Slashdot Mirror


USPS Ending Overnight First-Class Letter Service

New submitter cstacy writes "The United States Postal Service will be closing half of its processing centers this spring. Currently, 42% of first-class mail is delivered the following day for nearby residential and business customers. But that overnight mail will be a thing of the past, with delivery guaranteed only for 2-3 days. About 51% will be delivered in two days. Periodicals may take up to nine days. (Additional delays beyond this may come into play when Congress also authorizes USPS to close operations for some days each week.)"

713 comments

  1. Netflix by The+Pirou · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That is going to be a pain for subscribers to Netflix, Gamefly, etc. I used to be able to validate the turn around time with local processing centers, but this is going to impact monthly turnover for those with DVD plans. I can see where this is probably going to do more to push consumers to use Redbox and Blockbuster kiosks, furthering the impact to the bottom line of USPS when more Netflix subscribers drop their service, decreasing use of traditional mail.

    1. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Doubtful. Chances are pretty good Netflix and Gamefly will turn to UPS and Fedex

      http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204012004577072323400561792.html

      Let the free market succeed where the USPS only exists by monopoly.

    2. Re:Netflix by h0dg3s · · Score: 5, Funny

      They won't use UPS if they ever want to see their discs again.

    3. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or FedEx if they want the discs to arrive in one piece.

    4. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      man, have i got news for you

      if you want to send 5GB, to someone, anyone, anywhere in the world...you dont need to burn out pits
      in a metal disk in a plastic carrier. you can just wiggle the wires already present in your home or business

      no need to thank me

      Man I got news to you, if I want to send 20 GB of data to a friend/s its 1000 times easier to burn a blu-ray and send him the disk, instead of wasting weaks to upload it on a shitty home connection. And on the other hand you have to assume your recipient has a fast connection (and that he doesn't go overcharge his limit download monthly allowance).
      Postal service is here to stay, at least until the late 23rd century when we will all have replicator technology (and you better bet the RIAA/MPAA don't outright ban the technology lol).

    5. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      UPS/Fedex? Ridiculous!

      The USPS is incredibly cheap compared to the commercial alternatives. The USPS goes to EVERY mailbox each day (6 days a week). Nearly everyone gets mail every day and even if there is none to deliver there might be some to pick up. This is particularly important outside of big cities. There are MILLIONS of people living outside UPS/Fedex delivery zones.

      What are you going to do for the farmers and ranchers who live 50 miles away from the nearest FedEx drop box? Remeber they don't get internet out there either. So you are going to let them swing? Really? Nothing for the people growing your food? It is not wise to SHIT on the people who feed you.

      Government operations like the post office is just one of the many "costs of doing business" in a large society. Change the funding model so that the postal service can raise its rates and fire those that need firing and you'll see that it can work.

    6. Re:Netflix by r_jensen11 · · Score: 2

      I disagree. My suspicion is that most people would rather put up with the slightly slower service and the customers who feel that this will impact their experience will add another disc to their plan. Chances are it's a minority of Netflix customers who watch more than one or two discs per week. The one-per-week customers will not have a real impact to their experience.

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

      UPS and Fedex aren't required to deliver $0.44 letters to the boonies.

    8. Re:Netflix by Osgeld · · Score: 4, Interesting

      totally depends on the region, some hubs are great, some hubs play forklift hokey with your packages, take a guess and flip a coin

    9. Re:Netflix by firex726 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not to get too off topics, but that's something I never quite got.
      As society gets larger and more spread out there are certain services such as the USPS/Fire dept that will become a nesesity reagrdless of their bottom line.

    10. Re:Netflix by xstonedogx · · Score: 1

      Netflix doesn't want to do DVDs anyway. Unless customers leave in droves they'll just point their fingers in the direction of USPS and say write to your Congressman.

    11. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not just that, but pissed off sorters pushing packages off conveyor belts 30' in the air because they're pissed off that 60,000 packages per hour are being crammed through hubs designed for 30,000 packages per hour and they're getting yelled at for shutting down the belt every 7-10 seconds to keep up. Shoving unix boxes and monitors was my particular favorite act of revenge in the early '90s when I worked at UPS.

      Then, you have loaders who literally kick holes in expensive packages because the flow is coming down the belt far too fast for even two experienced loaders to keep up, while supervisors are cussing them out for not keeping up. Another tactic was to time it, and load only one box every six seconds, which is the performance level that loaders are required to achieve to keep their jobs, per union contract; they can't be forced to work faster - which would cause the already-overloaded rollers to back up onto the belt, past the pickoff sorters, and occasionally even up to the sorters where the trailers are being unloaded.

    12. Re:Netflix by shentino · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The USPS exists by monopoly to preserve service to poor areas.

      We decided that mail service was such an important part of our national infrastructure that we mandated it even in the poor areas.

      The monopoly was a QPQ that allowed the USPS to serve unprofitable areas with the support of income from high profit areas.

      Otherwise a commercial mail service would hog the high spots to itself and leave rural areas out in the cold.

    13. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Nice fairy tale.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Letter_Mail_Company

      Seems more like an expression of continued government dependency and credibility.

    14. Re:Netflix by arth1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Let the free market succeed where the USPS only exists by monopoly.

      No, USPS is no monopoly. If you think you can deliver letters across the country for less than half a dollar, you're free to do so. And unlike the USPS, you're not required to do so.
      And therein lies the problem - USPS, which is a private company, doesn't get to fight against other companies because laws and regulations hinder them. Which is fair enough, but then We The People need to foot the bill for this extra service we demand of them.

      My advice: Nationalize the postal service[*].
      The government owned and run postal services of many other countries do pretty well at low cost.
      Where they have privatized them, the expenses have skyrocketed and service has taken a dive.

      [*]: As well as any other essential services now run as private companies. The US Mint and the USPS are good starters, but there are dozens.

    15. Re:Netflix by Totenglocke · · Score: 0

      It's not that. It's that they're legally not allowed to do it - thanks to the USPS. The government took a long time before they allowed UPS and FedEx to do what they currently do and they definitely don't want them delivering letters because they know that no one will use USPS after that.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    16. Re:Netflix by Wandering+Voice · · Score: 1

      God I hope not.

      A few years ago, UPS dropped packages for me at a restaurant which I used to work at, rather than drive the extra mile and a half to my door.

      I got a call from my former employer informing me that there were a stack of boxes for me. I had to either walk a mile and a half on the road or a mile through rough mountainside to get them, and then carry them home.

      If there was a free-market, UPS wouldn't be there.

    17. Re:Netflix by Uberbah · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let the free market succeed where the USPS only exists by monopoly.

      Force the "free market" to completely fund the pensions of workers that haven't even been born yet and then we'll talk about how the USPS has "failed".

    18. Re:Netflix by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      If they don't get internet, how exactly do they use Netflix to get DVDs?

      Besides, you would have to be pretty in the middle of fucking nowhere to get neither UPS/Fedex nor internet. I grew up just outside of a small town where I did live 50 miles away from the nearest drop box, and UPS delivered stuff to us all the time.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    19. Re:Netflix by mjwx · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Let the free market succeed where the USPS only exists by monopoly.

      Yep, without a low cost alternative to UPS, FedEx and DHL, prices will all of a sudden drop through the floor.

      That was sarcasm in case you didn't get it. The invisible hand is only ever preparing to pull down your pants and give you a wedgie.

      The USPS needs to get rid of it's bad, underutilised services and focus on it's core, money making units. Australia Post has managed to compete well with private couriers and are keeping up to date with technology as well as offering new services. Here lies the success of Aus Post, they diversified and now only 50% of their revenue comes from postal services, of the last 5 times I went into a post shop only 1 time was to post something. Why bother posting a cheque to the power company when I can pay it at the post shop (grandma still hasn't figured out how to pay online, but she can give the money to the clerk at the post shop), hell, what we used to call the post office is now the post shop because it's become more of a shop then an office.

      If I want to send something across Australia in 24 hours with guaranteed delivery, I'll pay a courier to make sure it gets there on time. I have to do this with some documents and even data as 6 GB takes a long time to transmit but can be contained on 2 DVD's. But if I dont care how long it takes to get there and just want the cheapest option, I'll take Aus Post. I have to ask why the USPS didn't restructure like this years ago.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    20. Re:Netflix by cstacy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Let the free market succeed where the USPS only exists by monopoly.

      No, USPS is no monopoly. If you think you can deliver letters across the country for less than half a dollar, you're free to do so.

      Actually, USPS is a monopoly. It is a federal crime to deliver a letter. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Express_Statutes

    21. Re:Netflix by rtfa-troll · · Score: 3, Informative

      "AMERICAN POST OFFICE - The American Letter Mail company has established post offices in New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Boston, and will transmit letters daily from each city to the others - twice a day between New York and Philadelphia. Postage 6 1/4 cents per each half-ounce, payable in advance always. Stamps 20 for a dollar." [my emphasis]

      Looking at the material it seems the American Letter Mail company never provided universal mail. You have an exception which proves the rule (in the original sense of the phrase).

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    22. Re:Netflix by Totenglocke · · Score: 1, Informative

      Which is fair enough, but then We The People need to foot the bill for this extra service we demand of them.

      I'm sorry, but which people are demanding it? Seems like the massive amounts of packages shipped via other carries shows that the majority of the US doesn't want the USPS, so why should they be forced to pay for it? You might point out that FedEx and UPS don't do letters, but that's a matter of federal law prohibiting them from competing fully with the USPS, not because they can't / won't provide that service.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    23. Re:Netflix by mysidia · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, USPS is no monopoly. If you think you can deliver letters across the country for less than half a dollar, you're free to do so.

      No... you're not free to do so. That proposition would be a federal crime. Under 18 USC S 1696 . Also, the "unlawful letters" would then be subject to seizure by US postal workers, and US marshals.

      Whoever establishes any private express for the conveyance of letters or packets, or in any manner causes or provides for the conveyance of the same by regular trips or at stated periods over any post route which is or may be established by law, or from any city, town, or place to any other city, town, or place, between which the mail is regularly carried, shall be fined not more than $500 or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.

    24. Re:Netflix by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      I doubt that cutting the peripheral zones off the grid would be an intractable problem(the labor requirements of agriculture, forestry, and mining have all been dropping for decades, and as things like some of the more isolated oil extraction sites show, a helicopters-and-satellite-uplinks model isn't impossible, just expensive)...

      The effects would probably be pretty unpleasant, with the replacement of much of the present rural population by a mixture of heavily mechanized extraction operations, vacation zones in the more scenic areas, and a thin scattering of isolationists, amish hardliners, and others who consider the lack of grid to be a positive thing...

      As for that actually happening, though, subsidizing rural areas(rural electrification, FCC rural telco charges, USPS) has been a pretty consistent federal policy for decades, so it seems unlikely(the fact that Senators are allocated per state, rather than per-population, likely ensures it in perpetuity).

    25. Re:Netflix by AK+Marc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They'd do it how they (UPS/FedEx) started. They'd cherry pick routes and pricing to just compete on the most profitable locations. People in NY sending stuff to Boston would probably see an improvement. Someone in rural Georgia sending a letter to rural MT (or anyone sending or receiving anything Alaska, HI, or APO) is much better off with USPS. The country is better off with USPS.

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

      For some research projects they don't just burn a couple of DVDs. The amount of data is so large they leave it on hard drives and to make sure the hard drives are readable at the other end they ship the whole computer, operating system and all so the recipient only has to plug the computer onto the LAN to get access to the data.

    27. Re:Netflix by jhoegl · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Agreed... but then we live in the USA, where people are ignorant and uncaring of others as long as they can save a dime.
      Oh, you want running water way out there? I dont want to pay for it even though you help pay for my schools, my roads, my police, and my firefighters.

    28. Re:Netflix by zoloto · · Score: 4, Informative

      as a former UPS employee (unload/load, night shift) this is absolutely true.

    29. Re:Netflix by CoryFoy · · Score: 2

      Actually, a great majority of fire departments are all volunteer, especially in rural areas. It's only when the call volume goes up that they start justifying paid crews.

