems. No, it's really simple: stop spending more than you actually earn, and learn to live with what revenue you have. In the case of the government, that should mean restoring taxation levels to something that was historically sustainable (i.e. pre-Bush era tax-cut), or cutting spending correspondingly (should have been done WHEN Bush brought in those tax cuts instead of 10 years later after the debt piled up). The approach taken in the Bush era ("deficits don't matter") was a grand experiment in trying to make government smaller by starving it for revenue. It obviously didn't work.

      The sensible approach would be to split the difference (cuts + revenue increases) and focus any revenue increases on people who have gotten off comparatively easy the last 10 years of stagnant growth of lower and middle class incomes, who got bailed out by the government on Wall Street, and who poured comparatively little back into the economy as they set up bank accounts outside the country to hide their income: the very rich. They did very well through this entire period, with incomes growing well in excess of inflation and income disparity increasing greatly, while the people at the lower end were lucky to get rate-of-inflation wage increases. "Trickle-down economics" apparently doesn't work out very well either. Businesses need to start paying their employees better rather than preserving raises for upper management, or there's soon not going to be a domestic market to sell their products to. You can try to be "globally competitive", but if your competition is using almost the equivalent of slave labor, it's going to be pretty difficult.

    12. Re:They are in default by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...as long as there is a way to print more money the gov't will keep subsidizing these money losing programs, like military and wars, USPS, SS, Medicare, bank bail outs, stimulus programs, anything that is subsidized by government borrowing, printing and spending can go on for a while until the currency is destroyed."

      I agree there's to much money (especially in the financial market - 11 times as much money in the derivatives market as in the real economy, source CIA/wiki). But what do you propose as an alternative to not printing money in order to accommodate economic growth? Deflation perhaps?

      The problem is not with the printing of money, but with the fact that it's all borrowed from banks, and thus all money is debt to banks - including the money we/the govt use to pay back that debt. So the national debt can not be payed back as long as we (as per our government) keep borrowing money instead of the government printing money itself (and obviously not lending it to itself...) as was common practice until about a century ago. The were no trillion-dollar hedge funds back then, but the economy was doing fine.

      "USD is a federal reserve note. Do you know what a "note" means? Note means an IOU. It's a promise note to give you gold or silver for your currency."

      Except that the USD has been fiat money ever since 1971 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money). Precious metals are no longer a factor in the value of money.
      That is a good thing because the so called gold standard means that the "standard" (supposed real value) of your money is property of banks, not yours. So the gold standard is just another way to indebt labor to banks.

      Money ought to be an I-Owe-You for the labor that went into creating the product or service (excluding financial services) that is being traded by means of that money.
      The fact that instead of that all money is debt to banks, means that we (laborers) owe the banks the value of our labor. Somehow bankers managed to convince our elected representatives it's better that way (question is: better for who?), and although worded differently it was agreed upon in the Federal Reserve Act. It is wrong, insane, and the fundamental cause of the financial/economic problems faced by so many people on Earth.

    13. Re:They are in default by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      USA will default one way or another, I propose an honest default - debt restructuring, paying cents on the dollar in dollars that are still not totally destroyed, pushing interest rates up to double digits.

      Deflation is contraction of money supply, and yes, it should happen. All of the banks that were bailed out are insolvent once interest rates go up above what the short term t-bills pay. Then all debts will have to be restructured and all banks will fail. It should be allowed.

      You don't need to link me to a wiki, you should read my comment more carefully, it states plainly that USD hasn't been backed with anything for 40 years now (yes, that's today - 40 years and a couple of weeks I think). Federal reserve notes are notes, and now they will give you nothing for them, so they are worthless.

      Precious metals are no longer a factor in the value of money.

      - yeah, you can tell it to all the people who hold metals because they understand that economic reality of thousands of years cannot be changed by 100 years of bad policy. Well, 40 years actually. The age of fiat is coming to an end, people want real money - that's not paper.

    14. Re:They are in default by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      practical sense there isn't enough gold or silver in the world to match the value of the currencies in circulation

      - common misconception.

      There is a mechanism for it, it's called "price discovery".

      and the price of gold and silver fluctuates anyway.

      - I guess you'd be surprised to find out what the price of USD is doing then:

      (I compiled the list with numbers from 2003 to 2010)

      sugar Dec 2003: 20.40 cents/pound, Apr 2011: 36.97 cents/pound, price up by over 81%
      Beef Dec 2003: 105.40 cents/pound, Apr 2011: 193.00 cents/pound, price up by over 83%
      Barley Dec 2003: 100.77 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 208.70 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 107%
      Rice Dec 2003: 197.00 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 500.57 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 154%
      Cocoa Beans Dec 2003: 1,646.58 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 3,113.52 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 89%
      Tea Dec 2003: 205.22 cents/KG, Apr 2011: 325.33 cents/KG, price up by over 58%
      Rubber Dec 2003: 57.31cents/pound, Apr 2011: 265.49cents/pound, price up by over 363%
      Corn Dec 2003: 111.98 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 318.45 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 184%
      Bananas Dec 2003: 371.43 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 1,013.47 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 172%
      Propane Dec 2003: 0.63 USD/Gallon, Apr 2011: 1.45 USD/Gallon, price up by over 130%
      Wheat Dec 2003: 165.57 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 336.30 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 103%
      Oranges Dec 2003: 583.00 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 881.00 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 51%
      Salmon Dec 2003: 3.12 USD/Kg, Apr 2011: 7.86 USD/Kg, price up by over 151%
      Chicken Dec 2003: 68.98 cents/pound, Apr 2011: 86.42 cents/pound, price up by over 25%
      Pork Dec 2003: 48.68 cents/pound, Apr 2011: 92.06 cents/pound, price up by over 89%
      Silver Dec 2003: 565.33 cents/Troy ounce, Apr 2011: 4,279.79 cents/Troy ounce, price up by over 657%
      Alluminum Dec 2003: 1,557.78 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 2,667.44 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 71%
      Uranium Dec 2003: 13.35 USD/pound, Apr 2011: 57.84 USD/pound, price up by over 333%
      Iron Ore Dec 2003: 13.82 cents/dry Metric Ton, Apr 2011L: 179.26 cents/dry Metric Ton, price up by over 1197% (yeah, almost 1200%)

    15. Re:They are in default by holdme · · Score: 0

      wow, if you know about it, then it's not shiny enough. Time to polish some more, do it and... hold me.

    16. Re:They are in default by holdme · · Score: 0

      Mmmm, I love a nice juicy conspiracy in the morning. If it weren't for the conspirators, conspiring people, what would I do for Saturday nights? Who would I have to hold me?

    17. Re:They are in default by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Gold is money.
      USD is currency.

      Gold is a metal. One that has a few uses in industry and looks nice as jewelry. There's nothing magic about it. Your insistance that only gold is real money is an artificial distinction in your own mind with no basis in reality and your belief US dollars are "counterfeit" if they can't be redeemed for gold is, frankly, batshit insane. By this measure, there is no such thing as non-"counterfeit" money that I am aware of anywhere in the world. Not even the Swiss Franc is redeemable for gold.

    18. Re:They are in default by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      You are right, all fiat currencies are counterfeit. Japanese are printing, Europeans are printing, Russians are printing, Chinese are printing, etc.

      Some are pegging their currency to the reserves they have in USD, because USD is said to be the 'reserve currency' (the 1944 conference at Bretton Woods concluded this.)

      Do you not understand that all currencies printed by sovereign central banks are counterfeit if they have no reserves behind them? Then the joke is on you.

      Swiss Franc is not redeemable for gold, however it is not printed out of existence, so for a decade now it has been going up steadily against all other currencies.

      Just a few weeks ago there was a rumor that the Franc will be printed to push its value down and even an insane idea was floating around to peg the Franc to Euro. Now that would be really stupid, wouldn't it? Having a very successful currency in its own right be pegged to a monstrosity that Euro is. Basically losing the sovereignty in terms of fiscal policy and destroying the purchasing power of its own people.

      A currency war is a kind of war where the objective is to hurt yourself, shoot yourself so bad, that you are worse off than your opponent. Of-course those who lose in this war win in reality, because they fail to destroy the purchasing power of their own nation more than others.

      Gold is money, I see it as money, many people do. You may not see it as money, but it is market money, which means it's up to the individual to decide whether he wants to hold gold or anything else. AFAIC gold is better than anything else others use as money, holds its value unlike all of the paper notes.

    19. Re:They are in default by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please go back to calling in to CSPAN rather than bringing the desperate, barely coherent ravings here. Thanks.

    20. Re:They are in default by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Texas ranks 2nd in the US in GDP and 15th in the world. Should the union fracture, Texas would be in good financial shape to create its own currency. Shouldn't be too difficult with Dallas leading the way. Should such a radical scenario take place, you can bet your bottom US Dollar people all around the US, including China, Russia, and ever other nation would be investing heavily into Texas. After all, the Texas constitution *requires* a balanced budget. Solid and sound. That's the type of financial confidence people want these days.

    21. Re:They are in default by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Since the Federal reserve promises to give you nothing, that IOU is worthless, that is what S&P downgraded. They should have downgraded it to JUNK, because that's what US federal reserve note promises to you - nothing.

      What the note promises to me is the ability to pay any debt incurred in US, enforced by the US government. Not the least of those debts is one that most people in the country have - namely, their taxes.

      So, no, it's not "nothing".

    22. Re:They are in default by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      But wait a moment. To pay taxes in US dollars you need to earn or make US dollars somehow, and you are getting hurt at the moment that you are getting paid (of-course you are also getting hurt when you pay taxes, but that's a different discussion). You are getting hurt by being paid in worthless currency.

      How do I know it's worthless? I have in my hand right now a silver coin, it's a 10 ounce Perth Mint coin, it's large, it says: 10 dollars on it, but the denomination has no meaning. This coin is over 400 bucks. This was bought for about 60 bucks a number of years ago. If I go downstairs and open a safe, I'll have in my hands a small number of gold bars. Those were bought at 550 USD/ounce. You can figure this out, right?

      The point is that you are getting hurt when you are getting paid in currency that is losing value because it's being debased. The fact that you are also forced to pay income taxes on that is just an insult added to that injury.

    23. Re:They are in default by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      If you bought a stamp a few decades ago, it could easily be worth 100x today if it's the right kind of stamp. That doesn't bestow some magic properties on it that make it money.

    24. Re:They are in default by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      A stamp? I am sorry, are you saying that all the people who are getting rid of fiat and holding metal money are all lucky stamp buyers?

      OK, are central banks buying stamps by the ton? NO. Central banks are buying gold by tens and hundreds of tons. Clearly they understand that gold is money.

      Is US Constitution saying anything about stamps being money? No. US Constitution says:

      No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

      What about US coinage act? It defines how much gold or silver is a in a dollar.

      So central banks are holding gold, US Constitution and coinage act says money is gold, people have been using gold for thousands of years as money, people today hedge against inflation of fiat currencies in gold and silver and platinum, and you are saying all of this is like buying stamps?

      OK, I am not going to argue with you. We are all just that freaking smart - we know what goes up in nominal price when governments print more and more fiat cash.

      It's OK, dude, don't worry about gold and silver, you can go ahead and be free of worries. You can believe whatever you want to believe, it's a market of opinions, after all.

    25. Re:They are in default by dhawton · · Score: 0

      Think you need to take off your tin foil hat there sir. You're attempting to teach something through beer goggles.

  40. E-Mail? Don't make me laugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Early on in public internet access I'm sure it was a minor factor but not today. The big hit they took as far as business lost was in the direct withdrawl/deposit of funds. I used to send out about 6 bills a month. I don't send out any today. I only get paper statements from two companies I deal with. That makes a loss for USPS of 10 mailings from one person. This isn't to mention the annual stuff like taxes and dealings with the DOT. I ordered 200 checks about 3 years ago. I think I've used 5 of them so far and most of those was to set up direct deposit accounts. I'll never need to order checks again in my life.
     
    People who use to snail mail actual letters to other people have either gone to cell/Skype/Facebook services.
     
    Aside from that, they're going to lose more business to people who are getting their magazines via the web and e-readers. I really think their future is darker than most people think. Either costs are going to increase or people are going to be forced to adapt to a digital way of doing things or be forced to living a life where doing business outside of the essentials is not easy.

    1. Re:E-Mail? Don't make me laugh. by Aladrin · · Score: 1

      And instead of paper bills, those companies are using... Yup, Email. You invalidated your own point.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    2. Re:E-Mail? Don't make me laugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, no. While some companies do email bills a lot don't even do that anymore. So you've invalidated your own invalidate. So sad.

  41. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    I send cards to [...] Finland, [...] Germany, [...] Taiwan, [...] Netherlands and [...] Siberia. [...] I live in the UK

    That is going to help the USPS how?

  42. Phallic by tepples · · Score: 1

    Should have called it Post Roulette.

    "Post Roulette" might encourage people to send postcards of things that are quite phallic. At least "Crossing" keeps it firmly in G rated territory.

    1. Re:Phallic by xaxa · · Score: 1

      "Post Roulette" might encourage people to send postcards of things that are quite phallic

      I know better than to send something like that to the USA, but I wouldn't mind receiving it -- except it's a crap card: the head is missing just to centre the phallus. If it must be centred, why not zoom out a little, but show three herms together?

      I want to send cards showing my own country, so something like the Cerne Abbas Giant would be better.

  43. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FedEx delivers packages and "express" letters. That's a valuable job, BUT ... USPS has to deliver regular mail that takes just as much sorting as an "express" letter, but that brings in only a tiny fraction of the revenue (one stamp vs. one $10 bill). It's not surprising that USPS runs on slimmer margins.

  44. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by laird · · Score: 2

    FedEx pays much more per package for labor. But as a percentage FedEx' labor costs are lower because FedEx delivers $18 packages, while the USPS delivers 15-30 cent letters.

  45. Who is going to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Deliver all the parcels of stuffordered from Amazon (and other online retailers?
    Yeah I know 'content' (music, books, movies) can come electronically, but not the physical goods. Soon I will be buying everything but clothing and food online The sales tax is getting too much.

    1. Re:Who is going to by Xenious · · Score: 1

      UPS and FedEx! You are a Prime member right? ;)

      --
      -Xen
    2. Re:Who is going to by Seumas · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? Amazon uses UPS.

  46. USPS is only dying because they SUCK by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

    FedEx and UPS both provide tracking that works reasonably well. USPS doesn't. FedEx and UPS both provide insurance that will pay out in a reasonable time if the item is damaged or lost. USPS doesn't. FedEx and UPS both actually show if a package has been delivered. USPS doesn't (they SAY they do, but what it really means when they say "delivered" is they don't know where the package was delivered, who they delivered it to, or when -- but they probably don't have it any longer.) FedEx and UPS both bring the goods right to my door when the weather is really bad; USPS employees won't even come to my mailbox if there is snow on the curb. FedEx and UPS both will pick up packages I have to go out. USPS won't. USPS sometimes delivers letters sent to me (eastern MT) from the east coast (eastern PA) 2...3 weeks after they have been sent. These letters are dirty, sometimes wet, and often no longer timely. FedEx and UPS have never delivered anything more than a day or two later than expected, and every time it has happened to me, there's been severe weather to account for it.

    USPS has stagnated while private companies whipped their asses for them. I find myself without sympathy.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    1. Re:USPS is only dying because they SUCK by bberens · · Score: 2

      I live in Orlando, FL. Sending a letter to Tampa is the same price with USPS as sending a letter to Nome Alaska. The USPS still wins in a lot of areas.

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
    2. Re:USPS is only dying because they SUCK by Rinikusu · · Score: 1

      How much does FedEx/UPS charge you to deliver a sheet of paper? I can mail a sheet of paper for, what, 44 cents? There's the old adage of you get what you pay for. I'd also point out that the USPS delivers 600+ MILLION letters and packages EVERY SINGLE DAY. That's gonna be a fucking huge database table if you start issuing each one a tracking number.

      --
      If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
  47. Because all businesses make sane decisions by hellfire · · Score: 0

    1) Cable companies would prefer to not provide cable to all people in a state, only providing cable to those who will buy premium services and in highest concentration areas so it's most profitable, but states general have laws stating "no, cable for everyone or you ain't in business." So the USPS should not provide mail service to absolutely everyone in the US?

    2) One stamp for 44 cents seems insane, but it adds up over time. Small businesses have had to mail as well. Only recently with the maturity of free mail services and bulk email programs does this no longer make sense for letters but for larger parcels it still creates economies of scale for shipping businesses.

    3) A few minor businesses like, oh I dunno, Amazon, benefit from ubiquitous and cheap shipping provided by the USPS so the subsidation of cheap mail rates and others can be argued stimulates online commerce. It was never a complaint by Sears back in the day.

    4) The USPS actually is a government-mandated service that delivers flat-rate mail to every corner of the country six days a week, and there's no reason to create a false dichotomy that it absolutely has to be subsidized. The USPS worked just like this for decades, because the internet did not exist. The internet is a disruptive technology. On one hand, millions of people still need snail mail. On the other, the USPS needs major changes to continue to exist.

    The main reason for the massive news upheaval is simply because it's going to be a political third rail. Simply put, drastic changes need to be allowed, but to do so would put every congresscritter, Democrat and Republican, in hot water because it probably means raising rates, cutting jobs and pensions, or both. The political will, like on so many other issues, is nowhere near there yet. It affects too many re-election bids.

    Unfortunately, changes need to be made and they are going to hurt someone. But one thing is clear, the mandates by the US government are there for the benefit of the American people by keeping them connected and keeping commerce and goods moving throughout the country for cheap and easy rates. And because there are no subsidies, you don't suffer from "sane business decisions" to cut costs simply for the sake of making more profits and cutting costs. The mandate of the USPS is broader than simply a company that makes money.

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

    1. Re:Because all businesses make sane decisions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) Cable companies would prefer to not provide cable to all people in a state, only providing cable to those who will buy premium services and in highest concentration areas so it's most profitable, but states general have laws stating "no, cable for everyone or you ain't in business." So the USPS should not provide mail service to absolutely everyone in the US?

      Wait, really? The neighbor on the corner has Comcast, but whenever I call they tell me it will cost me $18,000 to get connected. Each time I ask about why the number is so high, they say that this is the last engineering figure they have on file for my address. I ask how current that figure is, and they always mention something about a site survey that will take 6 to 14 weeks to complete before they can tell.

    2. Re:Because all businesses make sane decisions by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      Actually it seems like some politicians are creating the problem because they want to cash in from further privatization. Annual postage increases of a few cents are no big deal but the government's veto of increases for 2 years has cost the USPS billions of dollars.

    3. Re:Because all businesses make sane decisions by stdarg · · Score: 2

      ) Cable companies would prefer to not provide cable to all people in a state, only providing cable to those who will buy premium services and in highest concentration areas so it's most profitable, but states general have laws stating "no, cable for everyone or you ain't in business." So the USPS should not provide mail service to absolutely everyone in the US?

      I wonder when this nonsense started. We used to have the ability to make progress in an economically sensible and viable direction.

      Imagine if New York hadn't been allowed to have paved roads until there was a plan in place to pave the entire Western frontier. No rail roads in California until Louisiana has a direct line to Idaho. No canal to the Great Lakes until the government builds a canal for North Carolina.

      At some point we lost the idea that progress has to start somewhere. Now it's all or nothing which usually devolves to the nothing side of things.

    4. Re:Because all businesses make sane decisions by Estanislao+Mart�nez · · Score: 1

      Imagine if New York hadn't been allowed to have paved roads until there was a plan in place to pave the entire Western frontier.

      Well, we actually did build not just one, but two highway systems that were designed to connect the whole country from the beginning. So yeah, actually, a lot of freeways in New York were not funded until there was a plan in place to build counterparts throughout the country. (Fun facts: first state to sign a contract to build an Interstate highway: Missouri. First state to start actually building one: Kansas. First state to open a segment of one: Pennsylvania. First state to finish all of its route: Nebraska...)

  48. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Stenchwarrior · · Score: 1

    What he's doing won't, but now the /. readers in the US are aware of the service and can start using it, too.

    --
    Loading...
  49. TYRANY TSHF TEOTWAWKI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Part of why the volume of crap from me was reduced.

    The CBU was robbed.
    The my slot in the CBU was too small - for all the ad spam (newspaper, redplum, etc, learnt to unsubscribe, u can do it) Um, I was getting hell of stuff in the box, so the box clearly was too small, for a short time some directive went out to stop delivery of large packages. I mean come on, you drive all the way out, then take it all back? I seen my box slot CLEARED of mail, and then new mail in the slot!

    note: missing mail or getting that pink,, or yellow, or blue or whatever slip means I have to travel 8mi by foot, and delay my time sensitive business.

    So after visiting the pub, sleeping a good night, having a hearty breakfast, Patty Donahoe is going to creep with his hand out while suggesting yet another govt agency, this time the USPS environment, who's trust is currently driven intermittent at best, now be made to ignore reality. That about sum it up? I don't mean to paint the leader in a bad light, my last JOB was 20 years ago.

    Okay enough. The USPS is the life blood communications and paper documentation.
    BETTER FUCKING FUND IT. If that means you got to pay the people that have 50+ years working there you fucking better pay them! I ain't talking about little whipper snappers that come in and do 4 years, never learn the job, and quit as a cripple.

    Now let's see all the retarded comments.
    I can barely wait.