    30. Re:Netflix by dryeo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here the volunteer fire department still gets the fire hall, trucks and rest of the equipment payed by the tax payers. I think the firefighters also get a small amount of money when working as well.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    31. Re:Netflix by blind+biker · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or see them intact, for that matter.
      Whenever I get some UPS package (not my choice, I am always forced into this option), I wonder in what creative new ways will the parcel be damaged. Broken items, punctures in various places of the package, even folded parcels (3D parcels, that is, where one dimension isn't particularly prominent, either), leaks of chemicals into the parcel, these are all various joys of a UPS-delivered parcel.

      The fact that they treat you like an idiot by never telling you when they'll deliver it at your home (and doing this repeatedly) just adds insult to injury.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    32. Re:Netflix by sFurbo · · Score: 1

      The government owned and run postal services of many other countries do pretty well at low cost.

      Excuse me? I live in Denmark, we have a government owned postage service (coowned by the Danish and Swedish states). It is now cheaper to mail a letter from the US via USPS to a Danish address (1$ postage) than it is to mail it from Denmark (8 DKK postage, around 1.5 $). They are supposed to check whether you are home when they have a package to deliver, but usually, they just assume you are not, and you have to pick it up from the post office. If you are served by one of the bad centers, expect your mail to be 3 days delayed (don't count on getting mail more then 2 times a week, when you should get it 6 days a week). In which countries are the government run postal service running well?

    33. Re:Netflix by TapeCutter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Shoving unix boxes and monitors was my particular favorite act of revenge in the early '90s when I worked at UPS.

      Kicking the cat may feel good but it's not revenge, it's frustration.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    34. Re:Netflix by Juanvaldes · · Score: 1

      I grew up in a small town 30 min away from the SF Bay Area. UPS delivered but that was it. No Fedex, DLH, etc. While the town did have a post office there was no door service just a PO Box.

    35. Re:Netflix by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Chances are pretty good Netflix and Gamefly will turn to UPS and Fedex. ...
      Let the free market succeed where the USPS only exists by monopoly.

      Umm... You forget that the USPS is mandated to deliver and pick up from *every* address in the US (at a uniform price and service quality). Fed Ex and UPS are not. People malign the Post Office, but they are actually pretty efficient considering the volume of mail they process and the area for which they serve. I think the main problem with the USPS is Congressional oversight keeping the agency from being more nimble and responsive. The obligation to its retired workers is also an issue.

      From http://www.nalc.org/postal/perform/productivity.html :

      • The U.S. Postal Service handles more than 40 percent of the world’s mail volume, five times more than the Japanese Post Office, the next largest carrier of letter mail.
      • In fiscal year 2007, the USPS sorted and delivered nearly 213 billion pieces of mail, about 703 million pieces a day.
      • The USPS delivers more items in one day than Federal Express does in a year and more items in one week than United Parcel Service does in a year.
      • The Postal Service delivers to 146 million businesses and households each day, six days per week. UPS delivers to 8 million addresses daily while FedEx serves even fewer.

      And from Answers.com:

      • The USPS delivers 177 billion pieces of mail a year (at an average of 584 million per day) to some 150 million addresses in the US and its territories.
      • United Parcel Service (UPS) is the world's largest package delivery company, transporting some 15 million packages and documents per business day throughout the US and to more than 220 countries and territories.
      • Its FedEx Express unit is the world's #1 express transportation provider, delivering about 3.5 million packages daily to more than 220 countries and territories from about 2,000 FedEx Office shops.
      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    36. Re:Netflix by TapeCutter · · Score: 5, Informative

      Here in Oz we have the CFA (Country Fire Authority) and MFB (Metropolitan Fire Brigade), MFB are paid, CFA are not (except for some admin jobs). If you look into the history of it, up until the great fire of London in the 17th century fire brigades in the UK were private organisations (sort of like an auto club that does roadside repairs), they would only put out their customer's fires, the other houses around were someone else's problem. It was realised by the government of the day that a bunch of competing private companies was no match for the fire hazards of a city like London, so they created their own and elevated them to a similar social position held by police. Similarly the Brits realised that large cities need a public sewer system when 19th century London was literally dying in it's own shit.

      Of course the above are examples of where socialism works as advertised, but I'm sure someone will object because their dogma tells them to reject the concept having their wealth redistributed, even if they are receiving more material benefits from it than they could possibly afford by themselves.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    37. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can not refute his statement by giving evidence of a single country where the government owned postal service is bad. All he said is that many are good. It can still be true that many government owned postal services offer a good service at low cost, even if Denmark is not one of them.

      If you want to argue properly, you will need to show us data from the overwhelming majority of government owned postal services in the world. The problem then will be how to define "many." If there are 50 unreliable and inefficient government owned postal services and 20 reliable and efficient ones, it is still correct to say that "the government owned and run postal services of many other countries do pretty well at low cost," even if the majority does not.

    38. Re:Netflix by arazor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They won't use UPS if they ever want to see their discs again.

      That is absolute bullshit. Mods please mark that post as troll and this one as well if need be. In my adult life (25 to 30 years) I have only had a couple problems with UPS which were always resolved by the shipping party.

      I have never experienced a serious USPS problems either for that matter. The current USPS financial problem is a purely political problem that could be resolved with a bill that would change USPS money management back policy to roughly their 1990s rules and regulations.

    39. Re:Netflix by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm sorry, but which people are demanding it? Seems like the massive amounts of packages shipped via other carries shows that the majority of the US doesn't want the USPS, so why should they be forced to pay for it?

      I'm pretty sure your numbers are off - way off. Yes, many businesses use FedEx or UPS rather than the USPS, most likely because (a) they've negotiated shipping rates with carriers and (b) parcel tracking is much better than w/USPS, but I'm willing to bet money that most people ship most of their packages via USPS, especially as it's much less expensive to do so. As for volume, according to this http://www.nalc.org/postal/perform/productivity.html and at least one other reference on Answers.com - of course, some of this volume is letters not packages.

      1. The USPS delivers more items in one day than Federal Express does in a year and more items in one week than United Parcel Service does in a year.
      2. The Postal Service delivers to 146 million businesses and households each day, six days per week. UPS delivers to 8 million addresses daily while FedEx serves even fewer.
      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    40. Re:Netflix by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      As a Netflix DVD user, let me just say NO. I will never go out to some stupid kiosk. And late fees??! Fuck that 20th century scene, baby.

    41. Re:Netflix by Ichijo · · Score: 2

      The USPS is incredibly cheap compared to the commercial alternatives. The USPS goes to EVERY mailbox each day (6 days a week).

      What alternative to the USPS is allowed to deliver first class mail?

      That's right. None. Since the USPS has a legal monopoly, you can't compare them to the commercial alternatives, because none can exist. If they could, they might do a better job than the USPS.

      What are you going to do for the farmers and ranchers who live 50 miles away from the nearest FedEx drop box? Remeber they don't get internet out there either.

      Sure they do.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    42. Re:Netflix by sjames · · Score: 1

      It' revenge if the cat then has to pay the vet bills.

    43. Re:Netflix by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 2

      Where did you come up with that? I have the same problem as the OP, and all my stuff comes when I am at work. Never seen the driver. UPS could be using magic ponies to deliver to my area for all I know.

    44. Re:Netflix by h0dg3s · · Score: 1

      That was my point, perhaps I should have been more clear. I've never had a problem with them losing packages, but they've earned the nickname "United Package Smashers" for a reason.

    45. Re:Netflix by h0dg3s · · Score: 1

      Your vast experience obviously means nobody else has ever had a problem.

    46. Re:Netflix by Patch86 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Again, it's deceptive because the nationalised postal services have a mandate to provide universal service, while private companies do not. That is, they need to be able to deliver first class mail to the most remote rural Danish island, the same as they do to downtown Copenhagen. This means that you pay more (with your national service) for simple deliveries to subsidise the more difficult ones.

      Privatising (or even liberalising) postal services can lead to several bad consequences. The most obvious would be this situation: the national service is still mandated by law to provide universal service. They still charge more on simple urban deliveries to balance the books. A private service comes in and competes only for the simple jobs- they refuse service to anywhere tricky. As all their deliveries are simple, they can massively undercut the national service on these jobs, depriving the service of it's main revenue stream. Therefore, either "non-simple" jobs become massively more expensive, or taxpayers need to step in to subsidise, or the service goes bust and you lose universal service.

      The situation in the UK is even more daft. The Royal Mail is still a monopoly, but they're now required by law to sell their "last mile" delivery capabilities on to competitors- and do so practically at cost. The above paragraph is still true, with the added irony that the RM is still delivering the letters- but for no profit! And they still have to provide universal service to the Outer Hebrides, also at massive loss. Competitors such as UK Mail or TNT cherry pick the profitable routes- and don't even need to worry about having any infrastructure past the sorting office. And obviously it's the taxpayer who picks up the bill.

    47. Re:Netflix by Alex+Zepeda · · Score: 1

      West Oakland isn't that small.

      --
      The revolution will be mocked
    48. Re:Netflix by sjames · · Score: 1

      Think carefully about that, do you really want rural areas that no longer consider themselves part of our society at all? Think very carefully again, they have guns and in some cases, vast stockpiles of ammonium nitrate.

      There are places that UPS and FedEx WILL NOT deliver to at any price.

    49. Re:Netflix by skovnymfe · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh get off your high horse, you SOCIALIST.

    50. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No fuckin way. Mark the above as a FANBOY OR PAID SHILL OF UPS!

      Boxes smashed, crushed, cut open, little square holes neatly cut in the side, wet, burnt!, and soaked in something that smelled funny like cleaning chemicals, non delivery when i was FUCKING HOME!, packages gone 100% missing saying they got delivered too. (and no, not stolen from my porch. camera says ups never stopped by at all.) Are all just a few examples of the useless fucking morons at ups. Oh and i just love trying to get stuff replaced thru ups due to the above.. They give the runaround until you give up.

      Not to mention my 'guaranteed 3 day delivery' usually takes 5 to 10 days if im lucky and it's intact.

      Fuck UPS. I don't even order from some places that don't offer fedex because i hate dealing with ups and their crap. It's not fucking worth the headaches.

      They are the WORST delivery service ever. USPS and fedex are way more reliable, faster, and i know my shit won't show up broken!

      What can brown do for me? Break my packages and leave me holding the bill. That's what brown can do for me!

      bastards. UPS = united package smashers

    51. Re:Netflix by Bob+The+Cowboy · · Score: 2

      This is a case where a "Score:5" isn't high enough :o(

    52. Re:Netflix by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      If the reason to be in the remote place is of "significant economic importance" then the infrastructure will pop up like a teenage boy in a strip club. It's hard to think of anywhere more remote than NW Australia, yet the mining boom has seen all that infrastructure (plus, ports, roads, rails) put in place long ago. The infrastructure short fall is private housing and all ammner of foodstuff and goodsbut the area will probably be all but abandoned once all the valuable rocks have been extracted. Let's face it Aussies aren't going to move in any numbers from the fertile corner of our island, to the corner that early Dutch explorers described as worthless desert.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    53. Re:Netflix by sjames · · Score: 3

      It is that. You can't make a profit on the rural routes.

      But to look at something where there actually is competition, consider parcel delivery. I routinely choose USPS for that unless I REALLY need it to go overnight. USPS is cheaper and just as reliable. Plus, I have had packages damaged by UPS, FedEx, and USPS, but only USPS actually paid the insurance rather than weaseling out of it.