  50. USPS Service Levels by Aladrin · · Score: 1

    I almost never need to mail or receive a letter, so that only leaves packages for me. (Actually, I do get quite a few bills and letters, but I want almost none of them. I'd rather have them electronically... It's just not an option for them.)

    Package delivery by USPS is the worst out there. They are the only service that refuses to leave packages with the apartments' leasing office. It would save -everyone- time and money if they did so, but they won't... Even if I beg and sign things. It makes them such a huge hassle to deal with that I usually pay more to have another service deliver the stuff instead.

    And mailing things? They are the slowest and grumpiest bunch of workers I've ever met. (This doesn't apply to all offices, but this has been my experience at about 4 of the last 5 I've used.) They don't explain things well, they're slow to do what they need to, and they aren't pleasant about anything.

    However, I will say that the attitudes are the same when I have to pick up at FedEx and UPS as well. It's just that I don't usually have to, since they'll leave it with the leasing office.

    And now Amazon is partnering with 7-11 to ship packages there so you can pick them up without any fuss. I'm wishing more people could do that so I could avoid the USPS office altogether. (Amazon is the one company I know I won't need this service for, sadly.)

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    1. Re:USPS Service Levels by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I prefer Canada Post to other package delivery services like UPS and FedEx. They're cheaper, just as fast if you use the express options (which are STILL cheaper) and will generally deliver packages to my door, because the delivery guy has a key. If not, I can (literally) run down to the drug store and pick it up. FedEx and UPS on the other hand cost more, won't leave the package if you're not home (which is most of the time since they only deliver during working hours) and to pick up the package you have to drive halfway across the city, navigate through an industrial area between the tracks and the airport, and wait in line at their office.

      But now I see why American companies hate shipping things via the post office so much.

    2. Re:USPS Service Levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ugh, tell me about it. I'm getting a kick out of these comments because I just sat by the door for an hour to receive a "signature confirmation" package, only to find that they decided to forget my redelivery request that I submitted online last week. Funny thing is, the first time they tried to deliver, I was making breakfast right next to the door. The postal carrier decided he'd rather not knock or ring the doorbell so that I could sign for it and leave a slip telling me to pick it up at the post office instead. Now I have to go over to the Fort Knox of post offices in the ghetto and wait in line for another hour to get my package. USPS going under might just be the best thing that ever happened to mail delivery in this country.

  51. Cost per visit vs. cost per piece by tepples · · Score: 2

    As long as each house is getting at least one piece of mail per day, the carrier is already going to the effort to visit each house. Is delivering four pieces of mail to a given house that much more effort than delivering two?

    1. Re:Cost per visit vs. cost per piece by bberens · · Score: 1

      Yes because you'll either need to buy a whole new fleet of (larger) trucks, or make two trips per route.

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
    2. Re:Cost per visit vs. cost per piece by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. The truck has a given capacity that cannot be exceeded.

    3. Re:Cost per visit vs. cost per piece by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      This capacity is nowhere near reached currently, and if it was, it has the somewhat trivially solution of making another ten minute trip back to get more mail.

      Pretending it would take another set of trucks and delivery people to deliver twice as much mail to the same addresses is just idiotic. There might be a very small set of dense urban routes that are near the carrying capacity of delivery, (At which point, like I said, they have to make a small detour to get more) but generally mail delivery people are limited by distance and number of stops, not whether they have 200 or 400 pounds of mail in their truck.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  52. Agent Smith says... by CozmoKramer · · Score: 1

    That's the sound of inevitability Mr. Anderson !

  53. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Custard+Horse · · Score: 1

    The point is that the system is prone to human error and/or interference. It's old tech which has been replaced - get over it.

    In 10 years time when another generation is kicking up daisies, there will be very little post. As the following generation moves out of God's waiting room, the postal system will be eradicated completely.

  54. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Are you trolling? What do you mean by complaining for no reason?

    He/She's complaining because mail was lost.

  55. FedEx and UPS by tepples · · Score: 1

    The internet has not only made letter delivery almost obsolete, it has also dramatically increased home shopping. If the US postal service is not seeing its share of that, despite not being allowed to raise prices (i.e. having very competitive prices) or letting go part of their huge workforce (i.e. having spare capacity), they're doing it wrong.

    To see what USPS is doing wrong, one must first figure out what FedEx and UPS are doing right. FedEx and UPS are competitive in every part of the postal business where USPS doesn't have a state-sponsored monopoly.

  56. Complete and total fail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How pathetic. So lets look at this objectively. The USPS corners the market on the least profitable piece of moving physical correspondence around the country (letters/bills/etc). They leave the mastery of the profitable piece of this business (packages) to commercial providers and have laws created to keep these carriers from "horning in" on their money-losing venture. So, while our general communications have become primarily electronic, our penchant for moving packages around has exploded and can NEVER become electronic. You, Mr. USPS, are truly a master of strategy. Survival of the fittest.

  57. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by aztracker1 · · Score: 2

    At my prior address, I'd had in the course of three years, two packages (not even letters) undelivered, or delivered to the wrong address), and on 6 occasions gotten letters and packages for other addresses, even on different streets. I stopped ordering online from places unless UPS or FedEx delivery are used.

    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
  58. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    STOP! You're bankrupting the USPS. They *lose* money on these items. They'll have to charge the true cost of delivery if they want to actually solve the problem.

  59. /me checks crazy meter [........../] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep, pegged that sucker.

    1. Re:/me checks crazy meter [........../] by udachny · · Score: 0

      Lovely style, short and to the point .... tiny bit too short. Whip it up, boy! Whip it OUT! United States Post Service - now with less money and with more postal than ever.

    2. Re:/me checks crazy meter [........../] by KermodeBear · · Score: 1

      Har har, aren't you witty.

      roman_mir brings up a lot of very good points, especially the one about the USD no longer being backed by anything other than "the full faith and credit" of the US government. Your dollar is only worth X because people decide that it is. There is nothing backing that value at all and that is one of the reasons the government is able to pull all kinds of retarded tricks with your money.

      Even if the dollar was still backed by a real asset then the monetization of the debt is still a major issue. It devalues the money that you yourself have right now. Most people don't realize that this is, in a way, yet another form of taxation. The US government magically creates money (and they have done so; all they have to do is update a database row in a bank account these days. It doesn't even have to be printed), devaluing your own. They now have more cash at the expense of the entire economy.

      I'm sorry that you cannot understand these concepts and think they're crazy, but they're really not. It's a serious problem.

      --
      Love sees no species.
  60. Money-saving idea: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop stuffing my mailbox with unsolicited bullshit. If it wasn't for junk mail, I might only receive 3-4 items a week.

    Also, it's pretty stupid that they're forbidden from laying employees off. That just lends further support to my hypothesis that government agencies are just bloated jobs programs for minorities.

  61. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by said213 · · Score: 0

    Considering that it is a given that some items will forever (relative to our current lifespan expectations) remain available only in physical form, please explain; What will replace the USPS?

    --
    help me fix this "Terrible" karma, please!
  62. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by schwit1 · · Score: 1

    And when the Democrats had all 3 branches including 60 in the Senate throughout 2009 and 2010 what did they do to fix this problem?

  63. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by hrvatska · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Fedex labor cost is 32%, USPS is 80%.

    There are so many things that Fedex isn't required to do that the USPS is that it doesn't seem useful to look at just labor costs as a percentage of operating expenses. Fedex isn't required by law to deliver packages six days a week. Fedex isn't required by law to maintain an office in every dippy little town in the US. Fedex isn't required by law to investigate cases of mail fraud, they leave that the the USPS. Fedex doesn't hold packages and mail when people are away from their residences. Fedex isn't required by law to fully fund 30 years of pensions and medical expense for retirees in a ten year time span as the USPS is. The USPS actually makes a profit on its operations. There are estimates that the USPS has been overcharged $75 billion in contributions to the Civil Service Retirement System pension fund. If it weren't for a 2006 law requiring it to over fund it's retiree pension and medical expenses it likely wouldn't be in the financial mess it's in.

  64. The E-mail age??? by Lord+Lode · · Score: 1

    I thought we were past that age and now in the social network and smartphone age!

  65. Not everyone is me... by Balthisar · · Score: 1

    I admit it; not everyone is me. I don't need the US postal service, but somewhere, there's someone who doesn't have a computer and needs to get her cancelled checks back from her bank every month in order to balance her checkbook. (Obviously but a single example of many.)

    So, let the rates boost. If you're going to demand a postal service and also not adapt to modern times, stop making everyone else subsidize you. Pay the rates the market bears. I hear dumb people on sites like consumerist complain about the outrageous price of $0.44 postage stamps. But you know what, that's dirt cheap! Why not charge a flat buck? What not two bucks? Hell, when I need a guarantee, I happily pay $10 and up for mail.

    Also, ./ apparently doesn't like cents symbols, at least on preview.

    --
    --Jim (me)
  66. How to Save the $5.5 Billion by arthurpaliden · · Score: 0

    Universal Health Insurance.

  67. Re:Funny, I get ten times the mail now than I used by Seumas · · Score: 1

    I get mail six days a week and it is nothing but junk. So much junk, in fact, that it fills an entire plastic sack from a grocery store each week. I never get anything but junk mail. I don't send anything through the USPS and I don't order things unless they're going to be shipped by UPS or FedEX. Any billing is done online. Any communication is done online or on the phone. I receive absolutely zero benefit from the USPS and my life would be better for them not providing me service. I don't need spam once a week, much less six times a week. And I certainly don't care to subsidize a government spam-delivery service.

  68. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I get an average of 2 to 3 pieces of mail a week that were addressed to other people. It doesn't have to be theft.

    I sometimes wonder what I;m not getting in the mail.

    Anyway due to the errors by the post office and better tracking of bills paid electronically, I use electronic bill payment and I also get all the bills I can electronically. Think of the number of trees saved by people doing this? It also means less paper to recycle.

    Electronic billing/bill payment is ecologically sound.

  69. Maybe they could pay their pensions.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If their fat-cat CEO took a pay cut. Ever consider that??

  70. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by xaxa · · Score: 2

    I send cards to [...] Finland, [...] Germany, [...] Taiwan, [...] Netherlands and [...] Siberia. [...] I live in the UK

    That is going to help the USPS how?

    In the whole scale of everything, it probably won't. Although 14% of Postcrossing members are from the USA (36k users) between them sending over a million postcards.

    My next two cards, which I will write this evening, are to be sent to Washington, USA and Austria. Me sending the card to Washington is a result of the person in Washington sending one to someone else, so that has helped the USPS in a tiny way.

  71. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by BStroms · · Score: 1

    I don't have any statistical data, but I find it unlikely that most people go their entire lives without losing anything. Unless I'm just the extreme outlier who has had tons of bad experiences with USPS. It's hard to verify exactly what is lost, but between mail that never showed up that people swore they sent, mail people tell me they never received that I know I sent, and neighbors mail that I've received, I estimate I'm up to around 20 something lost.

    I've also more than once had mail that had clearly been opened and looked through. I've twice had mail show up more than a month after the postmark date (hey at least they found those pieces that they lost.) Nor is this just one bad mail carrier. I've had these experiences spread across 6 different addresses, in five different cities and two different states. Every one of those six addresses had problems.

    I follow the policy of not sending anything by USPS that I can't afford to lose. If it's important, I stick it in a box and send it UPS. It's more expensive, but I've never had a single problem with them. That's why I would be thrilled to see private competition for letter delivery, was the final nail in the coffin of the post office as we know it.

  72. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, I use to work at UPS and I can tell you, we probably don't have much in the way of cameras at least at the facility where I worked, but it seemed not very likely anyone is going to be stealing anything without someone noticing. I have to wonder what the work culture is like at the sorting facilities for the USPS by comparison.

  73. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    I send cards to a child in Finland, a girl in Germany, a student in Taiwan, a recent-graduate lawyer in the Netherlands and a woman in Siberia.

    Congratulations, you are now on the MI5 watch list

  74. Re:Let's have another multi-billion-dollar bailout by sarhjinian · · Score: 1

    And watch how the employee's union makes huge contributions to Obama's reelection campaign....

    Considering that Obama has shown himself ready to cave to just about anything the Republicans want, any union executive with any brains would be better to push for a Democratic primary and a candidate that isn't either a) a coward, or b) a corporate shill (thank you, Ralph Nader, you were dead on right when you called him a metaphorical Uncle Tom) and/or c) a class traitor.

    --
    --srj/mmv
  75. isn't this just another example ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
  76. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by nbvb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... and you think dropping a check off in person will help?

    My (previous) mortgage company deposited my mortgage check... and I have no idea whose account got credited for it, but it wasn't mine.

    The check cleared, I marked it as such in my bank book, and the only clue something was wrong was when I went from 0 bill collector calls (since I pay all my bills on time) to 4 in one day all about my mortgage. Even after I opened a case, and they started investigating, AND finally credited me back, they STILL had the hounds calling me.

    I had to tell them the next call was going to my attorney before they stopped.

    So, even dropping that check off in person won't necessarily help. Mistakes can (and do) happen.

  77. You wouldn't know it by all the junk mail! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Talk about spam! I get more junk mail via snail mail, it's hardly worth the effort to go to the mailbox. Who is paying for all of this? Why doesn't the USPS charge more for this type of mailing and recoup it's costs? - That's right... the Big corporations that would have to foot the bill would no longer be able to line our congressmans' pockets with the money they'll have to spend supporting a system that should have been privatized years ago!

  78. Only 5% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sounds terrible: 22%, but it is in 5 long years.
    That means that the market 'collapsed' with less than 5% per year. Surely they have a personnel turnover rate higher than 5%?
    That means that the stubbornly kept replacing staff that was leaving voluntarily, knowing that they would be unable to stay afloat.
    I can only come to the conclusion that management knowingly went for the tactic of taking their customers hostage to Congress.

  79. Why the USPS is losing money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not sure what a bulk rate mailer pays, but I wonder if they're even paying the cost of moving what they send?

    I know 501(c)3 organizations pay well below what it costs the USPS to move the mail. Non-profit organizations should pay cost for what services of the USPS they use. And this is because the USPS can't afford to give them a below cost rate anymore.

  80. But, if the postal service goes away... by tekrat · · Score: 1

    how will Kevin Costner save the country and bring back civilization after the Third World War?

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119925/

    Ironic; the movie is supposed to take place in 2013, just in time to see our country fall apart *and* have no postal system to bring it back together.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  81. They could... by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    Put Bernie Madoff in charge. If it worked for Lord Vetinari...

  82. How about no more rubber bands? by SoundGuyNoise · · Score: 1

    What's the USPS budget for rubber bands? Sometimes I get just one letter with a rubber band wrapped around it. I always leave the rubber band in the mailbox so they can at least re-use it.

    --
    You never expect irony, do you?
    Want to be a professional wrestler? Visit www.iyfwrestling.com
    @iyfwrestling
  83. charge for email by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    How long until they banter around the idea (again) of charging for email? I remember back in the early 90's the urban legend of the postal service charging a nickel for 100 emails or some such thing kept floating around, but, you know the postal service, and the imperial federal government is still trying to figure out how to get their slice of the information superhighway. Taxes on "Amazon" type purchases, money for email....

  84. What a bunch of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The postal service is funded by postage not tax dollars. The FUD on this is beyond funny. Congress has put a series of regulations on the post office in funding retirements that would bankrupt most private businesses. It is an attempt to get rid of any gov. program that makes money and helps people, an privatize it. Do you really think privatizing the USPS is more cost effeceint? This plus a big union busting attempt.

    I wish Repubs and TeaBaggers would quit committing acts of treason just to get this president to fail. The only actions I have seen lately by congress are attempts to make the prez fail, the only way to do that is to make this country fail.

    If you ain't honest with yourself about what's really happening, then go ahead an mod me flamebait.

    1. Re:What a bunch of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not paying corporate income taxes isn't a subsidy?

  85. let's have a round of employment by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    Plenty of good people are hurting so badly in this economy they would take the post worker's jobs at half pay and no retirement benefits. Toss all workers out and on their ass and hire a whole new worker force. Also, the government can lead with a four day work week, starting with the postal force. Tuesday through Friday delivery is good enough.

    1. Re:let's have a round of employment by jmccue · · Score: 1

      Do you know anyone who worked prior to 1910 ? When I was young I did, maybe you would enjoy your 16 hour days, 6 days a week, no paid time off, work to you die, no paid sick time, loose your job, you starve environment. Seems with your "fire / hire" statement that is were you want to go to. Me I would prefer other solutions then 'fire and hire at a lower rate'. That would end up becoming a never ending cycle until we are back to 1900.

    2. Re:let's have a round of employment by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      I have no retirement plan where I work, and the health benefits are if you go with the company's policy that costs $3000 a month they'll chip in $100. So fuck you and your self-righteous attitude, why should the slackers at the post office get full benefits when most the nation gets nothing? And hell yes I knew many people born before then, I'm not a young man.

  86. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by nospam007 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "What will replace the USPS?"

    Electronic payments instead of sending checks,
    Fax, Email, IRC, FB ....
    DHL, UPS, USA couriers, Bongo, MyUS, FEDEX, Parcel2Go, ....

    Over half a million errand boys and >218000 vehicles don't come cheap these days.

  87. The Postmaster General makes $276K a year by Quila · · Score: 1

    That's relatively low for a company with over half a million employees and $67 billion in revenue.

    1. Re:The Postmaster General makes $276K a year by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      Well, more to the point, if you paid him $0 a year, you would have done absolutely nothing to fix their shortfalls.

  88. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you kidding me? I lost at least 2-3 items a month in the mail. I've had countless magazines delivered with just the cover sitting in a clear plastic envelope with a letter from the USPS saying they are sorry it didn't survive.

  89. perspective please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The US military doesn't turn a profit and we don't have this discussion about it. Neither do police or fire departments yet we fund those with our dirty dirty evil Socialism without much complaint. What exactly is the issue here? And was it invented by UPS or FedEx?

  90. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by foobsr · · Score: 1

    Considering that it is a given that some items will forever (relative to our current lifespan expectations) ...

    No need for a constraint here, unless you expect matter to cease to exist.

    CC.

    --
    TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
  91. Where is ... by cekerr · · Score: 1

    ... Moist von Lipwig when you need him? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moist_von_Lipwig

  92. Don't forget the vets! by stomv · · Score: 1

    Unlike private corporations, the USPS is required by law to give preferential treatment to military veterans. The exam scores of vets get a bonus when the USPS is deciding who to hire. I'm not arguing that vets aren't capable of being good postal employees -- my father is a vet and a retired postal employee. My point is simply that it's one more additional constraint.

    Here's another: the USPS, by law, has to deliver everywhere. Not everywhere every day -- some remote locations don't get daily service. For the same price in the case of letters. UPS and FedEx, on the other hand, have no such restriction and therefore they don't offer the same product, because getting a letter to the northern tundra of Alaska or to an adobe hours away from any other building in New Mexico will never be profitable.

    The OP is right, but there is a third possible option: allow the USPS to raise the price of postage. It doesn't necessarily need subsidies [though it's a reasonable proposal]. Let them charge what it costs.

  93. Give Credit where credit is due by oddjob1244 · · Score: 1

    At least they didn't show up asking for money, they showed up with a plan to work within their means.

  94. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by BVis · · Score: 1

    Yes, let's introduce a profit motive into the postal system. I'm sure that won't lead to cutting corners (and lost mail as a result) or anything like that.

    The postal service is way way WAY too critical to leave in the hands of a company that cares nothing about quality and everything about profits. (The fact that higher quality will lead to greater profits is too long-term a concept for Corporate America, as it usually takes more than a quarter to realize the profits.)

    --
    Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
  95. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Heh - I agree! The government / labor agreements make sure they keep slackers in their positions. We had dozens of pieces of mail lost in Colorado. Mind boggling how bad USPS is. They don't deserve to be in business.

  96. Re:Let's have another multi-billion-dollar bailout by mla_anderson · · Score: 1

    or c) a class traitor.

    Since university at least Obama has never been below upper middle class...how can you call him a class traitor? A race-traitor perhaps, but he is mixed race. Has he let down the masses he fooled with all the promises of change? Absolutely. Has he betrayed his own class? Not the least, he is an integral part of the ruling class. Or do you think there are substantial differences between the Republican and Democratic parties? If there is no real substantial difference between the parties, why do you think there is a substantial difference in their candidates? The only difference is on the campaign trail.

    --
    Sig is on vacation
  97. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by rgviza · · Score: 1

    What makes you think that online banking isn't prone to human error and/or interference?
    As well when you pay a bill online, unless it's an ACH, the bank generates a check and mails it to your payee via usps.

    --
    Don't kid yourself. It's the size of the regexp AND how you use it that counts.
  98. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by BitZtream · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They never did.

    But they were always cheaper overall than anything else you listed for physical delivery to the entire country as a whole.

    It costs the same to mail a letter anywhere in the US. All the other carriers you listed do not flat rate, and will refuse to deliver to places that aren't profitable.

    Everyone in the US can get a letter from the US postal service regardless of where they are. If they've got an address (so any private property and most public parcels) they can get postal drops. But they may not be able to get anything else, including an Internet connection.

    The USPS is a socialist service designed to ensure that EVERYONE has SOME form of communication, and reliable communication at that. Nothing else offers that, even if you don't realize it because it doesn't effect you.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  99. wow by Chewbacon · · Score: 1

    'If Congress doesn't act, we will default.' Seems to be how we get things done in this country! Next month, I'm going to tell my mortgage company the same thing.