    54. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha! Mrs. Postal worker, try using Google to type in "postal horror stories" and you'll get a view of how the REAL postal service works. Dealing with a bunch of rude, lazy, incompetent, overpaid clods who are incapable of getting a job in the "REAL" world. Such as a so-called mail carrier too lazy to deliver a first class package to my clearly visible numbered mailbox. Rather she sends it back marked as undeliverable thus incurring the cost of resending via UPS or FEDEX. The horror/rudeness begins when one calls the post office to inquire about what happened. During the year, I place numerous orders via the internet (e.g. Black Friday etc) and I will NOT do business with any entity that ships their product via the USPS. I have resorted to online-only billing statements and removed myself from any junk mail advertising lists (as if I really liked them). My position is validated with the news that the so-called best mail system in the world is now preparing to give customers even less for more money! As of today (Monday morning Dec 5) I just went online to the UPS site and tracked a package which I had ordered on Friday Dec 2 (free delivery) and it will be delivered TODAY to my doorstep right around 9:30 a.m.! My so-called postal carrier comes any time she feels like it between the hours of 2:00 p.m and 4:00 p.m.

    55. Re:Netflix by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      The large delivery companies have been lobbying for at least 20yrs to cripple the USPS and siphon off the best bits. eg: USPS management are not allowed to set their own prices, when they did they paid significant dividends to the government.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    56. Re:Netflix by jmottram08 · · Score: 1

      Wait, are you saying that a free marked wouldnt solve unions? . . . because it would...

    57. Re:Netflix by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      They are supposed to check whether you are home when they have a package to deliver, but usually, they just assume you are not, and you have to pick it up from the post office.

      You Danish are so lucky!
      In the Netherlands where I live, the postal service tries to deliver during working hours when I'm never home then try it again on the next working day when I'm never home before leaving it at the post office for pickup.
      They have now started offering a service by which I can call or visit a website and specify which working day (again; not home; like most people I have a job) they redeliver. No choice to tell them to leave it at the post office right away so I can pick it up before/after work, which would be easier, cheaper and faster for all involved.
      Off course, they're closing post offices all the time and franchising the service to small mom & pop stores which are open during business hours only and obviously never open during the weekend.
      Most packages I get to pick up about a week after first delivery attempt.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    58. Re:Netflix by soundguy · · Score: 4, Funny

      OK, then they won't use UPS if they want their discs to be intact.

      EVERY. SINGLE. THING. that gets sent to me UPS appears to have been intentionally kicked, punched, or slashed. This goes for parcels as well as envelopes.

      I got three new 1U servers sent to me via UPS last year. One of the cartons had a TIRE TRACK across the top of it.

      --
      Nothing worthwhile ever happens before noon
    59. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've lived in four countries in the past couple of years, here is my take in order of performance, best to worst.

      Australia Post wins easily: fast and cheap within Australia, a simple to understand (and use) premium express service for when you want/need it. Their international rates aren't the best, but they're on the other side of the planet. Having said that, I never found it "prohibitive" to send packages overseas to friends and family, and would do so at Christmas time without a second thought. It's about $1.60 to send a normal letter internationally.

      USPS isn't that bad. I lived in the US for six months and found their service to be quite reasonable. The amount of junk mail I received was really annoying. Sending packages was a bit confusing because I wasn't used to being forced to use their boxes. Back home in Oz you can turn up with your package already boxed and they'll be quite happy to take it, but USPS insisted on using their own. AND they wouldn't allow me to recycle an old box, which was stupid. But, when I sent a laptop to Gibraltar which was never delivered I filed a return claim and waited with no expectation that I would ever see it again...I then moved to Canada and asked them to forward my mail to my new address. And would you believe it, three months later, in a battered box covered in stamps and scribble and falling apart at the seams, that laptop arrived back in Canada. That blew me away. I can't tell you how much it costs to send a regular letter over seas, it's about a USD$1 though.

      Royal Mail: hmmm, this doesn't seem to be run that well, but it does function. I've only been here for a couple of months, so haven't yet sent anything over-seas. It's about £1.30 to send an ordinary letter internationally.

      Canada Post is awful: expensive, slow, and have really bad service. The international rates for packages were "prohibitive" (almost $100 for a shoebox sized package weighing a couple of kgs, you know, a "larg-ish" present) and stopped me casually sending packages to friends and family. A normal letter to send internationally costs CA$1.98

    60. Re:Netflix by Chalnoth · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The problem actually has nothing to do with the Post Office's business model. The USPS makes quite significant profits. The problem, instead, has to do with Republican legislation put into law in 2006 built with the very purpose of killing the USPS: the USPS has to forward-pay the benefits of its employees *for 75 years into the future*. See here:
      http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/28/330524/postal-non-crisis-post-office-save-itself/

      So basically, we shouldn't have to deal with this. But the Republicans want to kill the post office.

    61. Re:Netflix by skegg · · Score: 1

      In which countries are the government run postal service running well?

      Australia: I have no problem with Australia Post. Regular and accurate whether it's rain, hail or shine. (Speaking as a consumer here: I have very little experience with them on business-critical services.)

      All our postmen have been / continue to be extremely friendly; if they see you in the front yard when they're delivering they make an effort to actually hand you the mail instead of plonking it in the letter box. The current bloke has even delivered me mail where my name appeared but the address was malformed (I believe it was accurate down to street level -- hence the machine sorters got it right -- but the street number was missing).

    62. Re:Netflix by catmistake · · Score: 4, Insightful

      UPS drivers touch the package most likely once... when they actually deliver it. The drivers' trucks are packed for them. (UPS Driver is actually a decent paying, highly coveted position.)

    63. Re:Netflix by DarkOx · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Ins't anecdotal evidence fun! By contrast I live far away from my family and we send each other packages via USPS all the time. Our experience has been helpful courteous counter employees, timely intact deliver of packages and letters to our door steps, and all at a lower cost than the alternatives.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    64. Re:Netflix by dingen · · Score: 1

      Wait what? You can't start a mail company in the US? Home of the free, indeed.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    65. Re:Netflix by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Informative

      I've had friends work for UPS in Santa Cruz. When your packages come in they slide down several chutes. One of the chutes has a big ragged exposed bolt hanging down in the middle of it that gouges open packages just barely big enough to go in, but not big enough to go through. A worker will typically climb up the chute, grab your box, and just FORCE it downwards. Then the boxes end up in a big pile and they load them into the back of the truck, then throw the next set of boxes over a wall they've built there.

      If you care about your packages, don't use UPS. Fuckers just destroyed a package coming to me with a $225 rivet shaver, busted it straight out of the side of the envelope, then delivered me an empty envelope in a plastic bag tied to my gate chain in a windstorm.

      FUCK UPS: FUCK UPS.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    66. Re:Netflix by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      There are places that UPS and FedEx WILL NOT deliver to at any price.

      Because it's not profitable to compete with the USPS, which gets bailed out when it fails, unlike DHL. Eliminate the USPS, or force them to compete on equal footing, and this problem will solve itself. It will do partially through increased costs to deliver to those areas, but snailmail sucks anyway, and our nation should be solving the last mile with the internet, not men in jeeps.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    67. Re:Netflix by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      DHL is gone here in the USA, was that part of the joke?

      UPS and FedEx cannot compete with the USPS because they are prohibited from doing so by law, and because we bail out the USPS. It's anticompetitive subsidies and tariffs all over again.

      I hear you have no farm subsidies in australia either, bully for you. But we're talking about the USA here.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    68. Re:Netflix by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I've found USPS to be uniformly more expensive for large packages, and intermittently less expensive for small ones that fit into mailboxes. If I want something to arrive, I send it FedEx. I used to have very good results with the USPS but my postmaster is an asshole and my carrier is a douchewaffle, leaving a tag for missed package delivery even when my gate is open and so on.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    69. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let the free market succeed where the USPS only exists by monopoly.

      Force the "free market" to completely fund the pensions of workers that haven't even been born yet and then we'll talk about how the USPS has "failed".

      Exactly, this was a move by Congress to try and privatize the USPS. It isn’t working. This service was never a commercial business model. It is a service to build a nation. Changes have to be made because of the technologies impact to the service, but it is required service even in this modern world.

    70. Re:Netflix by xaxa · · Score: 1

      Your USPS prices are cheap. 44 for a first class letter, anywhere in the USA.

      I pay 36p = 56 for a similar service (2-3 days) just in the UK. It's 68p = $1.06 for a letter to anywhere in Europe (2-5 days).
      (It's 46p = 72 for usually next day service within the UK. That's not guaranteed, that costs a lot more.)

    71. Re:Netflix by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      If you think you can deliver letters across the country for less than half a dollar, you're free to do so.

      Um, no, you're not. The USPS has a Federally mandated monopoly on first-class letter distribution. They have gone to court to protect this, like when they shut down some kids who were delivering Christmas cards.

    72. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By "succeed" you mean "charge 10x the amount for less service", right? Oh, and before you trot out that "USPS is losing money" crap that right-wingers love to say--I would remind you that the ONLY reason for that is a poison pill put in by the right making the USPS fund 75 years of retirement benefits in 10. That is, they have to pay for the benefits for employees who haven't even been born yet. No government entity and no private corporation operates that way. Fund things the correct way and the USPS would be profitable at current rates, which is unacceptable to the right of course, so they had to come up with a plan to help their precious "free market" work where it wouldn't have otherwise. Conservatives believe that government is broken, and if it isn't, just put them in charge and they'll break it for you after all.

      You do realize that in rural areas of the country USPS and FedEx won't even deliver things, and so they rely on the USPS for that, right? Bet those people would just love the "free market".

      The difference between right-wing crony capitalists and people who actually think about things is that most of us don't want to see UPS and FedEx go away. They provide a useful service, and occasionally good and bad examples of how things should or should not be done. That benefits everyone. You, on the other hand, would love to see the USPS fail, because while it's a government entity it's not taxpayer-subsidized and thus would, if not for right-wing interference, be a profitable success story and that is just unacceptable.

    73. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong. I knew several guys who used to work at UPS as night shift package handlers and they constantly told me to never ship with UPS. The typical package handler will throw packages, kick them and tear them open to steal items. If your package is marked "fragile", they will purposely give it an extra rough treatment. Most of the guys who do that job are minimum wage street thugs who cannot get a better job.

      The UPS driver doesn't do any more handling of the package than carrying it from the truck to your front door. They are also generally educated and paid well.

    74. Re:Netflix by peragrin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How do they know when they will deliver it to your home?

      answer they don't.

      fact is residential deliveries are extremely variable in their timing depending on how large the area is and how many packages are in it.

      businesses get reliable delivery times because the routes generally have so many packages going to each place every day.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    75. Re:Netflix by sFurbo · · Score: 1

      Why is the situation in the UK daft? If it can be made to work, I would say that it was the ideal solution. The places where private companies work can do it more effectively than the public post, they are used, and all other places, the public post takes over. Of course, it needs to be backed up by the tax payers so postage isn't too expensive, but that situation isn't any different from any other public service.

    76. Re:Netflix by sFurbo · · Score: 1

      That's impressive. Any idea why it is so?

    77. Re:Netflix by bpuli · · Score: 1

      UPS/Fedex delivering to every single mailbox in the country for less than 50 cents? The MPAA will be delivering movies over the internet before that can happen!

      --
      BP http://www.card-central.com
    78. Re:Netflix by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      UPS/Fedex? Ridiculous!

      The USPS is incredibly cheap compared to the commercial alternatives. The USPS goes to EVERY mailbox each day (6 days a week). Nearly everyone gets mail every day and even if there is none to deliver there might be some to pick up. This is particularly important outside of big cities. There are MILLIONS of people living outside UPS/Fedex delivery zones.

      What are you going to do for the farmers and ranchers who live 50 miles away from the nearest FedEx drop box?

      They probably don't get home delivery service anyway. More than likely they have a PO box at a post office branch in a nearby town.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    79. Re:Netflix by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      USPS comes to my mailbox 5 days a week. no Thursday or Saturday delivery in Mesa AZ.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    80. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're talking about UPS, not USPS.

    81. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please stop getting historical information from fictionalized movies. The reason fire departments when public is because of the free rider problem. No houses burned down because firemen were ignoring ones without the plaque. They were putting out fires for people who didn't pay.

    82. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The USPS is indeed a monopoly-- no one else is permitted to deliver non-express letters.