    --
    Chewbacon
    The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
  100. I disagree... by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 1

    I have not bought a stamp or used one in over 10 years (aside from wedding invites that I didn't buy the stamps for), however, I use eBay and Paypal and buy sell things all the time and I spend WAY more on that stuff than all of the stamps my parents used to use in a month combined. A lot of people I know do as well. Unless their margins are terrible there (which I cannot believe as it cost me $30 to send a small mixer to NJ from PA last week the cheapest way) but even if they are they need to re-align their business to focus on this side of things. They are the default on eBay and with everything bought and sold there and online in general I can't see how they are hurting.

    --
    http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
  101. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Stormthirst · · Score: 1

    MI5? Why MI5? Is he a terror suspect? What have I missed here?

    Oh, you mean that the civilian police at Scotland Yard might think he's a paedo? What's that got to do with Military Intelligence (after all, that's what the MI stands for)?

  102. So remind me by tmosley · · Score: 1

    Why do these idiots have a monopoly on first class mail now? They can't even operate at a profit. Kill the monopoly, kill all funding to the USPS and let the market decide. If they shape up their act, then they will survive and continue to provide the "high quality" service they are known for (snort). If not, then we didn't really need them, and more likely some other company would do a better job anyways. After all, there is NO REASON for it to cost the same to mail something in the same town as it does to mail across the country. It is stupid decisions like that that keep these guys coming back, hat in hand looking for bailouts.

    Maybe if they fired the top 10% of the USPS bureaucracy every time they got a bailout, things would change for the better.

    1. Re:So remind me by DogDude · · Score: 2

      The idea behind the USPS is that everybody in the US, no matter if they live in Manhattan, or the wilds of Alaska, has access to mail service. "Let the market decide" will leave many poor people hurting, badly, and will severely limit where people can comfortably live. It's not a monopoly or a "handout". It's a government service.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:So remind me by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      The problem as usual is not the hard working people at the post office, its CONgress. Government as usual IS THE PROBLEM. The post office in my experience is pretty well run and at least for the lat 10 years or so most postal employees I have interacted with have been very helpful and provided excellent service.

      CONgress dictates much of the rate policy and the services they office. If the Federal Government let them operate more independently and competitively I am sure they could.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    3. Re:So remind me by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      If it's a service you can't run without breaking the financial back of the government, then it's no longer feasible.

      It *could* be run in the black. Once you add in pensions and health care though, it's impossible.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
  103. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by rgviza · · Score: 1

    Obamacare. You don't remember?

    --
    Don't kid yourself. It's the size of the regexp AND how you use it that counts.
  104. The USPS is not in trouble just yet by cjjjer · · Score: 1

    Just a heads up this is the real issue behind the default http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/09/06/postal.default/index.html?hpt=us_c2. It has to do with the retiree health care trust fund payment (5.5b) being due on Sept 30th.

  105. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They complained that the Republicans weren't doing enough.

  106. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by hrvatska · · Score: 2

    And when the Democrats had all 3 branches including 60 in the Senate throughout 2009 and 2010 what did they do to fix this problem?

    Since every major democratic party initiative since 2009 was held up or killed by the threat of a republican filibuster, I'm not sure they could have done anything about it. The democrats never really had a filibuster proof majority in the senate. The death of Kennedy and the interminable series of re-counts in Minnesota effectively kept the democrats from controlling the senate for most of 2009 and all of 2010. Since all legislation has to pass through the senate it's difficult to argue that the democrats had free reign to pass whatever they wanted in 2009 and 2010.

  107. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Stormthirst · · Score: 1

    Except commercial companies like UPS take the piss out of the USPO by sub contracting the expensive bits (the last few miles). That won't make it any cheaper or more reliable, it will just transfer the profitable parts of mail delivery to a private company. How is that going to save the USPO?

  108. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by said213 · · Score: 1

    Spoken like someone who's never sent, received or needed proof of delivery of certified mail.
    Look it up... then consider my question again. If the USPS goes away, your next court summons would have to be delivered by a law enforcement official, you would have no legally protected proof (audited) of mailing or receipt... Good times there.

    Some things cannot be privatized.

    --
    help me fix this "Terrible" karma, please!
  109. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Stormthirst · · Score: 1

    You use cheques for your mortgage? Why doesn't the bank just take the money from your account like normal people do? And before someone complains that the company might take more than they are supposed to, that's the point of online banking so you can spot that kind of thing quickly and get it resolved.

  110. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 2

    So, even dropping that check off in person won't necessarily help. Mistakes can (and do) happen.

    True. However, you can reduce the probability of an issue arising by reducing the complexity of the system. By trusting USPS with your cheque, you give USPS the chance to lose it. If you don't send it by mail, they can't lose it.

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  111. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Our company dropped 250,000 pieces of mail at the regional sorting center the other day. It took 3 days for it to actually go out,

    Did your company pay first-class rate postage for those 250,000 pieces of mail? Or did they pay a reduced bulk rate? Depending on the specific bulk rate, the postal service doesn't use the same priority for that mail as they do for first class.

    If you only pay for "send it when you have space on the trucks and/or can get around to it" service, don't complain when that's what you get.

  112. Telegraph by sureshot007 · · Score: 1

    Oh no! The end is near! Ever since the introduction of this new high tech telephone, people no longer use the telegraph to communicate!!! We will all be out of jobs! We need the government to give us more money so we can stay in business forever!!!


    Some things aren't supposed to last forever.

  113. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by compro01 · · Score: 2

    IMHO I think it is time for private industry to start bidding on mail regions.

    Capital idea. Then I'll just have to travel 50 miles to get my mail like I do whenever stupid companies ship via Fedex.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  114. Netflix by Xian97 · · Score: 1

    To be honest, about the only thing I use the postal service for is Netflix since the majority of what I want to watch is not available on streaming.

    The USPS is also very cheap compared to rates in other counties, for instance a first class letter in the UK is 46p, about $0.74 cents, and they are unable to raise their rates greater than the rate of inflation by US law .

  115. Boxes and Letters by yup2000 · · Score: 1

    The digital age hasn't killed the post office. they're just too focused on what they used to do: letters. Inability to change is killing the USPS. They should be focused on what people do now: buy goods online and have it shipped in a box to their home. I almost never see the USPS listed as a shipping option. The post office needs to ask themselves why this isn't so, and then figure out how to fix it.

  116. Why the Double Standard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is it assumed that UPS and FedEx have more business because of the Internet and online shopping, but at the same time that the Internet is killing the USPS? They ship too, and faster for less at that. Something else is at work here. Their employees don't make a whole lot more than UPS employees, and although anti-union people like to bring up the "no layoff" provision in USPS contracts, they don't tell you that there are 33% less USPS employees now than there were 10 years ago.

    What's really going on is that it costs a lot of money to deliver to every single address in the United States 6 times per week whether there's mail to be delivered or not. UPS and FedEx don't even come close to this scale of operation. We as a country have to decide whether we want that to continue, or whether we are good to let that go.

    1. Re:Why the Double Standard by gerardrj · · Score: 1

      The USPS could reduce costs a tremendous amount if they stopped with the all-coverage simplified address bulk mailing schemes. It requires the letter carriers to visit every address on every street. It requires a lot more fuel to carry all the mail pieces.
      If Bulk mail were charged at the same rate as standard first class mail, the USPS would not be in this financial mess.

      bulk mail discounts are a race to the bottom (loose money on each piece, but make it up in volume)) mentality that has not worked for anyone in the long term.

      UPS/FedEx do not have to visit every house, but they do service every house, or at least the overwhelming majority. They don't go down a street unless there is something to deliver there; saves time, fuel and money. USPS is in the business of making sure there is something to deliver at every address.

      As for USPS shipping faster? I disagree. FedEx and UPS ground are much faster then USPS. The priority packages may be lower cost at USPS, but I always have to go get them from the post office instead of having them left at my door, so there is no cost savings in the end.

      UPS and FedEx probably DO have more business because of the internet; they have better services (like tracking and employees who care). USPS only has most of the business it does have by acting as an advertising distribution company.

      --
      Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
  117. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by dkleinsc · · Score: 2

    I don't generally dislike the use of epithets like "Rethuglican" and "Democrap" because it just makes you sound childish, no matter how important your point.

    It also obscures the fundamental issue: A significant majority of Congresscritters and Presidents, and at least a few Supreme Court justices, regardless of party, are making it very clear that they can be bribed to wreck the US government. How they wreck it varies, who bribes them varies, but that's the problem in a nutshell.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  118. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by operagost · · Score: 1

    There's no way to ensure you won't be wrongly harassed, because people are idiots. But when the company cashes your check, you have a scan of it that proves the company cashed it in and possibly the original check if you have that service with your financial institution. You probably also have an ACH record, as most financial institutions find it most expedient to change the check into an ACH transaction. It's not your problem if they deposited in the wrong account; they need to fix it.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  119. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by operagost · · Score: 1

    We have a perfectly good ACH system, but not everyone has access to an automatic bill paying system. That being said, almost any financial institution will withdraw the money from an account you specify, but a lot of people like myself would rather have more direct control by "pushing" it instead of allowing it to be "pulled".

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  120. Labor costs. by MYakus · · Score: 1

    If labor agreements preventing layoffs and providing for expensive labor compared to the private sector are causing this, wouldn't the Post Office be better off going into default to restructure and renegotiate these agreements? A government bailout looks like a way to simply continue the problem and make it worse.

  121. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least once a month I recieve entire deliveries (4-6 items) for addresses that do not have a single thing in common with my own. Wrong name, street, number, city, state and zip every time. Each time it is a different "wrong" address. Not surprisingly, about this same frequency I realize that several items (generally bills) do not show up either.

    At least once a week me or my neighbors receive each others mail.

    This has been ongoing for about 3 years now.

    The local post office is extremely cavalier about the whole thing too. I complain and there general attitude is "so what do you want me to do about it?".

    I have all of my bills set up for ePayments through my bank. Unfortunately not all of my creditors will let me get an eBill. This has caused me a great deal of concern, since most of the information an identity thief would need is included on some of those bills.

    No one I communicate with sends anything via a letter anymore. Official correspondence that requires a signature is always either handled in-person or sent via an overnight carrier that is not the USPS. Funny how I never, ever, have a mistaken or missing delivery from any of the other carriers (UPS/FEDEX et. al.)

    NetFlix is the only thing USPS delivers to me anymore, aside from certain bills and junk mail. And NetFlix is about to go away too, dropping to just streaming for now, but probably dropping my subscription due to the issues that keep cropping up in the "news" about them.

    Personally I think the USPS is an antiquaited money-sink of a system that is beyond repair. I just wish I could eliminate the rest of my paper bills so I could stop using their services entirely.

  122. Who made that labor agreement? by C_Kode · · Score: 1

    You can't half a drop in business and not be able to cut staff. Who in hell agreed to not allow layoffs?!?! That is ignorant business decision. Sometimes layoffs are necessity because business dictates it.

    1. Re:Who made that labor agreement? by Viewsonic · · Score: 1

      The government agreed to it. So, the government are the ones who are ultimately responsible to the no layoffs clause.

  123. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by yourmommycalled · · Score: 0

    Ah yes, the usual they had control for 2 years line of sh*t. Tell me idjiot what happened in late 2008 under the Rethuglicans? Could it be the Rethuglicans tanked the economy with their "invisible hand of the market" theology. Could it be that the Democrats were trying to clean up the steaming pile the Rethuglicans left behind. Could it be that the Senate Rethuglicans used "holds" to prevent any legislation from going forward? You would think an intelligent person would try to handle the biggest threats to the economy that need to be solved as soon as possible and then worry about fixing smaller less pressing problems once the biggest ones are fixed. You know the concept of priortization.

  124. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by hedwards · · Score: 5, Informative

    In cases like that you send a registered letter to the agency requesting proof that you owe the debt. That will stop them dead in their tracks, especially given that lately even legitimate mortgage debt often can't be proven to be owed to the party wanting to collect.

  125. FEDEX makes drivers pay all costs and they ar 1099 by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    FEDEX makes drivers pay all costs and they are 1099 working even when they must use fedex uniforms, buy / rent fedex truck, pay for gas and all upkeep, buy / rent the route, be on fedex time table. And missing or lost packages come out of there pay as well.

    Is that what you want works to be like have to pay for the right to work?

  126. USPS, stop blaming the internet. by operagost · · Score: 1

    Complaints about the insolvency of the USPS invariably point the finger at the internet. From my perspective, though, I spend a lot MORE on the post office in the last ten years than in the previous ten-- because of ebay and its subsidiary, half.com. Allowing me to print USPS shipping labels right from the web, and dump the package in a mailbox or leave it for the carrier to pick up six days a week, is a killer app. This doesn't seem like an unfixable situation. Maybe they need to get rid of media mail, because I used to send out some heavy books for peanuts with that service.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  127. post offices in other countries already do this. by voss · · Score: 1

    Canada Post has a big thing on the front of its web page "Pay 200 bills online with epost"
    Irish post offices have savings accounts and passport offices.

    As for Saturday delivery we dont require UPS or Fedex to deliver on Saturday why should we require the post office to do so???
    Make saturday for priority and express mail only.

  128. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by StuartHankins · · Score: 1

    Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal... but in my experience the USPS has mangled my mail and packages at multiple residences, left a set of apartment mailboxes open several times (which exposes 8 mailboxes to the elements and everyone else), delivered mail addressed to another address (multiple residences again), folded my mail (when it wasn't necessary to fit in the box) (multiple residences), and not delivered mail (have had to call to get bills re-mailed -- at several residences).

    Not to say that the other shipping methods don't have their own problems (UPS, FedEx, and DHL have all done very very stupid things) but the others rarely misdeliver. I rely on the USPS for certain types of correspondence and I expect better.

  129. Is to the door delivery even necessary? by DigiTechGuy · · Score: 1

    I know I don't need delivery to my door. I wouldn't mind having no delivery and just a PO box. I would check once or twice a week or more often if I was expecting something important. If to the door service was eliminated in a lot of areas it would save them a lot on fuel and employee costs. Pretty much anything important I do online, through email and electronic payments. It's faster, cheaper, and easier. I just plain don't need daily delivery to my door. In a lot of rural areas they don't even offer that service at all addresses and the only option is to go to the post office and get your mail. I've been there and done that and it never bothered me.

  130. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

    That's not safe, really, in that both UPS and FedEx use the US Postal Service as the final deliverer for their cheapest (and therefore what you tend to get any time an online store offers you cheap or free shipping) shipping option.

  131. Let the USPS die by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

    It's a stubborn and extremely out-dated service, not to mention run by complete morons that barely know how to do their jobs. Whenever I order something online and have the choice of courier, I avoid the USPS like the plague. They've just made too many mistakes in the past for me to trust them with expensive goods anymore (not to mention their tracking system is a complete joke).

  132. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

    I was just hoping it would fall apart...

  133. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by artor3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The dirty little secret of those private carriers you named is that, when delivering a package to a rural location, they hand it over to the USPS for delivery. That's why the Postal Service can't compete with Fedex, UPS, et al on cost... they need to maintain a huge workforce and vehicle fleet to cover the 100% of the population, whereas the private carriers only cover the cheapest 90%.

    If the Postal Service fails, a lot of people out in the country will suddenly find that ordering a $5 replacement wiper blade from Amazon is gonna cost them $100 in shipping, or won't be available to their location at all.

  134. Govt Union Laber = FAIL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Labor agreements prohibiting layoffs are preventing one avenue for reducing costs..."

    Ah yes, one of the many reasons why government unions are an absolutely horrible idea and in conflict with tax payers.

    Friggen idiots.

  135. Here is a glaringly obvious idea by voss · · Score: 1

    Allow post offices to serve as drop off and pick up points for UPS and Fedex packages. Let the postal clerks offer ups, fedex(and whoever else) or post office shipping by using the post office some shippers could offer lower rates by not having to have their own customer counters.

    Allow post offices to be used for ebillpay and money wiring (let the postal clerks provide western union and moneygram).

  136. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

    Some banks charge a "convenience fee" for automatic deductions like that. On my car loan when it was through CitiFinancial it cost me roughly an extra $15/month for doing a direct debit payment online. If I mailed a check in I could avoid that. Not a huge savings, but still worth it over time.

    I have since paid that particular loan off, but I'm sure there are still companies doing it.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  137. 3days a week by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cut mail delivery to three days a week, problem solved!

  138. In support of national carriers by phorm · · Score: 1

    I'm in Canada. When I order a package from the US, using USPS (stateside) + Canada Post (past the border) is the only option that doesn't randomly screw me with things like "brokerage fees" that often hit half or more the value of the package itself.

    The private carriers seem to *love* brokerage fees, which allow them to hold packages hostage for fees way beyond the sending postage after crossing the border. It's always fun to get a bill for $10-15 duties/taxes and an additional $25-40 in "brokerage"

  139. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by artor3 · · Score: 1

    Is that an argument for hand delivering all checks, or what? Any other method, whether by mail or electronic, has a risk of something going wrong. And if you decide to hand deliver your checks, the probability that you get mugged (small as it is) is probably greater than the odds of the USPS losing an envelope.

  140. USPS.com needs love by snsh · · Score: 2

    The web and electronic services offered by the USPS are certainly part of their problem. You would think that by now, almost everyone would be logging into USPS.com to print POSTNET/IM barcoded prepaid envelopes and labels with inexpensive tracking and delivery confirmation options. You would also expect USPS.com to contain complete information and offer every service your local post office offers.

    Instead, USPS.com has not changed much at all in the past 10 years. You cannot print out an envelope with delivery confirmation from your PC. Delivery confirmation is not even available for the first-class envelope you use to pay your electric bill, unless you stick in a couple of styrofoam peanuts to make the envelope 1/4" thick to convert it from a flat to a parcel. The post office does offer a certificate-of-mailing service, and their legacy certified and registered mail services, both of which require you visit a post office and handwrite all the information out on paper forms.

    The USPS offers a bloated Windows desktop "Shipping Assistant" application, which still cannot print out a simple envelope.

    They updated the USPS.com website about a month ago, but that was barely more than a homepage redesign. click a few times and you're back to their old web apps.

    It's such a stagnant situation that the only viable fix is to have the federal government just sign a contract with stamps.com and make it a free service for everyone.

  141. The "E-mail Age" isn't the problem by spmkk · · Score: 0

    Labor agreements prohibiting layoffs...

    The USPS isn't losing a battle against the "E-mail Age" - it's losing a battle against organized labor. As is every other productivity sector in the U.S. And so long as we have a government that unconditionally supports one side of that battle, productivity -- be it mail delivery, manufacturing, education, etc. - will continue to lose.

  142. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 1

    Congress is considering doing the following: Take the budget used to subsidize phone service and postal service used to ensure universal access and put it towards universal access to fiber internet. Package delivery would still need to be supported but communication would be taken care of. The big huge drawback is the layoffs that would be needed. Congress would need to fire a ton of post office employees. They may wait till the post office collapses in debt. Then they can be viewed as fixing a problem instead of firing a bunch of people.

  143. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by andydread · · Score: 1

    UPS has delivered my package to random neighbors on 2 occasions. At work FedEX delivered one of our packages to the people in the adjacent suite. This all happened this year. The insinuation that UPS and FedEx does not make the same mistakes is laughable at best.

  144. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by repetty · · Score: 1

    Fedex doesn't have a legal mandate to provide service to most addresses 6 days of the week.

    So?

    How's that math work?

  145. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by nomadic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A significant majority of Congresscritters

    Honestly, "Congresscritter" makes you sound just as childish as using "Rethuglican."

  146. They are doing web payment of bills wrong. by MSesow · · Score: 1

    For myself, three out of the four bills (energy, internet, water/sewage/etc. and insurance) I regularly pay (last time I checked, anyways), charged a "convenience fee" that greatly exceeds what I spend on stamps, usually by two or three times as much (plus the envelope is included, and I don't have to put an address on it other than sometimes a return address). Also, it probably takes me slightly longer to write the check and walk it down to the box but I regularly got fed up when trying to pay online because I usually had to set up an account and re-enter all of the things that they already know for my billing account; only one time was it as simple as entering the billing account number, the amount being paid and the method of payment. This is good for the same reason that Google did so well - the result is the same with or without it, but I don't need or want a portal into the company's e-world in order to do so.

    1. Re:They are doing web payment of bills wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For myself, three out of the four bills (energy, internet, water/sewage/etc. and insurance) I regularly pay (last time I checked, anyways), charged a "convenience fee" that greatly exceeds what I spend on stamps..

      Ahh, my Credit Union doesn't charge for the bill payment service. And so it actually costs me less to use bill payment than to mail things out.

      Some of the places I pay via the service would charge a fee if I tried paying them directly with a credit card.

      So, see if your bank has a bill paying service that doesn't cost a lot.

    2. Re:They are doing web payment of bills wrong. by Stormthirst · · Score: 1

      You're right - they are doing it wrong.

      In the UK most utility companies will charge you if you don't set up a direct debit into your account (i.e. they can take the money direct from your account). Same with paying your property taxes.

  147. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 2

    Point being, if an area of the country has low enough population density that delivering there is unprofitable, FedEx doesn't. (Or, rather, they'll turn the package over to the local USPS for final delivery.)

    Whereas the USPS isn't allowed to say: "Fuck Montana. We're losing money delivering mail there. Let's just focus on cities instead."