      This monopoly comes with the requirement that they do so for a flat rate everywhere, which is WHY they are a monopoly-- Joe's Letter Carrier service delivering first class mail within a city (but not elsewhere) could compete rather nicely with the USPS limiting their ability to use urban areas (high density, therefore low cost per item) to fund rural areas (low density, and therefore high cost per item).

    83. Re:Netflix by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Indeed.

      I think the difference is that US rural subsidies(at least in intent, I don't know if they work or not) are built around the notion that some sort of actual stable, reasonably organic, social fabric, with towns and families and continuity and stuff is supposed to exist in the low-density zones.

      As the extraction industries of the world have shown, anything sufficiently valuable can be mined/blasted/harvested/whatever under arbitrarily horrid conditions; by shipping in more or less temporary infrastructure, a bunch of adventurous kids who have no commitments and like paychecks, and then just circulating them out from time to time to make up for the fact that they are in the middle of nowhere(empirically speaking, the inevitable presence of a more-or-less-tolerated prostitution sector and some heavy drinking also keeps morale up).

      If you aren't picky about the existence of the rural US as a place where somebody might actually live and do various things-that-people-do-during-the-course-of-life, and go to school, and spawn, and eat at the town diner and whatnot, just cutting the low density regions loose, having the extraction corporations buy 'em out for pennies on the dollar, and providing the urban areas with resources that way would work well enough. I just don't see team "Small town values" and "Real America"(and their two senators per practically empty state) standing for that...

    84. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Large customers like Netflix could have their deliveries expedited through the system for next day delivery. This is all a man power issue, not a technical degraded system so next day delivery is always there when it benefits USPS. I highly doubt that FedEx nor UPS could deliver Netflix for so little money that USPS charges.

    85. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you going to do for the farmers and ranchers who live 50 miles away from the nearest FedEx drop box? Remeber they don't get internet out there either. So you are going to let them swing?

      Sure. They make enough money selling crops and livestock, they can hire someone to go and get their mail for them, instead of paying for it out of my taxes. If they don't make enough money, and they all find that their costs have increased - then the cost of food will increase ever-so-slightly to cover it. The important thing is that it'll be voluntary: isolated farmers are supported by the people who buy their goods, rather than by everyone through compulsory taxation.

    86. Re:Netflix by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How is the fact that you send packages by USPS (United States Postal Service) with nothing but good things to say about your in contrast with their comments about negative experience sending things UPS (United Parcel Service)?

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    87. Re:Netflix by thejynxed · · Score: 3, Informative

      It wasn't the unions who did it, it was a Republican sponsored bill passed in 2006 and mentioned by an above poster in one of the threads. Try reading.

      --
      @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
    88. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's no longer a VFD...Volunteers do not get paid.

    89. Re:Netflix by hrvatska · · Score: 4, Informative

      To elaborate on what Uberbah is referring to, a 2006 Congressional mandate contained in the “Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006”, required the USPS to pre-fund healthcare benefits of future retirees, a 75 year liability over a 10 year period. It has to project and pay for employees who haven't even been born yet. No other agency or corporation is required to do this. UPS and FedEx are not required to do this, only the USPS. Whose lobbyists do you think congress and the white house were listening to when they passed this provision? This provision costs the Postal Service $5.5 billion a year. When you add in an adjustment that was made in how workers’ compensation costs were calculated based on interest rate assumptions and long term predictions concerning health care and compensation of $2.5 billion (a non cash accounting adjustment), you come up with $8 billion in cost. Actual loss was $500 million and when added, comes to the $8.5 billion reported for 2010. While $500 million is a lot, it doesn’t compare with $8.5 billion and is down from the previous year loss of $1 billion. If you took out the onerous pre-funding mandate, the Postal Service actually shows a $700 million profit over the last four years instead of the $20 billion loss.

    90. Re:Netflix by ToiletBomber · · Score: 4, Funny

      Can it still run Linux?

    91. Re:Netflix by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 3, Informative

      OK, a couple of points. First people who live out in the sticks probably are not paying for your firefighters (unless your firefighters are paid out of state funds, they are not in my state). Fire companies in most rural communities are voluntary, non-profit organizations that are not run by the local government. Generally, their operational expenses come from donations (although they sometimes get grants from various government agencies to buy new equipment). Another point, U.S. society is actually less spread out today than it was 100 years ago (that is a larger percentage of the population lives in cities today than did then). As for running water, very few, if any, people living in rural areas are dependent on the government for running water and they like it that way.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    92. Re:Netflix by pz · · Score: 2

      The USPS needs to get rid of it's bad, underutilised services and focus on it's core, money making units.

      While this sounds like standard business management turnaround strategy, I fear from my experience that the USPS is in much worse condition and that deeper, more fundamental issues need to be addressed. Like firing 90% of the workforce and replacing them with motivated employees who realize that if they do not perform, their jobs will end. Currently, in every single USPS office I have been to in the last few years, and I go in to an office every two weeks or so, the staff are largely slow, inefficient, do not speak English well, are often surly, and don't give one whit about customer service. There are employees who are the occasional exception, but the large picture remains. I've had people staffing the special services window tell me they can't staple a form together, or that they're too busy to make a photo copy even though they clearly aren't working on any pressing tasks, or that I used the wrong color pen *after* I've filled out a form, and no, they have no black pens I could use. Somehow they don't understand that there are alternatives to the USPS for many services, that they face stiff and growing competition, and that the future is bleak for the USPS existing at all, threatening the long-term prospects for the employees having jobs.

      There are exceptions, naturally, but given that such laziness is blatantly apparent in customer-facing employees, I can only imagine the sloth behind the scenes. Such horrible attitude develops if employment is essentially guaranteed for life and (a) it is impossible to advance by working hard, and (b) it is impossible to get fired for not working.

      The USPS needs a new work force. The idea of a national letter delivery service is an excellent one, and I continue to be amazed that they can deliver a letter anywhere in the US for under half a dollar. Imagine if they had efficient, motivated employees!

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    93. Re:Netflix by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      All they have to do is package the DVDs such that they can survive being kicked off a loading dock down to concrete, 4 times on each transit. DVDs are pretty light, they'll probably be o.k.

    94. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The cities have gang bangers and brothers with glocks...they'll pop a cap in that farmer's ass.

    95. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ALM never provided universal mail because the USPS quashed it at the end of the barrel of a gun.

      http://digitaljournal.com/article/271139

    96. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not Socialism unless they're the sole source by law.

    97. Re:Netflix by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      The fact that they treat you like an idiot by never telling you when they'll deliver it at your home (and doing this repeatedly) just adds insult to injury.

      A lot depends on your local office. Here, FedEx is the one who times deliveries to our home for 1:30pm M,T,R,F and 12:30 on W (the exact time that nobody is home due to elementary school pickup.) UPS generally comes around 5-6pm and leaves a package on the doorstep instead of a signature required, delivery exception, please drive yourself to our local service center and be frustrated that we can't find the package when you arrive.

      I also had a USPS local office that was horrid like this, took me 6 months to get a certified letter once - including 3 trips to the office in person where they couldn't find it. Ask to see the Postmaster? Yeah, the postmaster heard me making the request and promptly vanished herself to the back room..

    98. Re:Netflix by JoeMerchant · · Score: 4, Interesting

      When we developed packaging for shipping, one of our qualification tests was to stand at the top of a 15' tall no-switchback stairwell and throw the package overhead down the stairs (was required to hit the midway landing and then bounce the rest of the way down.) 4x with no internal damage was a pass.

      That worked pretty well for domestic shipping, trans-oceanic also required 16 hours in a paint mixer to be sure that the boards wouldn't vibrate out of their sockets by the time they got to Europe/Australia.

    99. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, they are mandated to do 6 day a week delivery because the Government has granted them a competition free environment to deliver letters to anywhere in the US. Then they complain that they have to work? Waaah.

      Fuck em, we don't need them.

    100. Re:Netflix by Miamicanes · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Clearly, you've never suffered the horrors of FedEx Ground. I've caught them RED HANDED skipping delivery attempts, and gotten them to admit (off camera, unfortunately) that drivers who skip stops are known to be an "occasional" problem. A few years ago, I was home for the day getting my roof replaced. FedEx Ground claimed that there was "nobody home" and said they "left a note". At that point, there were no fewer than 7 people roaming around, including at least 1 or 2 in the front yard (possibly including myself). The NEXT day, I left a webcam pointed at the driveway & recording. 6pm arrived, no package, no note... and they claimed there was. When I confronted the FedEx manager, he first got irate, then broke down and grudgingly admitted that there "might" be a problem with the driver and said he'd "talk" to him.

      The impression I've gotten from various sites is that due to the way FedEx Ground (a.k.a. "RPS") works is that the packages end up at a depot, and drivers (who own their own trucks and are basically free agents) grab the ones they want to try and deliver. Apparently, there's an official process for making unwilling drivers attempt to deliver other packages, but they don't push it unless somebody escalates. In the meantime, they'll automatically log a package left at the depot as a failed delivery attempt.

      The worst delivery record of all (in terms of packages that FedEx Ground either doesn't try to deliver) are packages that require a signature. FedEx Ground drivers get paid by the successful delivery, so when there are LOTS of packages waiting to be delivered, they intentionally bypass as many that require signature releases as they can, especially if you live in a gated community and they aren't certain you'll be home. It wouldn't be so bad if their depots were at least open until 9 and on weekends for pickup, but they're not. Getting them to pull a package from a truck so you can pick it up (within a fairly restricted range of hours) almost takes an act of god. UPS, in comparison, will let you camp out at their facility the day of a missed delivery and grab the package off the truck when the driver gets back to the depot.

      UPS might not be perfect, but they're infinitely better than FedEx Ground.

    101. Re:Netflix by magamiako1 · · Score: 2

      although they sometimes get grants from various government agencies to buy new equipment).

      What about the OP's post did you not understand when you wrote that statement?....

    102. Re:Netflix by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Really? Nothing for the people growing your food? It is not wise to SHIT on the people who feed you.

      Nobody is shitting on Monsanto.

    103. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except what people like you don't realize is....the government wrote those laws because they already had the experiences with the UPS and FedEx of the time, and you know what they realized?

      That it was a fucked up horrible system which wasn't worth having around, so they wrote a law to get past it. Much like we have laws that you can't just open a hospital willy-nilly, start a law office, or your own police force.

    104. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes - unions suck the life out of companies and raise costs. The amount of money they are forced to put into pension programs is insane....all because of unions.

      Although we can't blame the USPS for the loss of business. The internet has done a majority of that really.

    105. Re:Netflix by mjr167 · · Score: 2

      Be careful to differentiate between "running water" = "indoor plumbing" and "running water" = "city water". Everyone has indoor plumbing; not everyone has city water. Not everyone wants city water. There are advantages to being on septic and well water instead of on city sewer and water lines. You will notice that even in nicely populated areas there are still communities on wells and septic.

    106. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know what country you live in, but my property taxes pay for my Volunteer fire department, schools and police. Of course they require donations to better their services and pay for upgrades, training etc. But saying people living in the sticks do not pay is flat wrong.

    107. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You call hughesnet Internet!? Have you ever had hughesnet you fuck? Fuck you you fucking fuck, go suck a big fat cock you neckbeard knowitall asshole! And please elaborate on how the USPS is not doing a good job now.

    108. Re:Netflix by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Oh, you want running water way out there? I dont want to pay for it even though you help pay for my schools, my roads, my police, and my firefighters.

      Keep your creepy water lines away from my property - my well is perfectly well maintained, monitored, and free of 'necessary' chemicals.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    109. Re:Netflix by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Otherwise a commercial mail service would hog the high spots to itself and leave rural areas out in the cold.

      I get UPS and Fedex package delivery to my house. My post office makes me drive 10 miles round-trip to get the package. And that's only because I begged them to drop it off at the closer post office they drive by anyway, rather than making me drive 20 miles round trip to 'my' post office.

      Oh, and they're closed for lunch from 11:30 to 1PM every day.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    110. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parent is exactly correct. The way UPS treats its employees is appalling. I spent about ten weeks there. Three weeks to understand what the place was really like, and another six or seven looking for another job.

    111. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nearly everyone gets mail every day

      Short of netflix dvds, I can't remember the last time I got anything valuable in the mail that wasn't just bulk trash. I doubt the $0.04 (or whatever ridiculously low bulk rate they charged) was enough to cover the overhead of coming to my house. Charge the bulk rate at the regular rate and I suspect you'd see a lot less 'mail everyone-it's cheap' mentality.

      even if there is none to deliver there might be some to pick up.

      Money saving idea: drop off your letter at a local post office/shared box, or call and schedule a pickup. If you have mail to send, you call the number and they make sure they stop by in the next day to send it.

      The combination of those two things should drastically reduce the amount of waste the USPS has to deal with, while still keeping all the services intact. Not saying it's perfect, but at least it's an idea.

    112. Re:Netflix by Confusador · · Score: 2

      Another point, U.S. society is actually less spread out today than it was 100 years ago (that is a larger percentage of the population lives in cities today than did then).

      I'll believe that, easily, but I'm curious whether it's true that there are fewer people (on an absolute basis) living outside of cities. It seems likely to me that stopping daily mail service to those areas would impact more people now than it would have 100 years ago. Not that that's precisely the point you were referring to, anyway.

    113. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, USPS is no monopoly. If you think you can deliver letters across the country for less than half a dollar, you're free to do so.

      Wrong: "The United States Congress originally passed the PES in 1792, under powers granted it in the United States Constitution to "establish Post Offices and Post Roads". The PES created a governmental monopoly on the carriage and delivery of letter mail, and ensured that this monopoly can be enforced." [1]

      And therein lies the problem - USPS, which is a private company

      Wrong: "The United States Postal Service (also known as USPS, the Post Office or U.S. Mail) is an independent agency of the United States government responsible for providing postal service in the United States. It is one of the few government agencies explicitly authorized by the United States Constitution." [2]

      doesn't get to fight against other companies because laws and regulations hinder them. Which is fair enough, but then We The People need to foot the bill for this extra service we demand of them.

      Wrong: It doesn't have to fight against other companies (in part), and they do receive indirect subsidies (in the form of tax breaks -- they pay no fuel taxes at either the state or federal level, no registration fees, no property tax, etc)

      My advice: Nationalize the postal service[*].

      Wrong: It hasn't been privatized.

      The government owned and run postal services of many other countries do pretty well at low cost.
      Where they have privatized them, the expenses have skyrocketed and service has taken a dive.

      Wrong: The experience with nationalization/privatization in different countries isn't consistent enough to conclude that.

      [*]: As well as any other essential services now run as private companies. The US Mint and the USPS are good starters, but there are dozens.

      Wrong: "Under the Coinage Act of 1873, the Mint became part of the Department of the Treasury. It was placed under the auspices of the Treasurer of the United States in 1981." [3]

      In summary, 100% of what you said is incorrect. That you were modded +1 is incredible.

      [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Express_Statutes
      [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service
      [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Mint

    114. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FedEx home delivery is even worse. They often send packages for a business address to the home delivery guys, who try to deliver after closing hours and don't deliver on Monday. I wonder if the business address being a UPS store is part of the problem?

    115. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to get too off topics, but that's something I never quite got.
      As society gets larger and more spread out there are certain services such as the USPS/Fire dept that will become a nesesity reagrdless of their bottom line.

      Having lived in a VERY rural part of Alaska, I can tell you that our post office was never the one to be affected by things like these (with the exception of newly created mail-holidays). Considering we have no roads, they recognize that all of our supplies comes in by that mail so it's always taken care of. I would assume if you live in a remote enough area... most of these changes will not apply to you.

    116. Re:Netflix by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Informative

      We decided that mail service was such an important part of our national infrastructure that we mandated it even in the poor areas.

      Also worth noting here is that the people who negotiated the Constitution thought a public mail service was so important that it's one of the 18 powers specifically granted to Congress. (Article 1, section 8)

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    117. Re:Netflix by darronb · · Score: 1

      Wow, no kidding. I shipped some embedded systems to the UK from US once. Each had one internal expansion card that was in a very stiff card-edge slot but otherwise unsupported. They were quite hard to remove by hand, so we shipped them like that. (Hey, you learn)

      Perhaps obvious to some, all these cards were flying around loose in the enclosures on arrival in the UK.

    118. Re:Netflix by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      As of today (Monday morning Dec 5) I just went online to the UPS site and tracked a package which I had ordered on Friday Dec 2 (free delivery) and it will be delivered TODAY to my doorstep right around 9:30 a.m.! My so-called postal carrier comes any time she feels like it between the hours of 2:00 p.m and 4:00 p.m.

      Then your local UPS management must be unusual. Mine always say "by end of day," and that's iffy. Not to mention that it is apparently a matter of policy now for packages that arrive at their destination offices early to be left sitting on a shelf for as long as 4 days (personal experience: Package arrived locally on friday late-night/saturday morning, was delivered on the following tuesday) lest recipients think they are "getting over" on the company.

      I'm not saying that USPS isn't a clusterfuck, but you could really find something better to hold up as a counterexample than UPS. Like, I dunno... an old coffee-picker and his donkey.

    119. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nationalize NASA

    120. Re:Netflix by Politburo · · Score: 1

      This. It's amazing how people will call for the end of decades or centuries of policy without ever considering why the policy was started in the first place.

    121. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a former UPS hub employee myself, I can confirm everything parent said. I started off loading and worked my way to sorting. Most new hires literally last less than a month. I spent a couple years there because I didn't mind the physical workout and their tuition reimbursement and medical insurance for part-time employees were good incentives. But yes, you really get your ass kicked on a regular basis. The month from right after Thanksgiving up until right before Christmas was absolute hell.

    122. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Postal Service delivers to 146 million businesses and households each day, six days per week. UPS delivers to 8 million addresses daily while FedEx serves even fewer.

      Comparing USPS junk mail pieces to UPS parcel deliveries is absurd as is saying that FedEx serves fewer than 8 million addresses. FedEx serves nearly all addresses. Whether they are or aren't receiving anything that day is another story.

    123. Re:Netflix by Politburo · · Score: 1

      USPS will accept your own packaging, but the cheapest rates use their boxes. You can reuse old boxes as long as they're still sturdy and you've removed all old packaging and labels.

    124. Re:Netflix by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      The USPS is incredibly cheap compared to the commercial alternatives.

      Maybe thats why theyre having issues with funding and staying afloat.

    125. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Derpy would be a much safer way of delivering packages than UPS. Even if she does occasionally drop pianos on ground-bound ponies

    126. Re:Netflix by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      The paint mixer is an exaggeration, but, yes, before we started vibration testing, we had plenty of friction fit connections come loose during trans-oceanic shipment.

    127. Re:Netflix by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Of course the above are examples of where socialism works as advertised, but I'm sure someone will object because their dogma tells them to reject the concept having their wealth redistributed, even if they are receiving more material benefits from it than they could possibly afford by themselves.

      That is only true if your total wealth is under the mean, in which case socialism would generally be a net gain for you.

      The issue is whether it is just in all circumstances to take everyone's money for the greater good. There are times where it may be (basic infrastructure), but not always-- you are sacrificing some freedom to get there.

    128. Re:Netflix by DragonWriter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As society gets larger and more spread out there are certain services such as the USPS/Fire dept that will become a nesesity reagrdless of their bottom line.

      Not all the case in the US of something that will beceome a necessity as society gets larger and more spread out -- its something that's always been necessary, in part because of how large and spread out society was, and was recognized as such by the founders. For quite some time the political Right has advanced the idea that "government should be run like a business", and one of their big "successes" there has been the semi-privatization of the USPS into an entity that is, rather than operated like a public service, operated like a self-supporting business. The objective has always been to kill the USPS, and, even though it took a long time, they've finally reached the point where they've almost been successful.

      (Perhaps ironically, the USPS's main opponents are the same people that talk about limiting government to performing its constitutional roles -- and operating a postal service and postal roads is one of those constitutional roles.)

    129. Re:Netflix by The+Gaytriot · · Score: 1

      As an apartment dweller, whenever I see the option of using USPS for an order I will use them over UPS or Fedex. Although I only have one overly negative experience with UPS, the small frustrations of missing a delivery because I wasn't there to receive it happen nearly every time. Since I live in an apartment complex, they refuse to leave packages on my doorstep, which is fine because I've had a package stolen when the UPS man left a box in front of my door before. But, I inevitably have to have the package held for will-call at the nearest UPS center so that I can pick it up myself. Otherwise, you can bet they will attempt to deliver and fail at around the same time the next day since you will probably still not be home.

      As far as USPS is concerned, if I think that the package I'm ordering will fit in my mailbox or in the larger package mailboxes, I'll pick USPS every time. If I lived in a house (in a good neighborhood) I would not be as biased towards them, because I've seen where Fedex and UPS commonly leave packages tucked away near the door somewhere unless it requires a signature.

      --
      Srsly u guys. U guys, srsly.
    130. Re:Netflix by show+me+altoids · · Score: 1

      Please provide documentation on when these regular bailouts of the USPS have occurred. You can't, because you are completely full of shit.

      --
      I feel sorry for people that don't drink, because when they get up in the morning, that's as good as they're gonna feel
    131. Re:Netflix by scoove · · Score: 2

      I've had Amazon Prime for two years, with multiple deliveries per week to a rural address. Hundreds and hundreds of packages, and only one issue with the package being delivered impaired (a large farm implement that wasn't even in a box, delivered missing a large bolt that was zip-tied to the steel frame).

      UPS has been outstanding. USPS on the other hand can be guaranteed to leave mailboxes open, shred packages, place packages in strange places, destroy mail in transit, break DVDs, accumulate mail for a week at a time and then deliver it, etc.

      FedEx has also been good to work with but by no means as friendly and helpful as our USPS has been.

    132. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How lucky that you have decent UPS service.

      I live in a condo. Two weeks ago I was supposed to have a package delivered on Wednesday - which to them appears to mean mean sometime between 9:30 am and 5:00 pm. I was home. No delivery. I did get a nice "we tried to deliver message" on my door. Thursday, I was home. No delivery. Got another nice message saying that they would make their last attempt the next day. I checked the announcing system to make sure I was still on it - I was. Friday 5:00 pm - still nothing. I went out to get my mail and happened upon the UPS delivery person leaving another message on the door. I identified myself and asked what the problem was. He said that he couldn't find my number on the directory (it's second on the list). I showed him how to use the directory. I wish I could say that it was a new driver that didn't know that most condos don't have an on-site manager. It wasn't. I guess I should be happy - most times they don't even leave a delivery notice.

      Fast forward a week. I was supposed to get a package last Tuesday. Same thing.

      And before someone asks why not have it delivered at work, I did once. The memo I got from our shipping informing me that personal deliveries weren't permitted is still in my personnel folder...

    133. Re:Netflix by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      he USPS needs to get rid of it's bad, underutilised services and focus on it's core, money making units.

      Why? Specifically, why shouldn't a Constitutional function of the US government be subsidized out of tax revenues? The whole purpose of having a government is to provide services that provide indirect social benefits aside from the direct benefits to their participants; if the benefits of a service are entirely internalized, there's no reason for it to exist as a government service in the first place. But if the benefits aren't internalized, there is no logic to demanding the service be self-supporting.

    134. Re:Netflix by mdarksbane · · Score: 1

      They need new management first.

      I have multiple family members in the post office. Their stories are the perfect example of horrible management meeting a horrible union. Routes that are physically impossible for employees to complete in the time expected, regulations that only decrease efficiency, and mandated work hours that mean any gains realized from improvements are completely thrown out. If someone combines a route and reduces the total number of jobs, they aren't allowed to lay off the employees, so they sit around doing nothing but getting paid.

      You have route times that are impossible to meet while following the rules you are required to follow on them. If you violate a stupid rule, you can be fired immediately, but if you are just plain incompetent it's impossible to get rid of you.