  148. WAY Confused by Bardwick · · Score: 1

    Company A makes deal with Union. Company A can't pay for the promises they signed. I (taxpayer) give 5 billion to Union. Union gives money to political candidate I disagree with. This is a good thing why?

    1. Re:WAY Confused by hrvatska · · Score: 2

      I'm kind of confused too. Company A makes a deal with Union. Company A is running a profit on their operations with the union workers. Company A's competitors complain to congress members they contribute loads of money to that Company A needs to fund its employee pensions better or they won't be able to compete against it. Company A is required by congress to fund it's pension at an unrealistically high level, amounting to an overpayment that exceeds the losses the company is running. By some estimates as much as $25 billion. What confuses me is why some people think most of the problem is the union and not the congress members who did the bidding of Company A's competitors.

  149. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bill collector calls after one missed payment? Something seems fishy there.

  150. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by NJRoadfan · · Score: 1

    The OP didn't say anything about a receipt. Having one showing the account as being credited would have cleared up the problem. I have always received receipts whenever I made a loan payment at a bank counter.

  151. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some companies do it intentionally for their bills, so they can get late charges. It's hard or near impossible to prove it was intentional and not a mistake.

  152. Allow 4 day mail by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    Allow them no only to close down saturdays, but fridays as well, and you would have to pay less to your employees!
    Sad thing is if they go under, the monopoly created for all fedex like companies, will allow the price fixing for parcels just like the oil industry has been doing.

  153. Progress by flanders123 · · Score: 1

    I call this progress.

    Speed: Email is at least 175,000 times faster (1 second for email vs ~2 days for snail mail, at best)
    Environment: Considering paper use, delivery truck emissions, etc....How many times more environmentally friendly is eMail over snail mail? 100X, 10000X?
    Cost: how much cheaper is sending an email rather than a letter...again tougher to quantify but it is orders of magnitude.
    Reliability: What is the success rate of email vs snail mail?

    I mean honestly we might as well be subsidizing a carrier pigeon service or telegraph technology.

    No politician will downsize USPS due to the loss of jobs. I have to think we would be able to invest this money to more progressive endeavors, which would create some jobs (albeit not 500K of them)

  154. Nailed it. by GodInHell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You missed can't fund its pension plan at the same lower level as its private competitors.

    In 2006 Bush and the Republicans put a forward funding mandate on the USPS. That payment is due this year, to the tune of $5.5B -- 5,500,000,000.00. Guess how big the shortfall is expected to be in this "crisis."

    It's easy to make government fail, just cut revenues below expenditures, then cut expenditures, then repeat -- sooner or later the food isn't safe, the roads fall apart and Medicare can't be sustained any longer. Unfortunately, one party in the U.S. has embraced this as a "policy" of "governance." The other party is full of messaging fail.

    -GiH

  155. Some ideas by Thesis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Currently you can get shipping materials for free https://shop.usps.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10052&catalogId=10001&categoryId=10000036&parent_category_rn=10000002&top_category=10000002 which is ludicrous. They need to stop giving away shipping materials and charge for it like everyone else does. Countless times I have known of folks to hoard the materials, and use them for shipping using other carriers, or for personal storage. This needs to stop NOW.

    Raise the rates on the bulk mail, even if it requires congressional approval to do so. Bulk mail companies already pay way less than the general public to send their spam direct to your box, and at times they receive hefty discounts as well ( http://www.dmnews.com/usps-provides-more-details-on-summer-sale/article/131151/ ) which should be stopped. The First Class postage we pay subsidizes junk mail. It is high time they pay their own way. The ridiculous threat that bulk mail companies will stop using USPS if rates for them are increased is pure bullshit. Call their bluff, and raise their rates, for they can afford it. Do you really think they will start using FedEx or UPS to deliver their junk? The US mail is a government monopoly they must use, due to the cheapness of it when compared to other options. A friend of mine who works in the sorting of US mail told me that bulk mail has steadily increased every year.

    Additionally, the Postal Regulatory Commission believes that bulk mailers do not pay their fair share, and that their rates should be increased roughly 22% overall. An audit found that the current rates bulk mailers pay run afoul of the 2006 Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act http://www.prc.gov/PRC-DOCS/UploadedDocuments/ACD%202010_1697.pdf , which is hotly contested by the lobbyists in the bulk mail industry. The current Postmaster General caters to the whims of the bulk mail industry, and needs to be gone.

    Create a Do Not Mail registry, which works similar to the Do Not Call registry. Currently I have no way to stop all the loose-leaf flyers/advertisements from infiltrating my mailbox. The sorting and delivery of this bulk-junk takes up a considerable amount of time, including mine. The junk mail problem alone has me flirting with the idea of eliminating my mailbox entirely, for I can pay all my bills, and do all my banking electronically now. Granted, this may cost money initially, but I can dream, can't I?

    Granted, there are many problems leading to the current crisis, and I have only touched the tip of the issue. We have to start somewhere.

    1. Re:Some ideas by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Currently you can get shipping materials for free https://shop.usps.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10052&catalogId=10001&categoryId=10000036&parent_category_rn=10000002&top_category=10000002 which is ludicrous. They need to stop giving away shipping materials and charge for it like everyone else does. Countless times I have known of folks to hoard the materials, and use them for shipping using other carriers, or for personal storage. This needs to stop NOW.

      Those materials are supposed to be used for mailing stuff by Priority or Express. They probably do it to encourage people to use those particular sizes instead of using their own boxes, because they're probably able to make things more efficient somehow by standardizing the boxes. Why else would they offer flat-rate shipping with those Priority Mail boxes (you can stuff a chunk of lead in there and it costs the same)?

      This wouldn't help with people using them for personal storage, but they could simply pass a law banning other carriers from accepting those boxes.

      Raise the rates on the bulk mail, even if it requires congressional approval to do so. Bulk mail companies already pay way less than the general public to send their spam direct to your box, and at times they receive hefty discounts as well ( http://www.dmnews.com/usps-provides-more-details-on-summer-sale/article/131151/ ) which should be stopped. The First Class postage we pay subsidizes junk mail.

      From everything I've read, it's the other way around. Junk mail subsidizes your first class mail. Junk mail is cheaper because it's so automated, whereas FC requires more human contact. The junk mail senders even pre-sort the junk mail for the USPS by carrier and route. Do you do that with your first class letters? Didn't think so.

      The current Postmaster General caters to the whims of the bulk mail industry,

      That's probably because, unfortunately, the USPS would not survive without junk mail, as there simply isn't enough volume aside from that to sustain them, at least without downsizing, which Congress won't allow.

      Create a Do Not Mail registry, which works similar to the Do Not Call registry.

      This would take away the USPS's main revenue stream, and cause them to collapse.

      The sorting and delivery of this bulk-junk takes up a considerable amount of time, including mine.

      That's the price of having your firstclass mail subsidized, and having a Congress that won't allow the USPS to manage themselves properly. If you really want to do something, start writing your Congresscritter. It's the Peoples' responsibility to hold government accountable.

  156. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by NevarMore · · Score: 1

    The postal service is way way WAY too critical to leave in the hands of a company that cares nothing about quality and everything about profits.

    I'm sure it will be quite safe in the hands of the government. As it sits it is already about profits. The USPS is a quasi-governmental agency that is theoretically self funding through the sale of postage and services. It may not be out to function as an investor driven business with quarterly growth, but its not a tax sinkhole nor a charity/non-profit organization.

    Quick read: http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/consumerawareness/a/uspsabout.htm, the last two sections are relevant.

  157. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I do my part by sending notes to the Credit Card Companies who send me pre-approved offers using their business-reply envelopes. Usually the note goes something like, "Please stop sending me this SPAM that gives people the ability to steal my identity/use my credit if they get their hands on this mail)". Plus, it gives the USPS some kickback, on the credit-card company's dime. Win-win!

  158. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "It costs the same to mail a letter anywhere in the US. "

    (Gasp) Isn't that Socialism in the US mind?

    "All the other carriers you listed do not flat rate, and will refuse to deliver to places that aren't profitable."

    Welcome to the capitalist system!

  159. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by BVis · · Score: 1

    You sound like some of these Tea Party yahoos who were cheering at the concept of a government shutdown. What you're advocating here would be a catastrophic event. I know that my employer would go out of business were they not able to have their customers mail letters to us for a nominal fee; UPS and the like would charge too much.

    --
    Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
  160. The Founders were Clearly Red-lovers. by GodInHell · · Score: 1

    Since the USPS is created (and required) by a constitutional mandate, and not an amendment either -- its part of the core document. Other famous "communist plots" the Army and Navy. Let us not forget the super-double-secret socialist brotherhood known as "voters." Damn them and their lenin lovin' ways.

    -GiH

  161. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by petermgreen · · Score: 2

    STOP! You're bankrupting the USPS. They *lose* money on these items.

    Do you have a source for that claim and in particular does that source distinguish between overall profit/loss (apportioning some part of the fixed costs to each delivery) and marginal profit/loss?

    They'll have to charge the true cost of delivery if they want to actually solve the problem.

    As I understand it the real problem with a "postal service"* is that their costs are more related to the size of the service area and the frequency of service than the volume of post. Sending a postman down a street costs about the same regardless of how much mail he puts in each box.

    So as mail volumes naturally go down due to competition from electronic communication the average cost of a delivery rises. The governments that own and/or regulate them must choose betwen subsidising them, raising prices or reducing service. None of theese are lightly to be popular and the latter two options run the risk of driving down mail volumes further. Unions add to the problem of course as they are resistant to downsizing.

    I suspect in the long run we will end up with an infrequent and possiblly subsidised delivery to everyone, commerical postal services in areas with high mail volume and expensive courior services for the few items that absoloutely must be delivered physically and quickly to an address in the middle of nowhere.

    --
    note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  162. Don't Fear The Reaper by xeroedouttwice · · Score: 1

    "...the United States Postal Service is in dire financial straits..." ... More cowbell?

  163. stop the discounts by gerardrj · · Score: 1

    If the USPS wants to stop the hemorrhage of cash they top pissing off the retail customers (or potential customers) by:

    1. Stop the rate reduction of bulk mailings so everyone pays the same
    2. Enable rules that allow people to STOP mailings they do not want
    3. STAFF the service desks in your locations so there isn't a 30 person line waiting for help

    As it stands the USPS has entered a race to the bottom along with the bulk/junk mailers. Contantly reducing bulk mailing rates to get pieces moving. The reason seems to be that the managers and supervisors are paid bonuses on piece movement, not profit.

    USPS has had a failing business model for decades. I personally am happy to see it finally catch up with them. Now if we can just prevent Congress from doing anything stupid like throwing more cash at them.

    --
    Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
    1. Re:stop the discounts by SETIGuy · · Score: 1

      The stupidest thing Congress has ever done is to make the USPS ask them every time they need to change rates.

  164. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by XanC · · Score: 2

    Why do you assume that the government "cares" about quality? A profit motive gives a reason to care about quality. A guaranteed monopoly does not.

  165. USPS losing mail by fnj · · Score: 1

    As long as we're trading anecdotes, the USPS has NEVER lost a single check I mailed over a period of about 50 years, nor have I EVER failed to receive a bill I was due for. I think that's pretty remarkable. Also, nothing I have ordered for delivery via USPS has ever been stolen. I know some postal systems are infamous for loss and theft, but this is just my experience with the U.S. system.

    I order a lot of things. Packages delivered by the USPS generally arrive pretty mangled when compared to UPS or Fedex, but I can only think of a single case where the goods were damaged, and that was glass headlights very poorly packed and sent from overseas.

  166. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by NevarMore · · Score: 1

    If it weren't for a 2006 law requiring it to over fund it's retiree pension and medical expenses it likely wouldn't be in the financial mess it's in.

    It would be in a different mess, with an underfunded pension liability like many state governments.

  167. I say good riddance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only will you eliminate postal workers (thus making the world a safer place) but my mailbox has become the physical embodiment of my email inbox. I only check the mail these days to eliminate the clutter so the mailman can put more junk mail in there.

    I was discussing this with a friend once. I feel like the postal service should have a rule. If you return a letter to the sender then the original sender has to pay for the return. This would eliminate junk mail really quickly. People would only send stuff that has been requested.

    Anyways...I'm tired of the spam in my mailbox, except I can't have a junk mail filter there. So, bon voyage Postal service.

  168. My solution... by MDillenbeck · · Score: 1

    The postal system is an archaic but necessary system - however, I think it should be scaled back. Personal to-your-door delivery service when most people drive everywhere? Why? Instead, limit home delivery routes to those who show a need - elderly, disabled, etc who cannot physically make it to a central depot. Then, create neighborhood depots This would reduce the number of employees needed, lower fleet costs (number of vehicles and fuel cost), and allow regular service days to be maintained. For example, in many small towns in the USA, the post office would be in walking distance - and in large urban areas like New York City you could expand the network so that it remains in walking distance for the majority of customers. (As an aside, maybe add a law that says any unsolicited mail can be returned to the sender at that companies cost... that would take care of the tons of junk mail shipped every day.)

    1. Re:My solution... by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      The postal system is an archaic but necessary system - however, I think it should be scaled back. Personal to-your-door delivery service when most people drive everywhere? Why? Instead, limit home delivery routes to those who show a need - elderly, disabled, etc who cannot physically make it to a central depot. Then, create neighborhood depots This would reduce the number of employees needed, lower fleet costs (number of vehicles and fuel cost), and allow regular service days to be maintained. For example, in many small towns in the USA, the post office would be in walking distance - and in large urban areas like New York City you could expand the network so that it remains in walking distance for the majority of customers. (As an aside, maybe add a law that says any unsolicited mail can be returned to the sender at that companies cost... that would take care of the tons of junk mail shipped every day.)

      I like what you're saying. The last part is the one that makes me smile inside and out the most :)

      I'll add that the best benefit of email is the fast sort-and-delete method. If I get junk (even if it passes through the filter), I just hit a button and delete it. It doesn't stay in a stack of other mail while I walk somewhere else to throw away part, sort out another part.

      How about benefits from CHOOSING TO RECEIVE in a live fashion? If I want junk, I can have it printed right there. If I don't, they save delivery cost and I save sanity. If I want it, the compan(y/ies) that want me to have it pay for the printing costs and I get the advertisements I'm interested in receiving. If I don't want 'em, I *ahem* "Lose Out(sm) on(c) Special Deals(tm)." *cough* :)

      I know that's laziness, but hey... I don't like having to even have stupid advertising junk crap barf worthless *insert many swear words here* anywhere near my hands. I feel violated when touching that ridiculous filth.

      But that's just my opinion; I'm sure there aren't others who think about advertising the same way I do and automatically disregard all advertisers as junk that just lost all points they could have had in my mind when the decision comes to pass. ;) /snark /dirtyjunkmailbitterness

  169. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Beetle+B. · · Score: 1

    I've had far more emails "lost" to spam filters than lost by the USPS. In fact, in the last 13 years, USPS has never lost a single package letter (that I know of) - sent to/by me.

    --
    Beetle B.
  170. Two trips to the PO and only one to houses by tepples · · Score: 1

    I imagine that the trip back to the post office to pick up more sorted mail is less labor-intensive than the trips to people's houses. So it might be a net labor gain to make two trips to the post office and make only one trip past each house, compared to two trips to the post office and two trips past each house.

    1. Re:Two trips to the PO and only one to houses by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      They could also either split certain routes, or buy larger trucks for certain routes. They probably need to replace vehicles after a certain time anyway, so moving to larger vehicles would let them carry more mail per route.

  171. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by OldeTimeGeek · · Score: 1

    FedEx won't deliver to the condo that I live in unless there are at least two packages to deliver or the package was sent using the most expensive class of service.

  172. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "If the Postal Service fails, a lot of people out in the country will suddenly find that ordering a $5 replacement wiper blade from Amazon is gonna cost them $100 in shipping, or won't be available to their location at all."

    There are other perks if you live in Buttfuck, Wisconsin.

  173. As a foreigner living in the U.S. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the point of view of the consumer, it's obvious that the USPS is broken from the mindblowing amount of spam people get in the mail. I was shocked to find out that the USPS encourages this practice by selling businesses the address lists so that they can effectively spam people. And when you start pulling on this thread, asking "why is a government agency resorting to such shady business practices?", nothing good comes out.

  174. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 1

    They'll have to charge the true cost of delivery if they want to actually solve the problem.

    But then we'd never hear of the 'great' Sarah Palin...oh wait, maybe that isn't so bad...

    --
    People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
  175. Re:It's true FROM AN ACTUAL STAMP DEALER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm an actual stamp dealer (I post rarely so I'm doing it as AC) and I've FOUGHT the USPS to pay them. Why? Rule 604.9.1.6 in the Domestic Mail Manual basically says that old stationery can be exchanged for new, as long as you pay the USPS a cut (10% for commercial envelopes) as long as the envelopes are blank besides the postage (4.9 cent stamps are a pain to sell). What happened? I've received 4 letters which directly contradict each other as to why I can't exchange the stationery and pay them which aren't in the rule, and in a phone conversation "negotiation" I got annoyed and finally asked if I can pay MORE than what's listed to get this done, and was basically laughed at. Considering there's about $500 MILLION in outstanding postage, if they allowed dealers like myself to exchange these stamps, they'd make at least half a million a year doing that, but they don't want it. They're acting like the car companies did when they first asked congress for money, and I hope they get slapped to the floor like they did.

  176. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why would someone steal a mortgage check which they couldn't cash, or someone's electric bill?

  177. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by toadlife · · Score: 1

    Nope.

    Money was tight a few years back and we weren't able to make our car payment until about five days after the due date.

    I received a call from someone asking about the payment the day after it was due. They even asked where the car was parked.

    --
    I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
  178. Subsidize it Accordingly by uiucgrad · · Score: 1

    I don't understand why people feel that of all the things that the government does this one should be a money maker. It is not a requirement of mine that government services break even or make money. That's why I pay taxes. That's not to say that they should not be more efficient of innovative but they provide a valuable service that I am willing to subsidize with my taxes.

  179. Pensions by water-and-sewer · · Score: 1

    This Slashdot discussion is not touching on the one issue that matters to the USPS's fiscal health: the payments it owes retirees. There's an entire generation of Americans retiring and collecting their retirement pensions, and it's killing the financial system - not just the USPS. This is *not* about good or bad service, or email, or flat rates, or whatever. Those issues will sort themselves out naturally. But the USPS - like the USG on the whole, and many many private companies - have promised healthy retirement packages to lots of people who worked there for a lifetime, and now they've got to figure out how to actually pay them.

    --
    If this were Usenet, I'd killfile the lot of you.
    1. Re:Pensions by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      This Slashdot discussion is not touching on the one issue that matters to the USPS's fiscal health: the payments it owes retirees. There's an entire generation of Americans retiring and collecting their retirement pensions, and it's killing the financial system - not just the USPS. This is *not* about good or bad service, or email, or flat rates, or whatever. Those issues will sort themselves out naturally. But the USPS - like the USG on the whole, and many many private companies - have promised healthy retirement packages to lots of people who worked there for a lifetime, and now they've got to figure out how to actually pay them.

      That's is so NOT why they're concerned; it's simple profit. Like companies who promised good health benefits as well as retirement and didn't pony up on it (my grandfather and mother are both "victims" of this), the USPS is a company. It's not a government agency anymore (I know you know that, I'm just typing it for those who aren't thinking about it at the moment...)

      The gub'mint is going to have to handle the people who lose their retirement the same as every other person from every other company.

      They're just a company. If they can't compete, then they lose. People suffer from the loss. Simple economics. The employees don't deserve more fairness and support than any other person who has worked for many years and is looking forward to their supported retirement.

      Oh... IMHO.

    2. Re:Pensions by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      I've never understood how somebody can work only 20 years in an easy-ass job like the Post Office and expect to retire with the same standard of living on pension alone.

      I barely understand it for military people, who have undoubtedly done far more difficult work than anyone in the Post Office. And while we are at it, how in the world can you retire from the Army (at 38), then retire again with double pensions from the Post Office (at 58), then gather social security at 65-ish? Man, I'm totally doing it wrong.

  180. Another Bush Presidency casuality by Frankie70 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The real reason for USPS problems is not e-mail or online bill pay. The real reason is the Postal Act of 2006 which requires USPS to pre-fund 80% of future retiree health-care obligations by 2016. This costs USPS 5.5 billion $ per year. If not for this, USPS would have shown a 600 Million $ profit over the last 4 years.

    None of the USPS competitors (or for that matter any other company) has this burden. It's very likely this was lobbied for by USPS competitors - No lobbyist left behind.

    1. Re:Another Bush Presidency casuality by sarysa · · Score: 1

      Because it's a better idea for yet another government entity to put off its financial obligations for future generations to pay for?

      Regardless of who lobbied for this, or which unpopular president passed it, it should be patently obvious what the root of this problem is. (hint: It was mentioned in the summary)

      --
      Charisma is the measure of someone's ability to lie with a straight face.
    2. Re:Another Bush Presidency casuality by Stormthirst · · Score: 1

      Worse, I bet the Postal Act you refer to didn't allow the postal service to increase their costs in order to pay for those obligations. Gotta love a Republican mind set.

    3. Re:Another Bush Presidency casuality by inthealpine · · Score: 0

      Ha. So the postal service has to actually run the USPS like the business it technically and legally is and you blame Bush for them imploding????
      The USPS is going out of business because pensions are crazy, pay grades are outrageous and contract rules are pure stupidity (ie pay people $45/hr to sit in a room just in case they are needed).
      Blame Bush if you want, but only the government could have a monopoly service to every house in the US and fuck it up.