      It's the worst combination of mismanagement and overzealous union power I've ever seen. So of course everyone hates the job - the only reason they're there is because if they go anywhere else they won't get a proper pension.

    135. Re:Netflix by dlcarrol · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Really? Somehow I'm betting that non-free-market unions and a socialisticly-derived sense of entitlement have more to do with this behavior than "a free market competitive economy". I realize that my assertion is just as nakedly unsupported as yours, but I figured I needed to weigh in on the possibility that this got modded up as "Insightful" instead of "Informative".

    136. Re:Netflix by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Excuse me? I live in Denmark, we have a government owned postage service (coowned by the Danish and Swedish states).

      The Danish postal service was privatized and incorporated in 1995. Which is exactly why you now pay a fortune to send a letter, which didn't happen back when it was "Postvæsenet" instead of "Post Danmark AS".

      You've provided a prime example of why privatization of national services is a bad thing, like my original post stated.

    137. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, they realized having companies who got paid when stuff burnt down seemed to increase the total number of fires. Funny that.

      Publicly funded fire brigades first came about in London in the latter part of the 19th Century (not the 17th), around 40 years after the first publicly funded rozzers.

    138. Re:Netflix by LanMan04 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, USPS is a monopoly. It is a federal crime to deliver a letter. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Express_Statutes

      Yeah, to an official US mail box. At least be honest in your assessment. UPS and FedEx could deliver letters all day long, just not to your "official" mail box...and they do.

      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
    139. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      USPS is (supposedly) self-supporting. And probably would be if internal changes didn't require Congressional approval.

    140. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not in my experience they're not. UPS sucks, Fedex is a 100 times better. I've used both extensively (well, I stopped using UPS eventually) I have no stake or stock in either company, just personal observations.

    141. Re:Netflix by krinderlin · · Score: 1

      Ever actually get a USPS shipment that's tracked? I live in the Atlanta-metro area in Georgia. As in, I live in the Atlanta. My gift for someone I ordered online went to Atlanta, California, Atlanta, Texas, Atlanta, Delaware, Atlanta, Kansas, and finally Atlanta, Georgia. The worst part was that there was absolutely nothing wrong with the shipping address. Even the ending part of the Zip+4 was right. You can only imagine the ass-fuckery that Amazon's "Super Saver Shipping" suffers. I just sign up for Prime and get 2-day UPS. At least it arrives, get's left at the leasing office, and is at my door in our locked breezeway by the time I'm home from work.

    142. Re:Netflix by sFurbo · · Score: 1

      Privatized? When it is owned by the government?

      It is closer to a prime example of why monopolies are bad. It might be that governmental monopolies are less bad than private monopolies, but they are still worse than the market solution. Of course, monopolies often crop up, and if the state doesn't keep them in check, the free market is not exactly what we get.

    143. Re:Netflix by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      Privatize the profits, socialize the losses. They're doing this explicitly and you agree with it? Personally, I don't like my tax dollars wasted...

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    144. Re:Netflix by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Funny

      it runs NetBSD, but it's dying

    145. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact is those future employees will exist. They will draw pensions at high cost to the post office because of health care and compensation. The only loss the post office experiances by funding those pensions now is interest on the money. This is balanced out by the interest they save on the debt they would accrue if they didn't fully fund the pensions. Your suggesting that the postal service cook its books to not include known costs to show a short term profit. That may work for a CEO of a company who plans to leave after 5 years, but the post of is over a hundred years old. Congress is planning on it lasting for the next 100 years.

    146. Re:Netflix by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      You use discs? It comes 24 hours or more later? how 20th century of you. I use the net.

    147. Re:Netflix by pz · · Score: 1

      They need new management first.

      You're right in that management needs to be replaced as well. I was not exempting them from my screed. The USPS worker's union needs to be busted, as it is clearly not acting in the best interests of the country as a whole, the management thrown out, and the entire thing redone nearly from scratch.

      If what you say is true about routes, and meanwhile UPS is touting the efficiencies they gained by eliminating left-hand turns (it floors me that the delivery industry is still working on operational efficiencies that are as low-hanging fruit as that), we won't have the USPS as it currently stands for much longer.

      Note that the problem here is not that it's a pseudo-government job for these workers, but, as the parent poster points out, that we have a pathological combination of poor management and short-sighted union.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    148. Re:Netflix by sjames · · Score: 1

      Not likely if they act all cool and hold the gun sideways.

    149. Re:Netflix by sjames · · Score: 1

      The USPS provides no competition for overnight service (they simply don't offer it). Still FedEx won't go some places.

      So, after USPS is dead, will FedEx just refuse those routes entirely or will we get to "compute the postage" on letters?

    150. Re:Netflix by hrvatska · · Score: 2

      There are two issues. Pensions and future retiree health costs. They are more than fully funding the pensions. USPS has overpaid into its pension fund between $55 and $75 billion, yet is forced to continue to pay billions of dollars per year into the pension fund, even though the fund is fully (actually over) funded. The second issue is the amount of time USPS has to fund future health costs. By compressing the amount of time that the USPS has to meet future obligations, the provision all but guarantees the failure of the USPS. If most people or businesses had to meet all their future health costs by saving enough money in the next ten years, they too would go bankrupt.

    151. Re:Netflix by khallow · · Score: 1

      It seems likely to me that stopping daily mail service to those areas would impact more people now than it would have 100 years ago

      There's probably more people in the sticks than before, especially in areas that have become tourist magnets like beaches and mountainous regions. But as the previous poster noted, the population relatively has become more urbanized and concentrated in and around cities.

    152. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but how many of those pieces does anyone want?

      I only read about 5% of the mail that comes to me through USPS whereas I read 100% of mail that comes to me UPS/FedEx. USPS is just subsidizing businesses with taxpayer dollars so they can send me a bunch of crap everyday.

    153. Re:Netflix by khallow · · Score: 1

      It's written into the Constitution proper. Personally, I'm amenable to a constitutional amendment removing the monopoly provision for US Postal Service, but the problem isn't worth the effort.

    154. Re:Netflix by hrvatska · · Score: 1

      the post of is over a hundred years old. Congress is planning on it lasting for the next 100 years.

      If congress is planning on the USPS being around for 100 years, why is it necessary to cram all the retiree health costs into ten years? Why not 30 or 40? What was so magical about 10 years other than the fact that it guaranteed the USPS would go bankrupt?

    155. Re:Netflix by khallow · · Score: 1

      Force the "free market" to completely fund the pensions of workers that haven't even been born yet and then we'll talk about how the USPS has "failed".

      How about we don't do something colossally stupid for a change? I don't have a problem with dropping the USPS pension funds. Sure, honor the obligation for existing pensioners, but discontinue it for current and future workers.

    156. Re:Netflix by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      The OP seems to be under the impression that people who live out in the sticks are reliant on the government for running water. Not only are they not dependent on the government for running water, they are not dependent on the government for firefighters. The key word in the part of what I wrote that you quoted was "sometimes", not "oftentimes", nor "always". When the local volunteer fire companies near me need new equipment they will apply with various government agencies for a grant to purchase it. However, if they are denied the grant, they will run fundraisers to raise the money to buy the equipment. Actually, most of the time, they will start running the fundraisers about the same time they start applying for grants, when enough funds, from either source, come in, they purchase the equipment.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    157. Re:Netflix by pedrop357 · · Score: 1

      They'll find ways to sell that food if they want money for the various things they want that they can't grow themselves. I'd be curious to know what percentage of rural residents are actually farmers or grow/raise/produce ANYTHING that is sold to urban/suburban dwellers.

      If things change and we all stop spending money to subsidize rural residents, they'll have to build the cost of living into their products. This will allow people to choose whether or not they wish to pay for rural grown food, etc. There's no reason why someone who doesn't eat meat and grows many of their own vegetables has to pay for a farmer to live 50 miles from anywhere.

      I believe that socializing these kinds of things is bad-it hides their true costs, and by extension, hides or encourages inefficiencies. It also denies people the ability to truly choose to buy locally as possible, etc. I have the exact same problem with any subsidizing of roads in the name of keeping trucked goods cheap-it too plays favorites, hides inefficiencies, and deprives people of the ability to truly choose to buy only locally produced goods.

      BACK to the USPS:

      It's easy for USPS to do things somewhat cheap-they have a monopoly on 1st class mail, so your letter across town subsidizes another person's letter across the country. The USPS does not pay property taxes, business license fees, business profit taxes, parking tickets, motor vehicle registration fees/taxes, gasoline taxes, etc.

      Let UPS or Fedex avoid nearly all taxes and fees while also allowing them a monopoly on certain classes of mail and let's see how things change. In exchange for allowing them to avoid fees and allowing a monopoly on certain classes of mail, I'd bet anything they would have no problem fulfilling a mandate to deliver anywhere.

    158. Re:Netflix by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

      Yeah, to an official US mail box.

      No, the statute applies to all first-class letter delivery via "post routes", which includes, among other things, all public roads. No official US mail boxes need be involved. Private carriers can carry letters if they pay the USPS stamp fees in addition to their own delivery costs, ensuring that private delivery is always the more expensive option. There are a few other less-common exceptions, listed in the linked Wikipedia article, including "special messenger services" and free delivery. On the whole, however, the system is specifically designed to make it impossible to compete on level footing with the USPS for normal delivery of first-class letters.

      Don't take my word for it, however. This is what the USPS has to say:

      The Private Express Statutes (PES) are a group of federal civil and criminal laws that, for the most part, make it unlawful for any entity other than the U.S. Postal Service® to send or carry letters over post routes for compensation unless appropriate postage is paid in an amount equaling what would have been paid had the letters been sent through the Postal Service(TM).

      Publication 542 - 1-1 What Are the Private Express Statutes?

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    159. Re:Netflix by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      That is an interesting question. The area where I work was not only rural, but definitely the sticks 100 years ago. Today it is fairly densely populated (similar to the what the popuation density was of the nearest city 100 years ago), although by no means urban. There are other areas of the state that 100 years ago had a population density that was similar to the population density of this area at the time that are practically unpopulated today.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    160. Re:Netflix by sFurbo · · Score: 1

      The "losses" in that expression normally comes from risks inherent to the profits, and the problem with it is moral hazards. Here, it is a question about letting the market optimize where that can work, and having the state take over where the market solution will be unsatisfactory. The logical consequence of opposing that is having the state drive everything. It has been tested, it can be more efficient for a short period of time, but then it becomes much less efficient.

    161. Re:Netflix by pedrop357 · · Score: 1

      I'm sure I could, IF I was provided a monopoly on all 1st class mail and able to charge the same rate for pieces, regardless of distance, thereby allowing all my in-town deliveries to subsidize my long distance deliveries.

      I need exemptions from all local taxes for my distribution facilities and shop fronts. For example, I need all of the following waived:property taxes, business licensing fees, business profit taxes. I need all my vehicles to be exempt from taxes and fees as well-no vehicle registration or sales taxes, no parking tickets can be issued to my vehicles, nor do I pay gasoline taxes or toll road fees, etc. I also need to be able use eminent domain where I feel necessary.

    162. Re:Netflix by pedrop357 · · Score: 1

      The USPS had better have a mandate to deliver mail to all addresses since they also have a monopoly on 1st class mail.

    163. Re:Netflix by Maxwell'sSilverLART · · Score: 1

      Or, put another way, this is perhaps the only government pension that actually has funds to cover its future expenses. Kind of nice to know, given that most pension funds are grossly underfunded.

      --
      Moderate drunk! It's more fun that way!
    164. Re:Netflix by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      This just in: Economic incentives effect how humans make decisions. UPS drivers face different delivery metrics than FedEx Ground and Express, hence how they handle deliveries differently.

    165. Re:Netflix by Nimey · · Score: 1

      But it's Constitutional. The founders. Wharrgarbl. /snark

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    166. Re:Netflix by Nimey · · Score: 2

      Sounds like it was the brainchild of the "starve the beast" nutters, doesn't it?