      --
      "In God We Trust, All Others Pay Cash"
    4. Re:Another Bush Presidency casuality by PhinMak · · Score: 1
      These other companies you mention are public. While their pension liabilities may not hit their "Net Income" all the time, or to the same effect, you can find their costs in the notes to financial statements. Also check out the "Comprehensive Income Statement". I once had a job where my job was to scan those notes to financial statements and report back which companies were manipulating their pensions the most. Have an unfunded gap? Just increase your estimated annual increase in the stock market and "poof" you suddenly have enough money and don't need to transfer more to your plan to keep it afloat.

      As a CPA, I have long felt that Defined Benefit plans (You will get 70% of your pay from retirement until death, etc) should be illegal. The company is mortgaging its future and all of those pensions that people expect to have could be taken away through bad investment luck, fraud, etc. An example is the US auto industry, which has been crippled by their pension obligations. This wouldn't be a problem if employees were on a 401k plan or similar Defined Contribution plan.

      To further the problem, imagine an executive faced with a labor strike. Answer: Promise them pension benefits. What does it matter? You won't be running the show in 15 years when the promise comes due, your company goes bankrupt and everyone loses their pension.

      You see in this problem in the federal government as well. Social Security collection dollars have been larger than pay-outs since the beginning, but that will change. Where has the money gone? It is has been transferred to the Fed Gov general fund where it has been used to fund wars, roads, and promises elected officials make to stay in office. "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money."

    5. Re:Another Bush Presidency casuality by imric · · Score: 1

      No, idiot. The postal service can't raise rates to match costs. It's another Unfunded Wonder.

      And of course its cool by you if the government defaults on signed contracts to workers, because "OMG pension! I don't have that because I was too stupid to require it to work so FUCK them!" right?

      And $45/hr? Yeah that's common. Funny, all the carriers I know make about 1/5th that amount. Asshole. You probably think teachers are rich and only work during school hours, too.

      "only the government could have a monopoly service to every house in the US and fuck it up" Yeah - by trying NOT to rape the consumer. Lemme guess, your a republican and think the way to prosperity is to fuck the poor out of as much of their discretionary cash as possible because the rich will eventually trickle all over them.

      And yes, I'm being deliberately hostile. You morons will wreck the US for the sake of venality. Some baseline government services SHOULD exist, so that we aren't crushed by business - because business is about reducing and eliminating competition and maximizing profit.

      --
      Paranoia is a Survival Trait!
    6. Re:Another Bush Presidency casuality by ShavedOrangutan · · Score: 1

      Congress makes laws. But blaming Bush is always good for Karma whoring.

      --
      Godaddy is a scam and a ripoff.
    7. Re:Another Bush Presidency casuality by otaku244 · · Score: 1

      This isn't just a Bush Casualty. Decades union benifit agreements were made. Workers said "We want more money" and politicians, to kick the can down the road said "We can't give you money now, but we'll give you sweet retirement deals". The unions thought it was a good deal. It was sold to the American people as a "no-cost" benefit. Politicians got away with it because the state and federal budgets weren't constrained to GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principals).
      In particular, the "Principle of periodicity" they skirted state that future benefits and payouts must be fiscally accounted for, incrementally between the date of the agreement and the date of the disbursement. Think about it, if I were a business owner and promised you, my employee, $1,000,000 bonus if you contingent upon you working for me till retirement age of 65. We agree and I do nothing in my accounting books to account for that $1,000,000 in the ensuing 40 years of labor. How will I have the money for you when you retire? That makes my agreement with you, at the very least, an empty promise... more likely, it's a breach of contract.
      Now, considering that you are not allowed to sue a government agency, and considering that many of the politicians that employed this practice have retired themselves (with their own self-appointed retirement packages), the current government has no choice but to do what it should have done all along, follow GAAP. To the best of my knowlege, they JUST started doing this under Bush even though GAAP has been around in some form for over 70 years (Please check this statement).

      So why do USPS competitors not carry the same burden? Simple: If they are a publicly traded company, SEC requires them to follow GAAP in their operating reports. In other words, no agreement was made that went unfunded AND any agreement made has been incrementally ACCOUNTED for DECADES. The American people should be HOPPING MAD that we allowed ourselves to be fooled like this.
      "Because there is no such thing as a free lunch."

      --
      Mod me down, I shall become more off-topic than you could possibly imagine.
    8. Re:Another Bush Presidency casuality by gstrickler · · Score: 1

      We've seen what happens when companies don't properly fund retirement plans. Requiring the USPS to fund at least 80% of the plan ensures that the retirees are likely to actually receive a decent portion of their promised retirement. If they can't afford to fund it now, how would the be able to do it in 5, 10, or 20 years?

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    9. Re:Another Bush Presidency casuality by Buelldozer · · Score: 1

      I dunno, read it and you tell me:

      http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR06407:@@@L&summ2=m&

      Looks like it did though.

    10. Re:Another Bush Presidency casuality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Another Bush Presidency casuality"
      Unions have lobbyists too, don't they? Don't they bear some responsibility?
      If a 22% work reduction for the same number of people is acceptable, at what point is a reasonable person supposed to become concerned - 50%? 75%? 90%

    11. Re:Another Bush Presidency casuality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...or we could realize your progressive slave state is (thankfully) an unattainable dream and cut our losses. Seriously, why should we fund you and your union friends?

    12. Re:Another Bush Presidency casuality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll bet the USPS is required to invest their retirement funds in US T-Bills. Another bill we'll all have to pay back.

  181. Speaking of losing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...they just managed to lose the Touchpad I ordered.

    Let them go under.

  182. Technological Advancement by zifn4b · · Score: 1

    I really don't understand this. Prior to the internet, snail mail was the primary means of communicating in written form across long distance. Now that the internet is nearly ubiquitous in many countries around the globe, there is a natural shift from snail mail to email. Email is technologically superior. Why should USPS expect that taxpayers should continue to foot the bill for services that have become obsolete. It is only natural that USPS should decrease in size now that its technology is used far less because a more superior technology has replaced it. For now, at least until we have some matter disassembler/transmission/re-assembler technology, there will always be a need to send packaged goods. Certified mail is certainly still useful. But obviously, the USPS services are not as relevant in today's world as they were say 20 years ago.

    In order for the USPS to stay viable at the size it currently is, it will need to find a way to re-invent itself to make itself more relevant in the so-called digital age. That is the name of the game in business. If you want to stay relevant, you have to adapt. Survival of the fittest.

    --
    We'll make great pets
    1. Re:Technological Advancement by SETIGuy · · Score: 1

      Why should USPS expect that taxpayers should continue to foot the bill for services that have become obsolete.

      If the services really were obsolete, and if the requirement for the US to have a postal service wasn't written into the constitution, I might agree with you. But the Postal Service still is quite necessary for a lot of things..

      Why should USPS expect that taxpayers should continue to foot the bill for services that have become obsolete.

      The taxpayers shouldn't be footing any bills for USPS services. The reason that they often do is because Congress forces the USPS to keep postal rates below what is necessary to cover the USPS operating costs. Congress needs to let got of the rate controls, but maintain audit authority. But, as usual, congress people get big donations from companies that do a lot of bulk mailing. Do you think Land's End is going to pay it's share of Paul Ryan's campaign if he allows bulk mailing rates go up?

  183. Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Labor agreements prohibiting layoffs"

    Well, there's a big part of the problem right there. Revenues are down and they can't downsized because the economic-terrorist union won't let them cut the dead-weight and the unneeded?

    "the proliferation of e-mail and online bill-paying services have contributed to a 22% reduction in snail-mail volume since 2006."
    Shouldn't the reduction in volume also cut costs? Except for the point above of course...

  184. Sucky Package service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shipping a package is pretty DAMN expensive. And seems to be getting more so! Why can't the postal service fix that?

  185. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Rockoon · · Score: 2

    the probability that you get mugged (small as it is) is probably greater than the odds of the USPS losing an envelope.

    At least you will know that you were mugged in a timely fashion. You dont know that the USPS lost your mail for a long time that often has financial consequences.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  186. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

    "What will replace the USPS?"

    Electronic payments instead of sending checks,
    Fax, Email, IRC, FB ....
    DHL, UPS, USA couriers, Bongo, MyUS, FEDEX, Parcel2Go, ....

    Over half a million errand boys and >218000 vehicles don't come cheap these days.

    yeah, it's also a great way to ensure you don't ship international.

    UPS - charges anywhere between 30% to 200%+ for a package (those are the rates I've been charged). They wanted $20 for a $10 item (TOTAL, including shipping) - I rejected it. The tax owing was $1. USPS/Canada Post would've just ignored it (because it'll cost them that much to collect $1). They also wanted $140 for a $300 item as well. The least I've been charged was $21 for $50 items. And there was the time they wanted $40 for a $50 item. Bleh. Useless, and an instant skip if I can. Hell, just a couple of those pays for a US mailing address for a year.

    FedEx - OK, we're more reasonable here, as FedEx charges just $25 brokerage plus taxes. Not useful for anything under $500, but hey.

    DHL - Probably the most reasonable - $8, same as expedited (express) mail.

    USPS - $5 for priority and slower, $8 for express.

    The US address we have is mostly for the "free shipping US" deals most places have - where you can save $20 over shipping to Canada. It only takes two UPS packages to pay it off - the Canadian shipping ($30+) plus UPS' ourtrageous brokerage charges. Hell, even *one* moderately sized order ($300) could pay it off for two years!

    The problem is, most people ship UPS. FedEx/USPS are rarer. DHL is practically non-existent.

  187. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by xaxa · · Score: 1

    That's odd.

    Here in Britain some people are complaining that more and more businesses are requiring a fee when customers don't pay electronically. I'd have to pay, I think, £2.50 per month to pay my Internet connection bill by cheque, and £5 for the gas, electricity and mobile phone bills. Receiving a paper bill costs extra on top of that. But, I signed up for cheaper deals where I knew part of the discount was because of this.

    Paying "Council tax", a local tax I must pay, by cheque doesn't charge any extra, but the council explains that it's in my interest to reduce their costs.

    Some smaller places don't accept electronic payments, but if they've invested in a system to accept them it's to save staff costs, so they will want people to use it. Even the residents association prefers electronic payments.

    Processing paper cheques means the company has to employ lots of staff to move bits of paper around. Finding out the cheque is no good takes longer than for a bad electronic payment.

  188. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by janimal · · Score: 1

    What are checks?

  189. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by MrMatto · · Score: 1

    I worked at a very large computer chain (MC) in the tech shop and we used to get FedEx delivering laptops to us that were supposed to be shipped to our competitors' shops; a couple miles away, on a different street, with a completely different business name. We had to call the competing tech shop up and let them know, "Yeah, it's Matt from MC, we got another one of your packages. You can come and pick it up"

  190. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by zifn4b · · Score: 1

    One time I went to mail some documentation for a legal matter I was involved in where I needed receipt confirmation and had never done that before. First, I went to the post office but the workers there were rude and the lines were so long that I eventually just went to a Fedex Kinko's. While it cost a bit more, the employees at Fedex Kinko's were very friendly and I was in and out of there in less than 10 minutes.

    --
    We'll make great pets
  191. Once a week by foniksonik · · Score: 1

    I could live with getting mail once a week. If it's urgent send a courier or FedEx or something else.

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    1. Re:Once a week by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      If it's urgent, email me. I pay all my bills online and that seems to be the only use for mail these days anyway.

  192. That's all? by bigtrike · · Score: 1

    I get mail for entirely different addresses at least once a week and they used to lose at least a couple pieces of important mail per month. Packages can take up to 90 days for them to deliver from neighboring states.

    Your USPS branch sounds awesome compared to mine.

  193. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by flappinbooger · · Score: 0

    The USPS is a socialist service designed to ensure that EVERYONE has SOME form of communication, and reliable communication at that. Nothing else offers that, even if you don't realize it because it doesn't effect you.

    http://offgridsurvival.com/livingoffthegridcrime/

    So if you can't get "mail" because you're too far away from civilization for the new and efficient post office to service you, then you'll be forced to move because it is now illegal, presumably because it is unsafe. Seems already to be a crime to be off-grid.

    --
    Flappinbooger isn't my real name
  194. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Aqualung812 · · Score: 1

    I sent two mass mailings (wedding & other event) to 100-200 people each time.

    In those, was able to confirm that 30% of the people didn't get my invitations.

    When I complained to the USPS, they said unless I use certified mail, there was no way for them to do anything about it. The event were separated by 3 years.

    Since then, I've used email and for those that don't have email, I call them. Like the OP said, too much error in the system.

    Oh, and as for this:

    Most people would go there entire lives without losing anything.

    EVERYONE I talked to about my losses responded with horror stories of their own. So, unless you have stats that show that 51% of customers never lose anything from the USPS over their lifetime, my personal experiences trumps your presumptions.

    --
    Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
  195. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Memorize the last few digits of you mortgage account number. When you drop off the check LOOK at the receipt and make sure it got posted to your account before you pull away from the drive thru!

  196. Re:FEDEX makes drivers pay all costs and they ar 1 by yourmommycalled · · Score: 1

    Joe_Dragon: Did you read the post? Go back and try again: I am agreeing with everything you are saying. FEDEX paid off the congresscritters from Tennessee to push through a bill that would destroy the USPS. Then FEDEX could buy the remains of the USPS at pennies on the dollar. Of course FEDEX costs are low they make "drivers pay all costs and they are 1099 working even when they must use fedex uniforms, buy / rent fedex truck, pay for gas and all upkeep, buy / rent the route, be on fedex time table. And missing or lost packages come out of there pay as well." But Again that's what they Rethuglicans/TeaTerrorists/Libertarians want. Unfortunately what they want creates a race to the bottom. Think of SysAdmins working for 25 cents and hour and working more than they do now.

  197. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Stormthirst · · Score: 1

    Do you expect that level of service if the USPS closes? Where do you think that line of people at the USPS will go? Oh that's right to Fedex at Kinko's. Guess what, those employees will probably turn into the unfriendly monsters you see at the USPS because their relatively calm job has suddenly turned into an incredibly busy one.

  198. Won't miss them by Roogna · · Score: 1

    While I once thought the postal service was a requirement, at this point I have -two- bills I don't pay online, one because it's a local office and I actually just drop the check off (I could pay online, but it's a town thing so might as well say hi every month), and the other I mail because the company is still in the dark ages. A lack of a post office would simply force this particular company to finally update to at least take credit cards or some such. So for the inconvenience of a single business in my life it would mean I'd no longer get floods of junk mail in our box every week (that goes straight in the recycle bin, horrible waste of resources mailing that shit), and it will get rid of all the mail that goes to previous and nonexistent residents of our house. The previous residents of the house didn't put in a change of address form, so we get a LOT of mail to them. We're not legally allowed to put in a change of address form for them. We legally aren't allowed to toss the mail out. And marking it as return to sender or any other thing has served no purpose as our local postal office just doesn't seem to give a shit. Then we have the people who gave our address but never lived here, apparently they had the wrong street name or some such. Same thing, no matter how often we say they don't live here, we still get that same mail every month with no way to do anything about it.

    At least e-mail I can filter.

    And then sending things through them? Last package I sent by USPS never arrived... it simply vanished. They had no idea where it went. Which how that happens in this day and age I don't know.

    So IMO, let the post office die, pass a law requiring every business to provide a way to accept direct bank payments at the least, and UPS and FedEx for packages. If that means people in the wilderness have to head into town to pick up their packages once a week, well you know, that's what you get for living in the wilderness.

    1. Re:Won't miss them by SETIGuy · · Score: 1

      Last package I sent by USPS never arrived... it simply vanished. They had no idea where it went. Which how that happens in this day and age I don't know.

      The ways that happens are.... 1) Improperly secured address label. It's hard to deliver a package with no label. Always write the address and return address on the package in addition to affixing the label. 2) Delivered to the wrong address without signature. It happens, and if the person who got the package doesn't give it to the carrier, it'll never get delivered. 3) And the most common reason is.... The package was left on the porch, and a porch scavenger (i.e. thief) took it. To avoid #2 and #3 require a signature.

    2. Re:Won't miss them by Roogna · · Score: 1

      We did require a signature, it never ever arrived. It also -did- have the addresses on both the package and all labels. It was mailed directly at the local post office. It also simply disappeared.

      Sorry, while I know a single story isn't representative of the post office as a whole, it's enough to drive me away from ever shipping USPS again. I always use a shipper with reliable tracking now. Thing is, it only takes one fuckup to loose a customer. Eventually a business, even ones like USPS will have simply lost too many. Beyond that, even if the package arrived, the general hassle of improperly delivered mail, junk mailings, and other such things will make me happy to see the mailbox at my sidewalk become a thing of the past.

  199. Vicious circle by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

    Of course none of the "solutions" will work. Laying people off will mean less service. And no, reduced volume doesn't mean they've got excess people. It takes just about as many people to handle, sort and deliver one piece of mail per address as 20 pieces. Less service means more reasons for former customers to find and use alternatives. And higher rates means more former customers find the alternatives more attractive.

    And taking an honest look at my mailbox for the last couple of months, I find maybe half-a-dozen pieces of mail per week that I actually asked for. The rest is advertising of some sort or another. And of the small fraction I asked for, I only actually need a couple a month. The rest I could get through e-mail or the Web if I wanted to, I only keep them coming through snail-mail in case I'm hospitalized or something and someone else needs to handle my bills (it's already happened once). The USPS's problem is that changes in technology are steadily making them obsolete. They let UPS and Fedex and others take overnight delivery and parcel post away from them. E-mail took the regular first-class letter business away. On-line options are eating away at the use of mail for bills and payments. What's left? Advertising, and stuff where delivery by USPS carries a legal presumption of receipt. That's not much to build a business on.

  200. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by SecurityGuy · · Score: 1

    Actually, a profit motive gives a reason to care about profit. Bernie Madoff, for example, was quite motivated by profit, but the investing services he offered were rather low in quality.

  201. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by yourmommycalled · · Score: 0

    I'd disagree. I remind you of St. Ronnie said "In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problems; government is the problem." I cannot think of anything more descriptive of those whose sole purpose is to destroy the government of the United States than Terrorists. Since it is the stated goal of the TeaParty to destroy the government of the United States the appropriate title is TeaTerrorist. Since the current leaders of the Republican party have behaved in a thugish manner in their dealings with the president (Joe "You Lie" Wilson, Rush "I want him to fail"Limbaugh and Glenn "He's a racist" Beck as simple examples) and the public (deliberately disrupting townhall meetings, Kenneth Gladney and his TeaTerrorists friends faking injuries) they should be called exactly what they are.

  202. I wish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'Labor agreements prohibiting layoffs are preventing one avenue for reducing costs'

    Who's responsible for this?? Need I say more? Another, once profitable, business being slain by Union regulation.

  203. Real inflation is MUCH higher, so they loose by xiando · · Score: 1

    Those who track inflation based on how it was done before all the tricks used to generate the number today became standard find that real inflation is much higher than what is stated. shadowstats.com is one site which does this. A difference between real inflation and stated inflation of atleast 4 percent makes a huge difference for USPS and others who recieve income based on stated inflation. Their income is limited to government stated inflation, their expences are based on actual inflation. The difference piles up and grows bigger every year. This is not the only reason they are having problems, but it is likely a huge part of it.

  204. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Stormthirst · · Score: 1

    It is odd. What is even more odd is that most banks this side of the pond (I'm in Canada now, instead of the UK), charge for personal banking. From what I can see, most will charge you for every cheque you write, every transaction you make. Worse they don't even give you a significantly higher rate of interest than the UK. Companies in the UK, small and large, still have to pay per transaction, though if they are big enough they can get a discount. Which sucks if you're a small company trying to make a living. Of course, the really large companies like Sainsbury's just start their own bank so they can get even cheaper per transaction costs.

    Cheques (or checks for those this side of the pond) are a royal pain in the ass for small companies. They get lost easily, or they bounce which is worse. Credit cards are costly but at least you know you are going to get your money. And it turns out per transaction they aren't that costly compared to cheques.

  205. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 1

    If the Postal Service fails, a lot of people out in the country will suddenly find that ordering a $5 replacement wiper blade from Amazon is gonna cost them $100 in shipping, or won't be available to their location at all.

    The sad part is those same people seem to elect the politicians who want to cut government services to the bone....

    --
    People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
  206. Drop Wednesday delivery, not Saturday by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think USPS should drop Wednesday delivery, not Saturday. It's not right to go 2 days in a row without physical-mail delivery - it would be better to split it up throughout the week. If something important to you isn't delivered on Friday like you expected, now you have to wait till THREE days from now (Monday) to get it? Like, an over-night or 2-day delivery? This doesn't make sense to me. And likely in the future, they'll have to trim another day, and another; much better to spread it around, not lump it all together into a giant mail-gap that screws everyone up.

    Mail delivery has already been privatized anyway, with UPS, FedEx, DHL, Blue, and others. They're just somewhat more expensive than USPS, which is the ONLY thing keeping USPS viable. Eliminating USPS all together would save our government money, although it would raise our costs to mail physical objects. But then again, inflation is all around us, prices going up everywhere; this would be just another area where the cost of living in the United States is going up irretrievably.

  207. Good riddance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please don't use my tax dollars to prop up a failing system. There's money in delivering physical goods, but there's no longer money in delivering simple messages on paper. We don't need the USPS anymore. If someone really needs to send physical paper copies, let them pay UPS or Fedex's rates for it. Being for-profit corporations, they'll charge enough to stay in business and discourage acting like a dinosaur.