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    167. Re:Netflix by ngreenfeld · · Score: 1

      I've had problems with UPS too, but the last shipment we got was very carefully packed (6' by 4' by 4') in a custom-made wooden box (packed by UPS). The packer was great, the delivery guy was great, and we are very happy. Sometimes the actual people involved do make a difference!

    168. Re:Netflix by OrigamiMarie · · Score: 1

      Even getting FedEx Ground to divulge the address of the location where they are holding your package can be difficult. You may have to call several times before you get somebody who is sympathetic enough to just tell you where you can do a pick-up. And it's kind of no wonder . . . the facilities seem under-staffed and under-secured.

    169. Re:Netflix by R.Mo_Robert · · Score: 1

      UPS generally comes around 5-6pm and leaves a package on the doorstep instead of a signature required, delivery exception, please drive yourself to our local service center and be frustrated that we can't find the package when you arrive.

      Probably because you didn't request a will-call (hold) or didn't wait for the driver to get back? I've done this lots of times (I have Amazon Prime, and it's usually what they use) and only had a problem once where they forgot to record the re-arrival of my exceptionally large clothes-drying-rack box.

      --
      R.Mo
    170. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only one of them? Did one of the others at least have a boot-shaped or fork-shaped hole in it? Sounds like the package handlers are slacking off.

    171. Re:Netflix by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      And you seriously think that the US postal service is any better?

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    172. Re:Netflix by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      how 20th century of you.

      Wow, really? That tired old bugfuck cliche? Have you not been following the whole silly story about licensing rights and bandwidth caps and that whole dog and pony show?

      Look, I have multiple streaming devices with access to Netflix streaming, Hulu and a bunch of others. Collectively they do not have the nearly selection that the basic DVD service has. For example, less than 5% of my Netflix queue is available to stream. Anywhere. Yeah, that includes torrents.

      The way I watch things is that I see something specific that catches my interest, and I seek it out. I don't have time to root through some streaming service's limited selection and settle for something to watch. You savvy?

      I use the net.

      Look out folks! We have a badass over here.

    173. Re:Netflix by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      The USPS had better have a mandate to deliver mail to all addresses...

      Umm... As I said, they do - unlike FedEx and UPS.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    174. Re:Netflix by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      You mean like the American Letter Mail Company (look it up) that had faster delivery for a lower cost than the USPS but was forced to shut down because of Federal Law? Yea, that's SO horrible - providing people with a better service at a lower cost.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    175. Re:Netflix by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      Massive amounts of junk mail delivered via USPS is not the same as millions of packages delivered via FedEx and UPS that people actually don't throw in the trash. You also forget that almost every home gets at least one piece of junk mail per day - most homes don't get a package every day, so your numbers are utterly meaningless.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    176. Re:Netflix by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      Yes, they will deliver there - they might charge a higher price to go to the middle of nowhere, but they'd be willing to deliver there. For now since they're legally not fully allowed to compete, it's easier to just push it off on the USPS.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    177. Re:Netflix by tsotha · · Score: 1

      No, not poor areas. Rural areas. There are plenty of big city poor areas the post office can deliver to profitably, and there are wealthy ranchers who live miles from the nearest neighbor who are getting heavily subsidized junk mail. The cost to deliver a piece of mail has to do with density, not the relative wealth of the area.

    178. Re:Netflix by tsotha · · Score: 1

      No, USPS is no monopoly.

      Yes, actually it is. Commercial firms are not legally allowed to deliver first class mail, and in fact companies have been sued by the government for using Fedex and UPS to deliver mail that isn't time-sensitive.

    179. Re:Netflix by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Privatized? When it is owned by the government?

      Yes. Who the owner is doesn't matter - when incorporated, it becomes a private company with obligations to profitability, and no longer a focus on service.
      This privatization is why sending a class A letter now costs so much more than in 1995, even if adjusting for inflation, and why there now are far fewer post offices and deliveries.

      It might be that governmental monopolies are less bad than private monopolies, but they are still worse than the market solution.

      It's exactly the market solution that is the problem. By stopping the subsidies of the postal service and having it fight for profitability, you get the direct effect of capitalism - the lowest level of service the market is willing to accept, at the highest price they are willing to pay. Taking away the monopoly situation isn't going to stop this; it is only going to make it worse for those who now get postal service due to legislation, i.e. those who depend on a service that has to be subsidized to exist, because neither DHL nor FedEx will deliver letters to a losmand living on Ydderste NÃgne à -- it's not profitable.
      With the current privatized postal service, his mail is subsidized by charging others kr 8 to deliver a mail within a city.

      With a tax subsidization as before, at least it will hit everyone equally hard.

    180. Re:Netflix by DocHoncho · · Score: 1

      So we're just going to pretend that maybe, had the USPS never been created, that ALM would have provided mail delivery services to even the most remote locations where nary a profit was to be found? And they would do that because...? Well, never mind the details, because the free market fixes everything, amiright?

      --
      Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
    181. Re:Netflix by DocHoncho · · Score: 1

      SHUT UP YOU SOCIALIST PIG!!!~~~~~~~

      -- Non related --
      You want yelling? Slashdot, you don't even know what yelling is.

      --
      Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
    182. Re:Netflix by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      Actually it is. No company is allowed to compete directly with USPS. Lysander Spooner tried that over 160 years ago, and was rather successful, driving the cost of a letter down to 3 cents.

      However, the U.S. Government would not tolerate the competition and litigated his company out of existence.

    183. Re:Netflix by DocHoncho · · Score: 1

      While it's true that it is against the law to "establish any private express for the conveyance of letters or packets", tell me, when was the last time it cost you 44 cents to send something across the country? Do you really thing that doing away with this law is going to automatically cause UPS to deliver your letter to Aunt Martha for 44 cents? If so, I've got a few bridges I'm looking to sell.

      --
      Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
    184. Re:Netflix by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      I've had multiple occasions where the USPS guy left a note on my door saying "sorry we missed you, come pick up your package at the Post Office". No knock on the door. No doorbell. A couple of times, the dog noticed him and started barking, but he was already driving off by the time I got out the door. What is most frustrating is that then I have to wait until the next day to get the delivery from the Post Office, because it is in his truck (or maybe not, maybe he just makes all these notes out beforehand).

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    185. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, just stop. Your comments for this story have been nothing but wrong. And it isn't disagreement based on ideology. You are just simply factually wrong.

    186. Re:Netflix by The+Pirou · · Score: 1

      I appreciate the convenience of the Kiosk as I frequent locations with Kiosks at least twice a day between going to the gas station, going to the grocer, going to the drugstore, etc. I've got Redbox and Blockbuster kiosks within 2 minutes of my front door.
      I find the main pratfall of the Kiosks to be that they are largely tuned to new releases. Even if there are only a scant handful of new movies each year that I find worth seeing, using the Kiosk for those 'guaranteed in stock' titles is still helpful because I don't need to waste valuable (now even more so) DVD queue turnover time on them.

      With 1 DVD out at a time you could generally average 8 DVD's a month. With the changes in USPS service this number is going to decrease, driving the average dollar cost per rental well over $1 while making kiosks attractive and easier on the pocket. Add in the fact that you can also rent video games at some kiosks, and Netflix is going to be hurting.

      Whether people in more rural areas without such ready access to kiosks get on board or not, the end result is still a net loss for the USPS.

    187. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The solution is simple... quit guaranteeing pensions.

    188. Re:Netflix by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      One man's insightful is another man's Troll.

    189. Re:Netflix by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      UPS generally comes around 5-6pm and leaves a package on the doorstep instead of a signature required, delivery exception, please drive yourself to our local service center and be frustrated that we can't find the package when you arrive.

      Probably because you didn't request a will-call (hold) or didn't wait for the driver to get back? I've done this lots of times (I have Amazon Prime, and it's usually what they use) and only had a problem once where they forgot to record the re-arrival of my exceptionally large clothes-drying-rack box.

      Possibly so, when it comes to packages arriving at our house, we prefer services that "just work" as to those we have to micromanage. It just so happens that UPS "just works" better than FedEx, for us.

    190. Re:Netflix by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Quite often, UPS doesn't deliver where I live, but deliver it to the post office, who does the last mile.
      Yes, I still need the postal service. A free market does not work for public services, which this really is.

    191. Re:Netflix by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      UPS and Fedex aren't required to deliver $0.44 letters to the boonies.
      No, but they DO promise delivery to locations in the boonies, so presumably they would also do so for first class mail if allowed to do so. As to whether it would be flat rate or not. Who knows? It may end up being cheaper and give more good PR (read: cheaper) to deliver everywhere for a fixed cost. Or it may be extremely cheap to deliver across town and more expensive to deliver to BFE. We don't know, and all we can do is speculate because they are not legally allowed to offer the service.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    192. Re:Netflix by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      UPS and FedEx could deliver letters all day long, just not to your "official" mail box...and they do.
      In fact you are correct. I have a friend who receives home delivery from UPS and Fedex, but the USPS WILL NOT deliver first class mail to his address. At least they are nice enough to provide him with a free PO Box since they won't deliver to his address. I am not sure why they won't deliver to him. He lives in the center of a largish town. In fact, within about 5 blocks of the post office.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    193. Re:Netflix by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Fedex will deliver to any home address in the United States. Says so right there on their website.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    194. Re:Netflix by systemeng · · Score: 1

      I've had the reverse. The FedEx Ground guy knows I'm not always at my office and if he doesn't see me, he will call me and wait for me to drive over and sign for the package. That saved me many times.

    195. Re:Netflix by systemeng · · Score: 1

      I never had any trouble looking up where the location of the local FedEx Ground office was. I've also never had a problem with the hours. I think I was in there at 10:00PM on Christmas Eve a couple years back trying to locate half a dozen boxes of Hazardous Materials that were shipped to my business address when I was out.

    196. Re:Netflix by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Are you saying it isn't a good idea to fund the pension pool that you are promising to your employees?
      Of course, most private organizations get around this by telling you you are on your own for retirement. I'm perfectly happy to be responsible for my own retirement since I don't trust any organization to be around in 25 (sheesh am I getting that old) years.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    197. Re:Netflix by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Umm... As I said, they do - unlike FedEx and UPS.
      And Fedex also WILL deliver to any address, even though not mandated to do so. I don't know about UPS.
      I do know that, mandated or not, there ARE domestic addresses to which the USPS will NOT deliver. A friend of mine has one such address. FedEX and UPS deliver to him, but the USPS does not.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    198. Re:Netflix by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      You do realize that in rural areas of the country USPS and FedEx won't even deliver things, and so they rely on the USPS for that, right?
      You do realize that the USPS contracts with hundreds of other common carriers for delivery to other postal areas. Does that also invalidate their claim to deliver to every address?

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    199. Re:Netflix by R.Mo_Robert · · Score: 1

      UPS generally comes around 5-6pm and leaves a package on the doorstep instead of a signature required, delivery exception, please drive yourself to our local service center and be frustrated that we can't find the package when you arrive.

      Probably because you didn't request a will-call (hold) or didn't wait for the driver to get back? I've done this lots of times (I have Amazon Prime, and it's usually what they use) and only had a problem once where they forgot to record the re-arrival of my exceptionally large clothes-drying-rack box.

      Possibly so, when it comes to packages arriving at our house, we prefer services that "just work" as to those we have to micromanage. It just so happens that UPS "just works" better than FedEx, for us.

      Wait, I can't read, I thought we were discussing UPS. I've had the same FedEx experience as you, but it's also bad for me because they don't even have any Air or even Ground pickup facilities where I live (and yes, they are different, but they're all about 25 mi away). UPS usually works for me like it does for you, as long as signatures are taken care of--which is easy to do now with UPS MyChoice, anyway.

      --
      R.Mo
    200. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uhhh no. not true.

    201. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most rural areas either don't have fire service or they have volunteer fire departments. It's always been that way. Only an ignorant city person would think it should be any different. I help you keep your house safe and you help me keep my house safe vs. some "professional" who basically is just there for the pension.