  208. BLOODY BRILLIANT! - Thanks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I send postcards all the time - about 3 or 4 a week to many friends all over the world. In fact I make a rule of no email to some of them and we correspond solely by post card - it is a lot of fun and the size of a card is very restrictive so it makes you think more carefully what to write.

    I've been sending cards back and forth like this for over a decade to some people. You'd be suprised at the variety and number of postcards available. I pick up dozens everywhere I go at any opportunity. Museums, small tourist shops, newsagents, post offices, and charity shops.

    What also I like to do is visit local charity shops and search out old postcards that have been written on with an address - the charity shops often sell collections of old postcards - and simply put a new stamp on it and put it back in the post box. I've sent dozens of cards like this - I don't know if they get to their places but if they do it must be great/weird to get a post card to someone (who probably no longer lives at that residence) from someone (who is probably dead) with a post card from over 4 or 5 decades ago.

  209. no mail?? but... by CagedApe · · Score: 1

    How will I get weed from Silk Road delivered to my doorstep??

    1. Re:no mail?? but... by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      How will I get weed from Silk Road delivered to my doorstep??

      From "HIGHer" "FeeMail".

      Ha.. I made another funny.

  210. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by black+soap · · Score: 1

    And yet those last few miles are still profitable to the subcontractors. Sounds like a management/organizational issue more than a "can't make it work" issue.

  211. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by black+soap · · Score: 1

    I have only had the USPS lose one package that I can recall. Tracking showed that it made it to Houston, but never left the sorting center. Amazon refunded my money. At least with USPS deliveries, I can expect a specific time each day when they might come in. Fed-Ex delivered a box just last friday, after 10pm.

  212. Disagree by thefixer(tm) · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry, but the whole postal service crisis is BS. I get pounds, literally pounds of mail every week. Flyers, ads, coupons... These companies pay a fraction of a penny to dump this crap into my mailbox, and every time I put a stamp on something it's 2 cents more than last time!? Let them default. Let them go under. Get rid of the lazy bastards and subcontract the work to UPS or Fedex.

    1. Re:Disagree by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      ...Let them default. Let them go under. Get rid of the lazy bastards and subcontract the work to UPS or Fedex.

      Like the gub'mint isn't gonna bail this one out.

      Wait, I've just now made a 100% guaranteed prediction of the start of the next true Great Depression! :->

  213. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by o2binbuzios · · Score: 1

    Let's try a thought experiment:

    You have won the Publisher Clearing House sweepstakes and will receive $10 MILLION dollars - all that is necessary to collect is you have to deliver a signed response back to PCH by noon on Friday. (we're just using delivery service here, no driving, flying...)

    Would you trust your financial future to:
                              A) Post Office Mail
                              B) FedEx (profit driven)

    Personally, I trust the execution, SLA and customer service level of the profit driven organization far more than the government bureaucracy.

  214. Postal Strikes by SteveX · · Score: 1

    Canada Post is still profitable, but it's probably just a matter of time.

    One of the things that happens here occasionally is postal strikes. We just went through one. When there's a threat of a postal strike, billers (like utility companies and whatnot) step up efforts to get people to switch to electronic billing. And once someone has switched to electronic billing, they're probably not switching back once the strike is done.

    I don't think the postal employees realize the damage they're doing to their own business by going on strike.

  215. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Creepy · · Score: 1

    I don't remember ever re-mailing or seeing anyone re-mail anything to the USPS during the time I sort-of worked for UPS (a 3 week full time temp job during the summer while I was still in high school), nor did I see anything like that when I worked in billing (another temp job just before college, but 2 weeks this time, filling in for a lady on maternity leave). I'm not saying it isn't possible, I just didn't see it, nor did I load anything that was delivered to the post office, or see any billing code for re-billing to the post office, though there was a misc category that was mainly used for, say, checks missing a billing statement (so we didn't know where to file them). I did see mail delivered from the post office, however, in massive quantities (20+ mail bags a day).

      Delaying packages for several days to maximize efficiency delivering to an area was very common, though (probably much more-so than today), and that isn't a luxury the USPS gets. A few trucks went out with only a few packages destined for remote locations, but it wasn't too often, and when you see something like a "3-7 day window," hitting 7 days, it usually was for remote deliveries. The USPS, on the other hand, has to visit every house every day, 6 days a week, even if it is in the middle of nowhere, while companies like UPS only visit if they need to drop off or pick-up. I remember reading about some guy in Nevada over 100 miles from the nearest post office and they have to visit him even if there is no mail to deliver or pick up at the cost of hundreds of dollars a day. The post office wanted to end Saturday service just for those people and they threatened to sue, because it is their constitutional right to get mail delivery (the constitution says nothing about daily delivery, but that was the argument I remember).

  216. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you not have a Direct Debit like system in the US like we have in the UK?

    Basically you set up payment details and the company (gas/electric/mortgage etc) take their [variable] amount on a specific day each month.

    Hmm wikipedia says you have "Automated Clearing House" apparently?!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_debit

  217. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 1

    Exact opposite of the UK.

  218. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you'd prefer that the rest of us subsidize your companies otherwise untenable business model out of our personal paychecks? I guess I'm not surprised.

    I think there are good reasons we can't let the only affordable, small-letter postal service to die. But this isn't one of them.

  219. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by swalve · · Score: 1

    The point of online banking is to make it easier to do banking. Letting some creditor pull money out of my account and then having to check the account twice daily to make sure they did it the right way is not easier. It is much easier to push the payment yourself.

  220. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

    All /. posters should commit to mail their comments for one week to make up the difference.

    SWEET!

    I'll work on the T-Shirts to advertise this new movement! We'll ship those via USPS, as well. Oh, and the TV ads! Problem solved in less than a week. :>

    LOL..

    Humor, folks.

  221. What is the best way to kill a small town? by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    Shut down the post office.

    1. Re:What is the best way to kill a small town? by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      What's the best way to kill a small town?

      Shut down the post office.

      But it's "not the fastest"....

      Booya! :->

  222. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by rolfwind · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But let's get real, such an effort even if successful may fund one postal worker. The USPS is one of the biggest employers out there.

    I think they should do several measures:
    -Alternating day service. Route 1 gets Mo-We-Fr delivery, and Route 2 gets Tu-Th-Sa delivery. Mail carriers cut in 1/2. Express Mail already is handled by a different special carrier (I'm told) so that's unaffected.
    -Cut down all underperforming post offices that are within a certain radius of other, more successful, USPS locations. I'm close to such a one, that is in a shack of a location, and within 7 minutes drive of it's main branch. It has one guy working there, less than 75 PO Boxes, half of them unrented (the next most rural place I know has at least 300 boxes, 90% rented). USPS has been trying to close it down for years but the union is resisting, even if the worker is taken to the main branch. Hard to understand.
    -Open up automated kiosks to serve as advanced versions of blue mailboxes in malls/supermarkets/what_have_you. Emulate redbox, except for packages. Try a trial run. (All the USPS advertising is for flat rate boxes, they WANT the package business. Might as well try something novel.)
    -Back in WW2, Post Office has Vmail. It's mail on special sized letters, shrunk to microfiche, and reprinted. Save many cargo ships for other purposes - they used to be pioneers. They should have an email to mail service - afterall laywers and a ton of businesses need to send out certified mail all the time. But why should they have to print it, run someplace to mail it, and keep track of slips of "certified" this and that? Send it to the USPS server, let a central place print it out, and mail automatically, for postage plus a small fee. The software keeps track of what was sent.

    Just a few ideas. The USPS has to change and fast. It has to reduce their workforce. It has to do a lot of things. But ceasing to exist should not be an options, lot of online and offline commerce depends on them and will do so until perfect replicas of objects can simply be generated, like in Star Trek, just like computers can copy data files. Then they can call it quits.

  223. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

    Humor. He beat me to it.

    I was gonna say "...but but but I'm a male and I can't safely do that without being impounded!"

    Ha. I made a funny.

  224. It's the economy, stooopid.... by sgt_doom · · Score: 1
    Gee whiz, now how many offices has Fed Ex recently closed around the country (hundreds, I believe)? How many summers have the movie theaters consecutively lost money in America (the last four, I believe)? How many consecutive quarters has Walmart experienced dropping revenues (the last seven, I believe)?

    It's called offshoring the production assets and offshoring the capital assets ---- are people really still clueless about this??????? I.e., there is NO ECONOMY, and since there's NO MEDIA, you'll have to do the arithmetic on your own.

  225. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by BBTaeKwonDo · · Score: 1

    So that they can dissolve the ink in the 'payee' line and replace it with "Cash".

  226. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Patch86 · · Score: 1

    It'd be relatively common for the company itself to give you a call to inquire about the missed payment (and gather some sneaky info while they're at it). It's a whole different thing to sick the bailiffs on you. Not least because debt collection firms cost the lender quite a lot of money too; if they're too quick to call in the debt collectors, they're just throwing money away.

  227. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

    UPS would charge too much because it is illegal for UPS and FedEx to deliver a letter unless it is mailed overnight. It is illegal to put anything in a mailbox marked "US Mail" or "USPS" without paying postage--if FedEx delivers it, if DHL delivers it, if you deliver it, you better put postage on it, because God dammit, the USPS will get paid for the use of a USPS destination mail box! It was almost illegal to overnight letters, but the USPS couldn't actually supply the service at the time and so the law covering that left a gap due to skillful business arguments and pressure.

    UPS doesn't have facilities to handle normal mail because it's illegal for UPS to have facilities to handle normal mail. Thus it would be unprofitable for them to not charge you a fuckton for normal mail at the moment. Thus if the USPS craters, hopefully the law will change soon enough for UPS and FedEx to catch up to USPS in function, and we can all live happily ever after.

    USPS comes out of stamp money, not government money. The government doesn't support the USPS except by ridiculous legislation that supports a monopoly business, and needs to be excised. The laws in place stifle all competition against the USPS and they need to change.

  228. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

    Everything I do on a daily basis bankrupts the US and hikes the taxes. It's MY fault!

    How do I know this, you ask? Cuz the gub'mint said so.... :->

    And they said I shouldn't innovate and/or change processes because that costs them money, too.

  229. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That would work well, except for the part where the person who wrote the check would know shortly after it was cashed.

    ByOhTek didn't say anything about the check being stolen and cashed, just that it was "lost" and he now delivers them by hand.

  230. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

    But let's get real, such an effort even if successful may fund one postal worker. The USPS is one of the biggest employers out there.

    Cut down all underperforming post offices that are within a certain radius of other... I'm close to such a one, that is in a shack of a location, and within 7 minutes drive of it's main branch. It has one guy working there, less than 75 PO Boxes, half of them unrented (the next most rural place I know has at least 300 boxes, 90% rented). USPS has been trying to close it down for years but the union is resisting,

    Hmm...sounds like the unions here are one of the problems with the post office and efficient handling of routes, outlets and # of employees they can handle.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  231. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by BVis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For mission critical documents like that, yes, I would probably go with FedEx. (Should be noted, however, that FedEx loses stuff too, despite your faith in them.) However, that's not the market I'm talking about. I'm talking about typical bills, letters, small packages, and so forth, that right now are cheap to send via USPS. Right now you can send letters for 44 cents. If FedEx, UPS, and the like were to take over that segment of the market, you can bet your last dollar it won't stay that cheap (at least not for long.) Before you know it, you'll be paying $2 for a first class - level delivery, because the company MUST continually show increasing profits lest they be sued by their stockholders.

    Your assumption that "government bureaucracy" can't get anything done is a poor one. They get things done every day, and usually with a high level of quality, just like private industry. In fact, in some segments of the economy, the government is beating the stuffing out of private industry in terms of efficiency. (See Medicare.) Do those programs have problems (fraud, for example)? Sure. Do private industry programs in the same markets have the same issues (like recission, denial of care, poor/slow reimbursement rates, etc.)? You betcha. The difference is that less money goes into overhead with the government program, because it doesn't have to show a profit.

    --
    Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
  232. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

    The postal service is way way WAY too critical to leave in the hands of a company that cares nothing about quality and everything about profits.

    Trouble is, we NOW have a service that cares little about quality and nothing about profits.

    Maybe if we could more easily fire poor postal employees....and only have ones there that do want to work to keep and earn a job, like the rest of us out here in the private sector...we'd get better service, and a more efficient PO.

    Can't do that till we get rid of the grip public unions seem to have on govt. services. That's one area, IMHO, that we don't need them, or shouldn't allow them. Let the voters decide policy...not the unions.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  233. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

    Your assumption that "government bureaucracy" can't get anything done is a poor one. They get things done every day, and usually with a high level of quality, just like private industry.

    You obviously have NEVER been to any DMV that I've ever been to. I pretty much resign myself to take about half a day off whenever I have to get new license plate renewals or drivers license.

    I shudder to think my healthcare would be metted out by such an organization.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  234. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Spunkee · · Score: 1

    I second this. Especially the prisons. The prisoners should have to pay rent and should be set free if they cannot pay the rent. That will teach the socialist fucks!

  235. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

    Before you let it fall apart - consider this. A good chunk of postal employees are veterans of foreign wars. Do you think you are doing those guys a service? Plenty of them probably couldn't get work anywhere else.

  236. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Spazztastic · · Score: 1

    People don't realize that $15 a month adds up. If you have a 36 month loan on your car, that's $540 down the drain. That could be a new set of tires depending on how much you drive by the end of the 3 years.

    --
    Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
  237. How about... by SETIGuy · · Score: 1

    How about they just increase rates for junk mail. I still get plenty of that. And how about making future stamp prices be multiples of 10 cents? Is a bump to $0.50 or even $0.60 going to kill anyone? UPS and Fedex charge $20 for the same service, because they are more efficient private enterprise operations.

    1. Re:How about... by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      How about they just increase rates for junk mail. I still get plenty of that. And how about making future stamp prices be multiples of 10 cents? Is a bump to $0.50 or even $0.60 going to kill anyone? UPS and Fedex charge $20 for the same service, because they are more efficient private enterprise operations.

      You have a wonderful idea here that would work very well. That's exactly why it won't ever happen. :)

      I'm not being an ass, I'm just seriously been learning this since early grade school. Oh, also, when I really, REALLY like a show on television, it's definitely going to be off the air in one season or less. Guaranteed.

  238. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by rolfwind · · Score: 2

    Oh, and right now I will tell you where USPS absolutely lags behind where it could get an easy jump. For ebay, it absolutely sucks right now making international shipments for things under $300. You see, UPS and FedEx for a small guy will cost around $100 overseas (not something a buyer is likely to pay) to send a package. With USPS it costs 4-5 for really small items to, say $30 for something under 4lbs. The problem is that USPS lacks tracking - buyer says he never got it, Paypal will side with the buyer every time. Many sellers have given up selling overseas.

    And forget registration (that's insured to 45 some odd dollars to many countries) -- many customs offices became absolutely anal retentive about packages. So if it's from the post office, it can get held... and held... and held.... months at a time even. But by paypal/ebay rules, if they don't get it within 21 days (or 28?) internationally , the seller is boned. If you declare the real value, the buyer gets to pay 30% of it or something mindboggling stupid in may places... they refuse, and the sender somehow never gets his package back. UPS and FedEx somehow managed to zip these items through customs, and if there are problems, often the item get back to you. (I swear, this shit was easier 10 years ago...)

    Even if it gets through, if it's registers, the other PO system just doesn't know what to do with it. I got a registered package from China. The mail clerk tried to scan it in, and it just wouldn't work. He had me sign for it on a slip of paper because he couldn't understand the other PO system code (I'm sure they'd never find the signature again if I contested it).

    So the weak point of the USPS system are the foreign post offices, which UPS and FedEx obviously don't have. Plus customs. USPS is trying to mitigate that with Global Express Guaranteed, which basically uses FedEx's system after it leaves our borders and is quite a bit cheaper than FedEx.

    But if USPS could convene an international Congress, get the various customs offices to back off on the nickel and diming average people (good luck with that), work out an agreement with the foreign POs on a bunch of these issues, use universal forms that rely on easily recognizable symbols for registered mail (+ other services) that would be used in all countries, and have a universal scan code, they could really pick up business if they offered cheap, reliable package tracking on 1st class international parcels. Right now tracking even for a small business costs $0.17 or so. They could charge as much as $3 per package for 1st class intl tracking (as an option on top of the postage), and the the total postage would still be 10% of FedEx/UPS for 0-4 lb packages. They could earn a TON of intl business away from FedEx/UPS and generate a lot more from businesses that aren't willing or quit some time in the past.

  239. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Spunkee · · Score: 1

    Good luck finding some place (any place) that will give you cash in exchange for a random personal check that says "Cash" in the payee field.

  240. It won't help. by Have+Brain+Will+Rent · · Score: 1

    Relaxed economic requirements and cancelling Saturday delivery won't help. Canada once had a postal system just as good as that of the US, including Saturday delivery and cheap postage rates.

    CanadaPost was allowed the same things USPS wants and also allowed to degrade service levels. It hasn't helped . It is a joke - and an expensive one at that. Here it can take days for a first class letter to cross the city and I can generally ship something faster, cheaper and with less chance is it getting lost by using Fedex Ground rather than by parcel post.

    --
    The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
  241. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
    Interesting link there.

    I read down on some comments...one that struck me interesting...was one mentioning something about a Federal Land Patent, and a guy that used it to keep a city from annexing his land....

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  242. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by toadlife · · Score: 1

    It *has* to be either overfunded or underfunded?

    How about trying to find a middle ground?

    --
    I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
  243. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by BVis · · Score: 1

    Yes, because poor performance at a chronically understaffed and unresourced part of the organization is indicative of the organization's capabilities as a whole.

    I can be in and out of my RMV in less than an hour. It's pretty much a model of efficiency considering what it has to work with.

    --
    Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
  244. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    um, yes.. that's exactly what he said. And your point is what? That all unions are a bad thing because of one example? Of course, it would be almost impossible to find a single example of a corporation or gov't unfairly exploiting labor. They would never do such a thing.

  245. Constitutionally Mandated, but not Mandatory by dlenmn · · Score: 1

    You've got to be careful with the word "mandated". It has more than one definition. One means authorized; another means mandatory. In the case of the postoffice, congress is authorized to create one but not required to.

    "The Congress shall have power... to establish Post Offices and post Roads;"

    Again, congress can establish a post office, but they don't have to.

    1. Re:Constitutionally Mandated, but not Mandatory by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Good point. I'd misremembered that.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  246. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

    I don't think it's ever taken more then 5 minutes for me to renew my drivers license or license plates or do anything else in regard to that stuff.

    Of course, I live in a small town and the local "motor license issuer" is a small office just down the street. They are also sell insurance and package tours....

    --
    If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
  247. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

    Don't care. Society is not charity; charity is part of society. The USPS has a huge cost to society, as does anything else--the inflated price of college, the over-used duty cycles on cars, bank and realtor schemes to convince everyone that owning is better than renting (shittiest "investment" ever), gentrification and inflated rent prices.

    In the case of college and renters, it's the charging for a service because they can--because people exist with more money and the area is desirable (renting) or because you "need" a college degree to get a job paying enough to survive. Cars and houses are more of an education thing (drive less, rent until you have a specific need and highly favorable conditions to own). Both of these create a large economic cost to society, called "economic rent." This is the increase in cost without providing an increase in value of services offered.

    The USPS, on the other hand, is legally sheltered by the government. It's protected from competition, and was so protected while it was favorable. It's like if the government wrote laws saying, for example, that only Microsoft could sell operating systems for bundling on PCs, and that any third party installing any OS on a PC must pay Microsoft for the cost of Windows (even if it's Linux or whatever). The USPS is the only courier allowed to deliver general purpose post--the USPS couldn't overnight letters at the time, so the law allows other companies to provide overnight letter delivery. If you deliver to a mailbox marked "US Mail" or "USPS"--even a milk crate I painted "US MAIL" on--you must pay postage.

    Cut those laws and FedEx/USP/DHL will learn to deliver mail effectively. Then the USPS will collapse on its own. I am hoping that with its death throes Congress will open up the market for competition so that it doesn't leave a vacancy in the market for a needed service.

  248. Bad service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The USPS is untouchable.

    Here are my last two complaints made to the USPS.

    1. About 6 months ago, I sold a pair of the last generation G5 processors. They were the fastest G5s (speed and cache) and were in relatively low production. As such, they often sell on ebay and other places on the net for 500-1200 for a pair. I sold my pair on eBay for $250. I bought $250 insurance. The item was damaged by the USPS. I put in a claim and proof of value of item ($500+) and requested that I receive what I paid insurance for ($250). I checked online and saw my claim was approved. A few weeks later, I received a check in the mail. It was for $78. Apparently even though the USPS allows you BUY ANY AMOUNT OF INSURANCE YOU LIKE, they will ONLY PAY OUT WHAT THEY THINK SOMETHING IS WORTH, REGARDLESS OF PROOF OTHERWISE.

    2. Last year, my local branch lost 3 of my packages. This year, it's already lost two. Not once did anyone call me back with any attempts to locate the packages. In the past FOUR weeks:
    1- One package claims to be delivered. I never received it.
    2- One package was received by the post office. I was not notified. The post office sent it back. I was not notified.
    3- FOUR packaged were received at my local branch. Not once did I receive a notification. Luckily, they were important, and I tracked them. I had to go to my local branch and ask them if they had my packages.

    My local branch does not answer phones. Seriously. 1 in 10 calls gets answered. All other times, it rings. I filed two complaints with the USPS already. A supervisor was supposed to call me back, but never did.

    I have gotten to the point where I am recording ALL my attempts to contact them, and all my communication with them. If anything, it'll make for an interesting YouTube video.

    A customer also cannot sue the USPS in small claims to recover damages. It can ONLY be sued at the Federal level since it is a Federal agency. This makes them untouchable.

    They should have gone out of business 10 years ago.

    1. Re:Bad service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yes. I forgot to add:

      When I voiced my complaint to a local staff member, I was told that I should buy insurance and tracking for all my packages.

      Apparently, their bad service is intentional so that you would pay more for services.

  249. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by jkauzlar · · Score: 1

    I'm not the person you're replying to, but I'm about as progressive as it comes. I get nothing but massive amounts of coupons in the mail, catalogues and bills addressed to previous occupants, and an occasional birthday card. I transport my mail to the trash every couple weeks. If I could cancel my USPS service (Kramer-style) I would. That said, I'm all for minorities (i.e. the poor) getting privileged access to services that would make their lives easier and keep them on their feet. If I could be convinced that there weren't better alternatives to the USPS, I'd be more supportive of it's continued existence.

  250. bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The government should never have tried to run the USPS as a for proffit business. It is too poorly structured, poorly regulated, and the service is too poor , too expensive, and too unreliable for that.

    It would be interesting to see what would happen if FEDEX, UPS, DHL, etc... were not prohibited from competing against the USPS for letter delivery.

    My name is Nonya F. Biznes
    Email: nonya@nonya.org
    Address: 123 Nostreet
    Notown, FU 77342-090

  251. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Cramer · · Score: 1

    The deal with lawyers... they need the papers with your actual PHYSICAL signature on it. That's a fedex round trip for a lot of things. They cannot accept scanned images of a signature. (with an image of your signature, I could photo-sign your name to everything.)

  252. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Radres · · Score: 1

    Put the letters addressed to the previous occupant back in the mail, and write "not at this address" on the outside. You'll be amazed at how quickly the post office fixes it.

  253. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Cramer · · Score: 1

    YES. Let's leave it in the hands of a "company" that cares nothing about quality or profits.

  254. I hate to be the town jerk... by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 1

    Think about the huge carbon costs in moving large volumes of paper from one part of the country to another part of the country. In this day of high speed networks, this is foolish. Kill the existing system and start over. The post office needs to reinvent itself as a leaner, more focused organization. People have to get it into their heads there is a real cost to moving crap all over the place.

    Here's what they need to do.

    1. Go down to 2 or 3 day delivery.
    2. Ditch the bulk mail crap. Nobody wants credit card offers and all the other tripe.
    3. Close the small town post offices, roll them into an existing establishment, or replace them with a drop box. For the Holidays you could even roll up a more elaborate van that would have someone in it that could handle larger packages.

    The currently system doesn't make any sense in the digital age.

    --
    Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
  255. possible USPS new venture to save business: by sageres · · Score: 1

    Perhaps USPS should get into the official government email business...

    That might work.

    Sincerely,

    My_Federal_SSN_ID@GENERALPUBLIC.USPS.GOV

  256. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by markhb · · Score: 1

    I made a tax payment to my city recently, and found that they are now adding a surcharge for credit card payments, essentially to recoup the discount fee (not sure if they add it for debit card transactions as well, as I didn't use one for that particular payment). There was no similar charge for using checks.

    --
    Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
  257. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

    um, yes.. that's exactly what he said. And your point is what? That all unions are a bad thing because of one example?

    I'm not in favor of unions, but I'll say they may not be bad in all cases.

    I don't, however, think they should be allowed in in PUBLIC jobs...as that the rules, pay, etc...are voted by and should be dictated by the public for those jobs.

    And not to mention...govt. is inefficient enough as it is inherently....due to difficulty of getting civil servants out when they aren't effective...laws and regulations, etc.

    You add in union on top of that, and it goes downhill fast into a money sucking entity that returns little if any effective service to the public that funds it with their taxes.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  258. Post Office Karma by bbairtime · · Score: 1
    I would say so, after having issues with the service, just let them fail.

    Have many overpaid family members working for it, it would actually improve their life to get away from USPS's ridiculous ways.

    This is just karma working.

    With debt so high, and with people still in a mood to misuse and abuse money, no system run by the government is going to be anywhere near flawless.

  259. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Karlt1 · · Score: 2

    You obviously have NEVER been to any DMV that I've ever been to. I pretty much resign myself to take about half a day off whenever I have to get new license plate renewals or drivers license.

    Why would I go to the DMV to renew my license plate or drivers license? That's what they have the Internet for.

    I shudder to think my healthcare would be metted out by such an organization.

    Because the private sector has done such a bang up job.....

  260. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by xaxa · · Score: 1

    Ah, that's the only case where I would be charged a fee.

    But that's because credit cards companies tend to charge a percentage of the total, whereas debit cards, electronic transfers and cheques have a fixed cost.

  261. One statement says it all... by superdave80 · · Score: 1
    FTFA:

    Labor represents 80 percent of the agencyâ(TM)s expenses, compared with 53 percent at United Parcel Service and 32 percent at FedEx,

    They have too many workers that are paid too much that they can not layoff. They can try all of the tricks and gimmicks that they want, but getting rid of dead weight is the only viable option.

  262. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Assuming your ignorant little fantasy ever came true, I have to assume your euphoria wouldn't last long - roughly about as long as it took for you to have to pay "market rate" for first-class postage instead of the $.44 it currently costs.

  263. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Fjandr · · Score: 2

    No, probably more likely that not all unions are necessarily good. It's sort of like police misconduct: "Well, yes there's police misconduct, just not here."

    It's alright for others to lay off employees, or close locations, just not here.

    Governments, corporations, and unions all cause problems. They just cause different problems. Pointing out the problems one causes does not imply that the problems another causes do not exist.

  264. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by WNight · · Score: 1

    Can't do that till we get rid of the grip public unions seem to have on govt. services.

    And I'm going to fight that as long as the anti-union rhetoric is as out-to-lunch as it is. Teachers salaries aren't the problem, a banking/property collapse and two wars are the problem.

    Despite that though I dislike unions and think they're a patch for a broken government.

    The problem is that the powers unions need to combat corruption are also useful for keeping lazy workers around. A small price to pay for modern worker safety but still something to be aware of the next time we try to fix things with laws.

  265. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAKhtYgoIqE
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89SKOBQTEuY
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1mhz1-biEY
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoCYePvJJmE
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fN7Lmk5ykXI
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7EJ2wdI1Zo
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4JWiZbVowk
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Zh9kFJzDnA
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slk6zeM4Of8

    Yep. For profit companies clearly provide the best execution, SLA and customer service level available. And there are dozens and dozens more similar videos online and hundreds of complaints about both FedEx and UPS if you bother to look.

    USPS, UPS and FedEx do not release statistics to show what percentage of packages they lose and what percentage they damage. Without that information, your claims that one is better than the other just shows that you're biased.

  266. Fire the government fat/ break the contract by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another example of a Union costing taxpayers billions. IF you don't need the labor, fire them.

  267. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Fjandr · · Score: 1

    Sometimes catastrophic events are necessary to rebuild things that are failing or flawed.

    Otherwise, inertia holds back effective changes. "Too big to fail" is a buzzword that means the system that allowed it to get that large has a fundamental flaw.

  268. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Fjandr · · Score: 1

    Your assumption that "government bureaucracy" can't get anything done is a poor one.

    Conflating "can't get anything done" and "can't do everything it tries" is pretty common. Your assumption that the poster actually meant the above is a poor one.

  269. If you can't beat em, join em! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since the USPS is losing so much business because of the internet, then why doesn't it join them?? They could become an isp, a backbone provider, etc and get revenue that way instead. They need to become an integral part of the internet where they can make money in this electronic information age instead of hanging onto their obsolete, dying business model based on century old income models that are no longer viable.

  270. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    I send stuff all the time for a small side business, and I haven't had them lose a package in a several years. After that, I went to Delivery Confirmation and they've never lost anything.

    If it's really important (like a check), you have to send it by a trackable service like Express Mail. Yes, it's expensive, but $25 is a lot cheaper than the trouble of dealing with a lost check. Or better yet, just use an electronic method like paying your bills online, or sending Paypal payments if it's a personal transaction. With the sheer volume of mail the USPS handles, you can't expect perfect service.

    Ever heard of the good-fast-cheap triangle? You can pick any two. The USPS is cheap, very cheap, 50% on the fast, and 90% on the good IME. If you want really good, you're going to have to give up on cheap; as a bonus, you also get really fast (overnight) thrown in. There's no market for really good and cheap and slow, so no such service exists.

    Thanks to electronic payment services, USPS is mostly obsolete for sending money. But there's still a lot of things that people need to/want to physically send to each other. For super-fast service, there's FedEx/UPS (and USPS Express which is actually handled by Fedex), but if you're not in a big hurry and would like to save 80-90% of the cost, USPS is a great option.

  271. New Service Needed - Package Depot by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    With the advent of the web instead of physical stores, there needs to be a way to pick up packages. Leaving it on the doorstep if nobody is home is not secure (at least not in my town).

    USPS could turn post offices into Package Pickup Depots for web orders.

  272. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

    Why would I go to the DMV to renew my license plate or drivers license? That's what they have the Internet for.

    Because not every state has it available online? What if you didn't own a computer or internet connection? This method is still highly optional.

    But given that, I recently was able in my state a few years back to renew online...EXCEPT for cases like:

    Change of address

    Change of name (marital status)

    Needing a new picture....etc.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  273. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    Same banks and credit unions have an online billpay service where you can pay your bills directly from your account. There's no extra fee (at least with the CUs I've used), and you wouldn't pay that $15/month either, because what's happening is your bank is generating a paper check and mailing it to the lender.

  274. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    Everything is backwards here in the USA. Corporations try to sneak in as many fees as they can to improve profits, and "convenience fees" are popping up everywhere, even though they also reduce costs for the company accepting payment as it's a lot cheaper to just have money come directly into your account than pay someone to open up envelopes and process paper checks manually.

    Since Americans are so lazy, most of them will willingly pay this fee, and the number of those who stick with paper checks to avoid it is small enough that it's actually profitable for the companies, or else they wouldn't do it.

  275. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The $75 billion dollars needed to fund both the retirement program and the health plan at the 100% level is equal to a year's income at the USPS.

    Wow, that's a lot of dollar dollars.

  276. Junk Mail by Macrat · · Score: 1

    Maybe they would save some resources if they charged full price for all that junk mail instead of giving it just a big bulk discount.

  277. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by couchslug · · Score: 1

    I hear ya!
    I've been fighting the move to send my mail by the horribly unreliable (deleted) mail carrier and retain my reliable-over-many-years Manning Post Office service but some bureaucrat decided to hand a few hundred yards of "route" over to (deleted).

    Apparently some Post Offices don't run a tight ship and their diversity hires don't actually have to perform their damn jobs. Too bad the "good" Post Office is more likely to be closed or reduced...

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  278. Forget the USPS; let's have internet instead by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    How 'bout instead of the USPS, we spend the money on last-mile solutions that can get the last people out there online. What with sub-$100 tablets and netbooks it ought to be possible to just get everyone who can currently get mail connected. Digital signatures are already legally equivalent to normal ones.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  279. Easy solution by dalias · · Score: 1

    Stop giving spammers discounts. Instead make it cost the same (or more!) as standard first-class to send junk-mail. Best of all, if this strategy fails, at least you end up saving a few million acres of forests in the process...

  280. They had their chance by pubwvj · · Score: 1

    The post office had their chance and goofed. They could have become ISPs back in the mid-1990's. There was a push for it but they didn't do it. By making all the post offices ISPs they could have brought internet to the masses of people out in the rural areas. Then they would have been ready to deliver the final mile via Wi-Fi when that came along. But no, they were scared of email and the web. They actually tried to tax emails and pass laws that you had to use the USMail for anything that wasn't priority in need of extra fast delivery. Losers.

    1. Re:They had their chance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The post office had their chance and goofed.

      Consequences will never be the same.

  281. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by confusednoise · · Score: 1

    Oops, can't send a registered letter if there's no USPS anymore....

  282. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by redback · · Score: 1

    Who the hell pays their mortgage by cheque?

  283. Older than USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The oldest post office they are planning to close does not fly the American flag because it was started before the revolution. For years the Grover Norquist followers that believe all government should be made small enough to drown in a bath tub are finally making the progress they so desire. For years the same people that wanted to privatize and sell off the most profitable parts of the USPS have been put in charge and they make decisions to bankrupt the USPS. Delivering the mail was a public service started before the revolution and has always been part of America. The USPS has very sophisticated equipment and can do a lot more than it is allowed to do, but the goal has been to privatize rather than increase services the American people may grow to like, and expect much like Social Secuirty and Medicare.

    I knew something was up when I found out I could order directly from Hong Kong and receive free shipping via USPS registered mail, which is the most labor intensive mail the USPS handles - it starts at $10.73 but I can order items that cost less than the costs of shipping directly from Hong Kong and track it via the USPS registered mail number. Some trade deal ha? And lets not overlook how the USPS supports the airlines, remember when the fuel prices were high and people stopped flying, well the good old USPS kept buying space on the flights because you never know when someone may need a letter mailed. Then there is the private contractors that are well paid but if they need help or just don't show up the good old USPS has one of their employees do it and never charges the private contractors for the cost, wow getting paid for doing nothing - great way to make money. And lets not forget the military unloading their retirement costs on the USPS, many vets work for the USPS and once they do the USPS picks up their military retirement - keeps the costs down for budget time- after all they need that money for those $400 hammers.

    Yeah, it's the email that killed the post office, keep saying that over and over again....

  284. So go out of business, already. by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    The postal service has been threatening to go out of business since late last century. Time to put up or shut up. I'm looking forward to seeing what happens. It can't be any worse than all the whining about it.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  285. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Ritchie70 · · Score: 1

    Maybe you just don't know about the things you've lost, ever considered that?

    About a block away from my house is another house with a very similar address.

    My address is 16W535 Reindeer Place. Theirs is 6S535 Reindeer Avenue.

    My mailman regular delivers my address-twin's mail to me, and my mail to them.

    One letter (from a mortgage company) I had to put back into the mailbox twice before I stopped getting it.

    In fairness, UPS and FedEx have both done it also. I called UPS up and explained how they'd abandoned $2,000 in prescription medication on the wrong porch and they haven't done it since.

    --
    The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
  286. email? by radarsat1 · · Score: 1

    I'd like to see evidence that it is really email that is killing USPS. With internet shopping, there are more packages being sent than ever. I don't know the facts, but I imagine that packages must be far more profitable than letters. However, for reasons I just don't understand*, many online shops use UPS or other private services instead of USPS. I would argue that it is competition that is killing USPS, not the internet.

    * I always choose USPS when I order things because then the items end up down the street from me and I just go pick them up. Contrast to UPS, where if I'm not home when they drive to deliver (before 5pm of course, who's home at that time?), then I have to somehow get my ass very far out of town to their depot to pick up the package; without a car, this is extremely inconvenient. Sadly, some shops don't even seem to give you the option of selecting the postal service.

  287. FedEx labor costs. Ahem by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 1

    My brother's girlfriend drives for FedEx. LA to Atlanta and back. Every week. But she's not a Fed Ex employee. She works for a trucking company that carries freight for FedEx. So no, they may not show up on FedEx's balance sheet as "labor", but I'll bet labor makes up a good chunk of all their subcontractors' balance sheets.

    --
    Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
  288. Let USPS fold and go under... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Currently you can get shipping materials for free https://shop.usps.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10052&catalogId=10001&categoryId=10000036&parent_category_rn=10000002&top_category=10000002 which is ludicrous. They need to stop giving away shipping materials and charge for it like everyone else does. Countless times I have known of folks to hoard the materials, and use them for shipping using other carriers, or for personal storage. This needs to stop NOW.

    Raise the rates on the bulk mail, even if it requires congressional approval to do so. Bulk mail companies already pay way less than the general public to send their spam direct to your box, and at times they receive hefty discounts as well ( http://www.dmnews.com/usps-provides-more-details-on-summer-sale/article/131151/ ) which should be stopped. The First Class postage we pay subsidizes junk mail. It is high time they pay their own way. The ridiculous threat that bulk mail companies will stop using USPS if rates for them are increased is pure bullshit. Call their bluff, and raise their rates, for they can afford it. Do you really think they will start using FedEx or UPS to deliver their junk? The US mail is a government monopoly they must use, due to the cheapness of it when compared to other options. A friend of mine who works in the sorting of US mail told me that bulk mail has steadily increased every year.

    Additionally, the Postal Regulatory Commission believes that bulk mailers do not pay their fair share, and that their rates should be increased roughly 22% overall. An audit found that the current rates bulk mailers pay run afoul of the 2006 Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act http://www.prc.gov/PRC-DOCS/UploadedDocuments/ACD%202010_1697.pdf , which is hotly contested by the lobbyists in the bulk mail industry. The current Postmaster General caters to the whims of the bulk mail industry, and needs to be gone.

    Create a Do Not Mail registry, which works similar to the Do Not Call registry. Currently I have no way to stop all the loose-leaf flyers/advertisements from infiltrating my mailbox. The sorting and delivery of this bulk-junk takes up a considerable amount of time, including mine. The junk mail problem alone has me flirting with the idea of eliminating my mailbox entirely, for I can pay all my bills, and do all my banking electronically now. Granted, this may cost money initially, but I can dream, can't I?

    Granted, there are many problems leading to the current crisis, and I have only touched the tip of the issue. We have to start somewhere.

    80% 0f the USPS cost is labor.. FEDERAL-EXPRESS(FED-X) labor cost is 30%.. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE(UPS) labor cost is 40%.. Let USPS DIE, FOLD, GO UNDER.. FED-X and UPS can join-up and start a new POSTAL SERVICE.. Stamps would be about .35 or .40 cents and the mail will be on time.. They could call the new POST-OFFICE.. "FED-UP"... God Bless!

    1. Re:Let USPS fold and go under... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are so many things that Fedex isn't required to do that the USPS is that it doesn't seem useful to look at just labor costs as a percentage of operating expenses. Fedex isn't required by law to deliver packages six days a week. Fedex isn't required by law to maintain an office in every dippy little town in the US. Fedex isn't required by law to investigate cases of mail fraud, they leave that the the USPS. Fedex doesn't hold packages and mail when people are away from their residences. Fedex isn't required by law to fully fund 30 years of pensions and medical expense for retirees in a ten year time span as the USPS is. The USPS actually makes a profit on its operations. There are estimates that the USPS has been overcharged $75 billion in contributions to the Civil Service Retirement System pension fund. In 2006 congress put a forward funding mandate on the USPS. That payment is due this year, to the tune of $5.5B -- 5,500,000,000.00. Guess how big the shortfall is expected to be in this "crisis". The real problem with the USPS is that it gets micromanaged by congress. How long do you think Fedex and UPS would be profitable if they were subject to the same level of highly politicized oversight as the USPS?

  289. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On top of that, for all you Constitutionalists out there, the Post Office is one of those things mentioned explicitly in the Constitution.

  290. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ya know, I'm getting kinda pissed at folks who always use this excuse.

    In the 40+ years I've been using USPS, I have NEVER "lost" ANY outgoing or incoming package, letter, or postcard. Not a single one.

    My father, however, once had some important letters disappear. A complaint was filed with the local Postal Inspector, and calls and actions were taken to re-send or ammend the important stuff. He thought nothing else would come of it.
    Two weeks later, the PI not only had ALL the mail returned to him, but all the other letters that had been reported missing in the area. Guess what? It turns out a neighborhood girl was going to various mailboxes after the carrier had been by, and was stealing the mail from them, seeing if any contained money, and stashing them in her garage. The PI, after getting many complaints from the area, posted (pun intended) an investigator, and followed the girl home. Her parents were NOT happy, and they moved out sometime the next month.

    Yeah, it's great having someone else to blame for YOUR screw-ups, but when push comes to shove, I'd trust my mail with USPS over ANY other carriers, simply because they are a dedicated and professional bunch.

    (I am not, nor have any relatives, employed by the USPS. The girl was about ten years old, IYWTK.)

  291. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I did until I paid it off last December. I liked to vary the amount I paid each month according to what I could afford so I would sit down and write a check each month. I paid off a 30 year mortgage in 16 years.

    I've had the Post Office lose 1 piece I sent in over 50 years. I've had a few items (10? over 16 years) mis-delivered to my current address but I just write "Delivered to wrong address." on them and stick them back in the mailbox or I walk them over to my close neighbors. I did personally deliver the Victoria's Secret catalog I got in error just to thank them. :)

  292. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by bronney · · Score: 1

    I do the same except I use email and I send to millions of random people telling them how this wonderful pill changed my life :) Not many people reply though :(

  293. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Nethead · · Score: 1

    I stopped reading when a commenter got the idea to "start armed rebellion."

    --
    -- I have a private email server in my basement.
  294. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by Fjandr · · Score: 1

    Nope, they just provide service to every address 5 days a week voluntarily, for a price that is comparable for the same Postal Service delivery.

    I guess the difference is that Saturday delivery costs more via a private company?

  295. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by Fjandr · · Score: 1

    FedEx provided universal delivery coverage prior to their USPS contract. It just means that, for whatever reason, it is more profitable to pay another entity to deliver to some addresses. What it doesn't mean is that it is unprofitable for them to deliver themselves. Both are obviously profitable, given how many years FedEx did it themselves. In other areas, they contract with other private couriers for final delivery. Paying someone else to use their infrastructure is often easier than capital investments in your own. When that infrastructure doesn't exist though, it is still profitable to put it into place.

    If the USPS declined to renew their last-mile delivery contract, you can bet FedEx would still provide universal address coverage. The contract just proves FedEx believes A > B. It does not prove B is a negative number. Even if B is a negative number, it does not prove FedEx would decline to subsidize B through the profit of other routes.

  296. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by Fjandr · · Score: 1

    Shame on them for not calling the Republicans' bluff. A filibuster requires continuous facetime by a member of the filibustering bloc.

    Make them stand and deliver, 24/7, until they're tired of holding the issue up.

    Nothing happens because nobody has the balls to call the bluff, and make them deliver until they drop from exhaustion.

  297. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

    I'm not saying you're for 100% sure wrong, but having spent several years of my life working for one of the two aforementioned large American shipping companies, I have my doubts that you're right. The numbers and profitability on these things have shifted a lot over time.

    To give you one easy example, gasoline costs at least twice what it did before FedEx's USPS contracts.

    In other areas, they contract with other private couriers for final delivery

    Interesting side note: for some zip codes, private couriers and the USPS and FedEx are all involved in handling a single package from pickup to destination. Good luck tracking that one online.

  298. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymus · · Score: 1

    Judging by the fact he quoted the entire list, I think he actually meant MI5 and not paedo fear. Communicating with random people around the globe being suspicious behaviour.

  299. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by flappinbooger · · Score: 1

    I stopped reading when a commenter got the idea to "start armed rebellion."

    Just going to that site probably puts you on a list somewhere.

    --
    Flappinbooger isn't my real name
  300. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

    Yes, no response.

    The electric bill never showed up at my place - so I don't know why anyone would steal that. The mortgage check went to a post office drop box, in a very safe neighborhood. Prior to arriving at the bank, it should have only ever been accessible to USPS employees.

    --
    Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  301. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

    I usually get my neighbors letters once a week. Addressed correctly to my neighbors. I tend to just bring them over.

    --
    Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  302. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

    I always go the cheapest UPS/Fed Ex route with online packages. They always come in a UPS or Fed Ex truck. Not USPS.

    --
    Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  303. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

    I put my account number on the check. I have reciepts that I've paid. My owed balance is going down. Never has a check been lost in delivery this method.

    So, yeah, it helps. There is one less space for error.

    --
    Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  304. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by alphastar · · Score: 1

    Do you mean constables?

  305. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

    My bank is about a mile from my house. I live in a *VERY* safe neighborhood. I've never been mugged, and in this neighborhood, I won't be. I have lost mail to USPS, including a mortgage check, so I have to disagree with you, at least for my situation.

    --
    Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  306. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by alphastar · · Score: 1

    I assure you that many "normal people" still pay things by cheques.

  307. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

    The American spelling of checques, or however it is spelled in British English.

    --
    Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  308. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

    My mortgage isn't with my bank I use for checking. Also I prefer to set the amount, because most months I pay extra. Finally, my company pays me monthly, around the time the bank would take it out +/- 2 days. I don't want them taking it out before I have it there (I keep enough of a buffer that wouldn't be a problem, but the month I don't have the buffer, would be the month they try).

    --
    Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  309. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

    it is not that it was late, it *never* showed up. Also, my bank has a huge window from "due date" to "late payment date", I pay long before the end of the window. At the time, I tended to have my mortgage paid about a month before being due - which saved my ass there.

    --
    Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  310. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

    That's nice, that could account for my missing electric bill.

    However, my mortgage check was dropped in a secure post office box, prior to arriving at the bank, it should have only been accessible to the post office. The check was never cashed. I put a lock on it nearly a month after someone would have had a chance to cash it, so I think it was just carelessness by the post office.

    Fortunately, I pay my mortgage well in advance, so I didn't have any troubles from this, except wondering where the hell my check went, or if it would be cashed much later (say the post office found it in two years, and finished delivery after the lock expired).

    So, no, I'm not using it as an excuse for not making a payment and getting extra charges. I'm using it as an excuse to not send anything *really* important via USPS. Twice in 4 years is twice too many.

    --
    Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  311. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're using checks (cheques) for anything other than payment by mail, you're not normal. And if you're frequently using them to pay things by mail, you're still not normal. Normal people use their credit card or an electronic bank draft.

  312. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by said213 · · Score: 0

    Are constables also frequently described as being Jack booted thugs?
    If so, then yes.

    --
    help me fix this "Terrible" karma, please!
  313. Privatize it by aftac · · Score: 1

    If the USPS can't at least break even, much less make a profit, I'm sure the private sector can step in and not only replace it, but do so at a profit, and even reduce the postage rates, while providing a more reliable service. That is the kind of progress we need to see.

  314. Charge actual cost! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they would just charge "actual costs" instead of the ridiculously low fees currently in effect, they wouldn't be in financial trouble. I live in Canada and it boggles my mind when I have something shipped to me from the US in a big padded envelope and the sender only had to pay $1.18. If I had to mail the same thing back, Canada Post's cost would be at least $3 or $4.

  315. Tax each email sent is one solution by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

    Or better still, tax each email classified as junk. Junk is usually advertising, etc, which is what kept the postal service alive

    --
    Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  316. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by jkauzlar · · Score: 1

    That wasn't my point.

  317. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

    It depends on where you live... the fact they've been using USPS for last mile delivery really sucks imho... I've been getting packages at work lately.. since there are regular UPS/FedEx deliveries, and it always comes in (so far). Even USPS has been more reliable at work.

    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
  318. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

    Actually, that may be legitimate.

    Governments are a different situation. Working for a county government that is in the same situation, it's actually not legal for us to take a credit card payment directly for payment of taxes. What we do instead is essentially forward a bill to a 3rd party entity which allows you to pay them with a credit card, and in turn they pay us the taxes owed. Naturally, such a service entails a surcharge. We don't actually charge it - the 3rd party charges and keeps that charge, but it still gets blamed on us a lot.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  319. Re:Yep. Pretty standard. by Fjandr · · Score: 1

    The contract just proves FedEx believes A > B. It does not prove B is a negative number. Even if B is a negative number, it does not prove FedEx would decline to subsidize B through the profit of other routes.

    That was pretty much the CYA line in my post. I may well be wrong about the profitability of providing universal coverage sans a USPS contract, but I still doubt they'd decline to service unprofitable locations should they no longer have the USPS contract option. After all, they deliver to BFE locations in much of the world, many of those surely at a loss.

  320. Why is this the first comment to mention bulk mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That seems the most obvious and the least onerous. Charge $.05 more per catalog shipped and they could fund a letter carrier per block in the course of one week.

  321. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by alphastar · · Score: 1

    Actually, I have a prime example for you on why your statement is a broad, inaccurate, generalization:
    I recently purchased a computer from a small, one-man computer seller/repair shop. Like any business, he gets charged a percentage of all credit card transactions by his merchant. (I'm also aware of this because I worked for a small business and was privy to this sort of thing internally.) Because I didn't want to use a check (or cash), I paid an additional 2% over the cost of the invoice to cover his fees. You can argue that I could have taken my business elsewhere or a number of other things, but that's entirely irrelevant to this statement. The point is that using credit cards costs (additional) money, and sometimes that cost is passed on to the consumer.

    Using checks is still a normal method of paying debts. Just because it's less convenient (for the payer) than other methods doesn't make that untrue.

  322. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by alphastar · · Score: 1

    As and addendum, that's also the reason why some gas stations charge a lower price for gas on transactions made by cash.

  323. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by alphastar · · Score: 1

    I don't know how it works in your region, but in Pennsylvania, subpoenas and court summonses are still served by constables.

  324. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by said213 · · Score: 0

    "A constable is a person holding a particular office, most commonly in law enforcement." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constable]

    And, no. The sorts of things which we'd be talking about would be civil actions such as tax or debt collection suits or... mortgage foreclosures.
    Those are generally mailed first and may never be formally delivered by anyone, much less a constable. In place of the "Constable" you have what is known as a "Courier." The "Courier" will attempt to deliver a package requiring a signature... UPS and FedEx are sufficient to prove attempt to serve notice.

    However; If you need legal proof of meeting your obligations... the only legally indisputable method available is certified mail. I live in Ohio, but here's a guy from Alabamer to fill you in:

    http://www.alabamaconsumerlawblog.com/2011/06/the_importance_of_using_certif.html

    --
    help me fix this "Terrible" karma, please!
  325. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, you just used an anecdote where you specifically avoided using a check to try to argue that using checks is still a normal way of paying for stuff.

    It's exactly as I said: using checks for anything other than payment by mail is unusual. It doesn't happen often. The vast majority of people, the vast majority of the time, pay by either cash, credit, or debit.

    Sure, there are advantages and disadvantages for the payee. There are advantages and disadvantages to any and all forms of payment. Cash: now you have a lot of cash in your register, which means either you have to transfer it to a safe regularly or you risk losing a large sum if you're robbed. Credit/debit: processing fees, takes longer to get the money, and with credit you're always at risk for chargebacks. Check: takes even longer to get the money, and it might bounce. About the least risky method is to accept a cashier's check, but of course that's also the most inconvenient for the payer and, while it's as good as the bank that authorized it, you still don't get the money until the check clears.

    What is "normal" is what most people do most of the time, and most people don't often use checks.

  326. re: Teabagger? by King_TJ · · Score: 0

    Umm... first of all, as a libertarian and supporter of very much of what Ron Paul advocates right now? Sure, I'm happily a "teabagger" if that's how you'd choose to label me. On the other hand, I think most of the people rallying under the "Tea Party Republican" label are blithering idiots, including Palin, Bachmann, and even Rick Perry.

    With THAT out of the way? I see a few problems with your "logic". First of all, if it's so critical for my mailbox at the end of the street to comply with numerous govt. regulations to "ensure it can be accessed easily from the postal truck", why not outlaw all the mail-slots in people's front doors? Surely, those things make mail delivery FAR more time-consuming and difficult for mail carriers than *anything* you could put near the end of your street/driveway for them to use? The fact is, the placement of a mailbox should be a common sense thing. Just put the thing up in such a manner so it can be used for its intended purpose. If it's impossible, because you did something really stupid (like putting it 10 feet from the edge of the road), the mail carrier doesn't have to use it until it's fixed. None of that requires a bunch of technical details to be codified into federal law. My garbage pickup company doesn't specify how many inches from the curb I have to leave my trash out for them, for them to pick it up....

    More importantly? People who want to distribute advertising flyers shouldn't be made into criminals because they're trying to save money on postage by hand-delivering the materials themselves. Right now, they're told they should "rubber band or other affix the materials to a front door-knob". I actually did this sort of work once, trying to help promote my wife's housecleaning business, and I can tell you it triples the time and effort required to canvas a neighborhood, vs. being able to slip the flyers into mailboxes along the way. The excuse that this legislation helps stop people from stealing your mail is preposterous. Anyone who cared to observe could see the difference between a person carrying a stack of identical flyers and dropping one into each mailbox, and a person taking mail out of said mailboxes as he/she walked by. There's no need to decriminalize theft of mail, just to start allowing people to INSERT materials in a mailbox.

    I'd agree with your point about package delivery being optimized differently than general mail delivery, but I still don't see why that negates the argument that mail delivery could be privatized. You're saying only the U.S. govt. is capable of organizing things in a profitable and efficient manner so people could drive a truck past each street address and drop off mail for you?? If UPS and FedEx simply set things up so every time they delivered a box to a given address, all the day's mail they had for that same address was delivered at the same time, they'd improve efficiency over what the USPS does right now. They could still run trucks for the purpose of delivering the rest of the mail and reduce the workload for those drivers.

  327. Re: Teabagger? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    Umm... first of all, as a libertarian and supporter of very much of what Ron Paul advocates right now?

    I thought Ron Paul was a strict Constitutionalist. Maybe you've never bothered to read the document, but the USPS is mandated in there. The other Teabaggers don't give two shits about the Constitution (Palin, Bachmann, etc.), and those are the real Teabaggers, not Paul. They've successfully co-opted the Tea Party movement, so they're not just people rallying under that label, they really do represent that label, or else Tea Party events wouldn't have them appearing there. Also, you can't be a libertarian and a Teabagger. While there are some things they sorta agree on, Teabaggers want a fundamentalist religious government; true libertarians are fundamentally opposed to religion in government. Also, Teabaggers are big supporters of government-run medical insurance, but they want the guvmint [sic] to stay out of it: http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/funnypictures/ig/Teabagging-Pictures/Government-Out-of-My-Medicare.htm

    why not outlaw all the mail-slots in people's front doors?

    Different rules for different locales. In my current subdivision, all the houses have mailboxes next to the front door of the house. The mailman stops at the end of the street and walks to every door. In my previous subdivision, all the mailboxes were in a single giant box bolted to the sidewalk at the end of the street. The mailman only made one stop at each giant box, and the residents had to walk themselves to the central mailbox to get their mail (a lot of apartments are the same way, except there's a single wall of boxes for the whole complex). I haven't seen curbside boxes since I left the East coast, but the key in every case is uniformity. You can't have a subdivision with giant boxes at the end of every street, but then one or two morons who have to be different and have their own box at the end of the curb. You can't have a subdivision with boxes at the curb, but then one or two morons who want a box next to their front door. It has to be the same within every locale.

    My garbage pickup company doesn't specify how many inches from the curb I have to leave my trash out for them, for them to pick it up....

    Your garbage company also doesn't have to worry about the trash containers being different sizes and shapes, because they require you to use the container they give you, the exact same container all your neighbors have. They don't make a rule about it because they provide the trash can. The USPS doesn't provide your mailbox and install it for you, you have to do that yourself (or your home builder), so they have to set standards. Also, your garbage company (if it's like my company) has a nice truck with a giant mechanical arm that can reach out and grab containers without having to worry about a few inches here and there. The mailman has to use a human arm, which is much smaller and has much less reach. Finally, the USPS is a Federal institution, so any rules they make are necessarily going to be Federal law. The local garbage company (or city garbage service) is local, so any rules are either going to be binding to customers of that company, or residents of that municipality (depending on if your trash collection is private or government-run as mine is).

    More importantly? People who want to distribute advertising flyers shouldn't be made into criminals because they're trying to save money on postage by hand-delivering the materials themselves.

    No, they should be made into criminals for littering. No one wants your stupid flyers.

    Right now, they're told they should "rubber band or other affix the materials to a front door-knob". I actually did this sort of work once, trying to help promote my wife's housecleaning business, and I can tell you it triples the time and effort required to canvas a neighborhood, vs. being able

  328. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by alphastar · · Score: 1

    I can easily see the argument being made that an officer of the law personally delivering a court summons would constitute "legally protected proof."

  329. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by alphastar · · Score: 1

    Um, you just used an anecdote where you specifically avoided using a check to try to argue that using checks is still a normal way of paying for stuff.

    Yes, I did. Imagine that. I wasn't going out of my way to avoid using a check, but faced with the simple fact that I didn't have one on me. Because I didn't go home to get one, I paid more money. Unless you're implying that trying to spend less money is "abnormal."

    This isn't a question of whether I did wrong or right, but a simple statement of fact.

  330. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by said213 · · Score: 0

    i think you're now just arguing out of boredom.

    when did you the ending?

    --
    help me fix this "Terrible" karma, please!
  331. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    However; If you need legal proof of meeting your obligations... the only legally indisputable method available is certified mail.

    Here, educate yourself:

    In most common law systems, the service of process is effectuated by a registered process server who must be an adult and (in most jurisdictions) not a party to the litigation.

    Most jurisdictions require or permit process to be served by a court official, such as a sheriff, marshal, constable or bailiff. There may be licensing requirements for private process servers, as is the case in New York City, Alaska, Arizona, California, Illinois, Montana, Nevada, and Oklahoma. Texas process servers are currently certified by order of the Supreme Court and are regulated through the Process Server Review Board, consisting of members of the industry authorized by the Supreme Court.

    Other jurisdictions, such as Georgia, require a court order allowing a private person to serve process. Many private investigators perform process serving duties. Texas and Florida also have a required training course which must be completed prior to certification.

    An example of such a license would be in Rhode Island, where an applicant must complete 90 days of training with a constable that has 'full powers'. Once the 90 days of training is complete, a test is given at the local courthouse from the laws included in the constable manual. Once an applicant passed the written exam, one will be scheduled for an oral interview with the disciplinary board. If they find the applicant to be competent, they will pass a recommendation to the chief judge who will then swear in one with 'limited power'. These constables can only serve within the county they are appointed. After one year, a limited power constable can apply for his/her full powers to arrest, evict, and be able to serve state wide.

    Certified mail might be an indisputable method of serving papers, but if it goes away it's certainly not like it was the only method of serving papers. With the proper documentation any valid method of serving the papers should be legally indisputable.

  332. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by said213 · · Score: 0

    "With the proper documentation any valid method of serving the papers should be legally indisputable."

    "Should be." But might not be. And... thanks for noting that we're talking about civil litigation and, particularly, your ability to DEFEND yourself.

    With certified mail, you are removing a weapon from the arsenal of the attorney who is working to harm you... they cannot dispute the validity of USPS Certified mail. With ANY other option, you are potentially exposing yourself to unnecessary risks which can, and will, be used to leverage your property and assets.

    With certified mail receipts, that the transaction occurred cannot be questioned.

    This is tiresome...

    --
    help me fix this "Terrible" karma, please!
  333. Re:Do your part! Snail-mail your comments! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fine, we're left with the conclusion that you're an old fart who still uses checks on a regular basis. Most people don't. That doesn't make it "normal" to use checks, it just makes you unusual. I'll get off your lawn now.

  334. Re: Teabagger? by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    Maybe you need to do a little more research.... Ron Paul ran on the LIBERTARIAN ticket in the past, and has NOT ever been a member of the Constitution party. The difference between the two parties, realistically? Not a huge amount, BUT, the Constitution party generally expresses much closer ties to some sort of "God" and/or religion having a place along-side of "proper governance".

    In any case, the fact that the Constitution currently mandates the USPS doesn't negate the possibility that it's time to pass a new amendment to said Constitution to delete that requirement. We've already got quite a few of those amendments to the original document, because *sometimes* a revision is needed as times change. Most Libertarians I know would be more than accepting of the discontinuation of a Federal govt. provided service, if it's failing to work as intended and private industry has proven it's capable of handling the task. (When the USPS was new, mail was delivered on horseback .... a LOT has changed since then. The Internet is a HUGE factor, as is the proliferation of electronic bill-pay, either by touch-tone phone or Internet.)

    As for your opinion on a private business trying to advertise with flyers, on a tight budget, being "criminal"? All I can say is I hope, some day, you try to start your own business and you receive a rude awakening about the cost of advertising, and how it can easily make or break your new start-up operation! The fact is, for every 100 flyers I distributed? I very consistently got at least 1 to 3 new customers, so SOME people were appreciative I handed those out. For everyone else? It was just one more piece of paper they could use as scrap paper if they wished, or recycle, or use as some extra fuel for their fireplace. Whatever ... The idea that it created some huge hardship for you to have this one extra advertisement in your mailbox is insane.

    I know I occasionally receive a flyer on my doorstep from a landscaping company or other such "home improvement/repair" related place, and quite often, I actually save them and scan copies into my computer to hang onto. Why? Because personally, I'd much rather give my money to the "little guy" trying to advertise that way than to some big firm running TV ads or taking out glossy color ads in the local papers. I know I'm not just paying inflated prices to cover that advertising!

  335. Re: Teabagger? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    Maybe you need to do a little more research.... Ron Paul ran on the LIBERTARIAN ticket in the past, and has NOT ever been a member of the Constitution party. The difference between the two parties, realistically? Not a huge amount, BUT, the Constitution party generally expresses much closer ties to some sort of "God" and/or religion having a place along-side of "proper governance".

    WTF? I said he was a Constitutionalist, not a member of the Constitution party.

    Are you going to tell me now that he's against democracy because he's not a member of the Democrat Party? Or that members of the Democrat Party don't believe in having a Republic because they're not members of the Republican Party?

    Most Libertarians I know would be more than accepting of the discontinuation of a Federal govt. provided service, if it's failing to work as intended and private industry has proven it's capable of handling the task.

    So you believe corruption is a good thing? The USPS isn't working because of corruption, because private industry handed bags of cash to politicians to get them to pass a law that they themselves don't have to follow, which cripples the USPS financially. Private industry has never proven they can handle delivering the mail cheaply to every address in the country.

    As for your opinion on a private business trying to advertise with flyers, on a tight budget, being "criminal"? All I can say is I hope, some day, you try to start your own business and you receive a rude awakening about the cost of advertising,

    I own a small business. I advertise with this newfangled thing called the "internet" (using specially targeted ads), and more importantly, word-of-mouth. Maybe you've heard of these things. I don't need to spew litter all over peoples' private property. And I don't have to spend much money on it either.

    And yes, I consider littering to be criminal. I think you should be harshly punished.

    The idea that it created some huge hardship for you to have this one extra advertisement in your mailbox is insane.

    So I guess you don't mind having one extra "spam" email in your email inbox here and there. Or maybe a few thousand extra emails every day advertising "important products" like penis-size enhancers.