    202. Re:Netflix by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

      I don't doubt your experience, but it is dependent upon both the quality of the delivery drivers and the manager who decides whether to fire them for their behavior or not.

      My experience with FedEx before my most recent move was mediocre. No huge problems, but nothing to brag about. I moved to a smaller town, however, and my experience with FedEx now is freakin' awesome.

      If I'm not home and it's raining or looks like it might rain, the guy who delivers to my neighborhood will take the package around to the back of my house, put it in my shed and leave a note on my door telling me it's there.

      This is well beyond the service FedEx officially offers and I can't begin to explain how much I appreciate it, but I know that it's not the result of a corporate-wide level of attention to customer's needs. The driver and the manager who hired him and encourages this behavior are the source of my good fortune.

    203. Re:Netflix by DriedClexler · · Score: 1

      Agreed. The most aggravating part is that neither of them even have an option where they won't even try to make the delivery, but will just inform you when it's reached the nearest depot. And for *both* of them, you still have to go through a human to get them to hold it at the depot rather than re-attempt delivery. WTF?

      --
      Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
    204. Re:Netflix by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

      Of course we should believe that ALM would have serviced even the remoteest locations. Telephone companies weren't required to provide service to every rinky dink little town and lthey hooked everyone up.

      You should also ignore anything you might read about Universal Service Obligations, the Communications Act of 1934 and its later revisions. That stuff will just interfere with your suspension of disbelief and it's not like it took seventy-one years to get every town in the USA connected to the hone system once the act was passed, right?

    205. Re:Netflix by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      sure, I read about all that and it apparently doesn't apply to me. I get anything and everything I want, via the net. From foreign TV shows (twelve hour to three day lag) to current movies to 40 year old shows.

    206. Re:Netflix by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, I disagree. The USPS is a government-owned corporation, and if it weren't for Congressional interference, would be doing just fine. Making it a government agency makes it too susceptible to politics, which is why it operates autonomously. However, the problem is that they still are susceptible to politics, and that's what's killing them, namely Congress's ridiculous law that requires them to prefund their employees' retirement accounts for decades in advance, something their competitors don't have to do. This law was lobbied for by the USPS's competitors, so that it would destroy them, and it's working.

      In the end, there is no real solution, because of corruption. In a country with a thoroughly corrupt government (like the USA, Mexico, or Zimbabwe), there isn't really any way to do things well; if you try to do thing with the government, the corruption will screw it up; if you try to do it privately, the corrupt government will get involved, or someone will do something illegal and the corrupt government won't set things straight to make sure everyone plays fair.

    207. Re:Netflix by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The problem is those same people are generally so dumb that they keep voting for politicians who want to remove any government services that benefit them.

      Of course, the people in the cities vote for politicians who promise "hope" and "change", and then when nothing changes, they somehow rationalize it in their minds and convince themselves that they didn't want any change after all.

    208. Re:Netflix by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      It doesn't help that the UK has the most confusing and nonsensical postal addresses in the entire world.

    209. Re:Netflix by xaxa · · Score: 1

      Other than cost, what possible advantage is there to a septic system?

      (In this country, only very rural places have septic systems, but living in the middle of nowhere is appealing to some rich people.)

    210. Re:Netflix by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Postal service is here to stay,

      Looking at what's going on with the USPS, I seriously doubt that. I think pretty soon (esp. if a Republican gets elected next year, which is a good possibility, but also if Obama gets re-elected since he'll just do whatever the Republicans want), the USPS will fold and Congress will disband it. UPS and Fedex will become the only two major delivery companies, and it'll cost $10 to have a letter delivered (urban areas only, rural areas much more, if they deliver there at all). Netflix will also be dead (at least the DVD/BD disc part of it) as it'll cost too much to send discs by UPS/Fedex.

    211. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure that was entirely for practical reasons, as most people did not even have an address at the time.

    212. Re:Netflix by sjames · · Score: 1

      In some cases, they utilize USPS for the "last mile".

    213. Re:Netflix by Optic7 · · Score: 1

      Just wanted to chime in here to say that UPS now has something called "UPS My Choice" that you can sign up for (free) that will email you and/or text you the day before the delivery, and then if you want, they will notify you again after it's been delivered. I just signed up for it recently when I was expecting a bunch of packages and it worked well. You also have the choice of paying an yearly fee that allows you to redirect the packages or direct them to all be held at the nearest UPS store for example. FedEx has yet to catch up with this option, but I hope they will soon, because like you said you never know what company you will have to use to receive a shipment.

    214. Re:Netflix by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Why? Specifically, why shouldn't a Constitutional function of the US government be subsidized out of tax revenues?

      By the same token,

      Why? Specifically why shouldn't a government department run at a positive balance. Why must it be subsidised via tax revenue. Like Australia Post and many other Australian government services that are pay per use, it doesn't have to make more then $0.01 of profit.

      Taxes are for services that cant support themselves or have a net cost to society if they are forced to, As an Australian who has seen the woeful state of the US medical system, there are better things the US can spend it's tax dollars on if the postal service can support itself.

      The whole purpose of having a government is to provide services that provide indirect social benefits aside from the direct benefits to their participants

      I absolutely agree, but when having that system become self sustaining does not reduce the social benefits there really is no reason not to.

      If we are talking about medical services, I can agree 100%, if Australia did not have public health care, it would cost more then health care does in the US, instead I am paying, via tax, 10-20% of what US employers pay private insurers for an employee on my wage.

      The logic is to allow a government department to modernise itself. The process is called corporatisation and is designed to allow departments to become more efficient by giving them discretion over their own activities. The department becomes a business under it's own right whilst the Government becomes the (only) shareholder. Ergo, the government writes the departments mandate, in this case postal services while the department decides how best to go about fulfilling that mandate (delivering post).

      Granted, you cant corportise everything, but it is ideal for a lot of pay per use government services that suffer from bureaucracy, such as postal services, state power/water providers and so forth. I'd never suggest corporatising health care or the military.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    215. Re:Netflix by mysidia · · Score: 1

      tell me, when was the last time it cost you 44 cents to send something across the country? Do you really thing that doing away with this law is going to automatically cause UPS to deliver your letter to Aunt Martha for 44 cents?

      It's really quite possible they could do so profitably. The USPS did so for a long time; the USPS would still be profitable if not for the explosion in budget dollars spent on worker health care and other union-protected luxuries.

      The question is the cost of the trip divided by the number of items sent. However, it's also possible the UPS would want to charge a fee that varies based on where you send an item to and from, so that each transaction is profitable. Even the USPS varies the price by weight and size.

      To achieve the efficiency for the $0.44 price to be economical, you have to have a certain amount of volume. The monopoly helps ensure the USPS has the volume.. If there were multiple competitors, the reduced volume could lead to higher prices across the board.

    216. Re:Netflix by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      Just one question: If the "whoever" were a corporation (Federal Express, UPS), who would be imprisoned for "not more than six months"?

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    217. Re:Netflix by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      Why not have the package delivered to your work in the first place?

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    218. Re:Netflix by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      In this situation, half of the RM's business is profitable, while the other half is loss making. Left to itself, the business as a whole is break-even or better.

      What they've done is privatised the profitable part (but without actually selling off anything or making any money from it, as is usually the case with privatisation), while keeping the loss making part government owned. The customer still pays much the same for postage, the service is the same (because the last mile delivery is the same as it's always been), but now the taxpayer is needing to pay subsidies on a scale it never has done before. Seeing as there are several for-profit companies operating in this space where there weren't before this move, you can see those subsidies as essentially going straight into those companies' profits.

      That is not a sensible move.

    219. Re:Netflix by mjr167 · · Score: 1

      Which country do you live in? I live in the US.

      According to the US census I live in a metropolis and several of the communities are still on septic. It's not that uncommon, even in nicely populated regions. I have never had septic, so cannot speak to why one would prefer it, but I do know that many of my co-workers that are not on the city sewer system have strongly opposed proposals to extend the sewer line. Perhaps it is only cost and they feel that the advantages of the city sewer system are not worth the added cost. Remember that in addition to the recurring costs for sewer service there is also the installation cost of laying the pipes, which, by the way, around here the home owner pays for laying the pipes in front of their house.

      One of the clear advantages to being on well water is that well water tastes better than city water.

    220. Re:Netflix by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      UPS/Fedex? Ridiculous!

      The USPS is incredibly cheap compared to the commercial alternatives. The USPS goes to EVERY mailbox each day (6 days a week). Nearly everyone gets mail every day and even if there is none to deliver there might be some to pick up. This is particularly important outside of big cities. There are MILLIONS of people living outside UPS/Fedex delivery zones.

      What are you going to do for the farmers and ranchers who live 50 miles away from the nearest FedEx drop box? Remeber they don't get internet out there either. So you are going to let them swing? Really? Nothing for the people growing your food? It is not wise to SHIT on the people who feed you.

      Government operations like the post office is just one of the many "costs of doing business" in a large society. Change the funding model so that the postal service can raise its rates and fire those that need firing and you'll see that it can work.

      They are the 99%

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    221. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's also criminal. A shame the GP was probably never prosecuted.

    222. Re:Netflix by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      In some cases, they utilize USPS for the "last mile".
      That may be so, but USPS also utilizes Fedex, UPS, and various airlines for some of their trunk routes.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    223. Re:Netflix by sjames · · Score: 1

      That may be so, but USPS also utilizes Fedex, UPS, and various airlines for some of their trunk routes.

      What does that have to do with it? The fact is, without USPS, there are addresses that FedEx won't deliver to. UPS does the same thing. The USPS currently contracts out international flights to FedEx, but had other arrangements before there was a FedEx.

    224. Re:Netflix by CtownNighrider · · Score: 1

      The Constitution requires the federal government to deliver the mail. An Amendment would be required to change that

    225. Re:Netflix by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      The fact is, without USPS, there are addresses that FedEx won't deliver to.
      We can't know that for sure until there is no USPS. If USPS goes away and Fedex abandons some areas, then you are right.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    226. Re:Netflix by sjames · · Score: 1

      If USPS goes away and Fedex abandons some areas, then you are right.

      And the people who get cut off do what? I suppose they'll be happy at first that they get no tax forms, no jury summons, etc, but given the way government works the inability to get those will somehow be treated as the citizen's fault.

    227. Re:Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem, instead, has to do with Republican legislation put into law in 2006 built with the very purpose of killing the USPS: the USPS has to forward-pay the benefits of its employees *for 75 years into the future*.

      This isnt killing the Post Office ... its called planning ahead.

    228. Re:Netflix by sFurbo · · Score: 1

      It's exactly the market solution that is the problem. By stopping the subsidies of the postal service and having it fight for profitability, you get the direct effect of capitalism - the lowest level of service the market is willing to accept, at the highest price they are willing to pay.

      No, that is the private monopoly situation. If the monopoly was removed, other actors would be able to perform the same service, forcing the price down to the marginal cost. How would PostDanmark be able to demand such a high price if competitors was allowed to do it for half the price? Look at the Danish telephone market: What has happened since the monopoly was removed? Prices have dropped and service has increased. Admittably, it didn't work very well for the cell phone market until Telmore came along, but since then, it works really well. Of course, that does take government involvement, as they mandate that if a service is sufficiently widespread, everyone must offer it.

      You are correct that the market solution will make service untolerably poor in the outer areas, and that the government needs to do something to something about that. But why choose a solution forcing everybody to use a monopoly, which will inevitably be ineffective? Why not allow the market to optimize where it is possible, and have the government step in* where the market will not offer an acceptable level of service?

      *either by having a government company be obliged to make all deliveries and pay their loss over the taxes, or by having private companies bid to which subsidy they need to do that service.

    229. Re:Netflix by newslash.formatblows · · Score: 1

      Absolutely! I had essentially the same thing happen with FedEx Ground. Claimed to have attempted delivery, webcam revealed that to be BS. They suck. Of course, I've got a friend who refers to UPS Ground as UPS Ground To Dust. I've had the boxes with boot prints, tire tracks, everything except tank treads. Regular Fed Ex is OK, IME.

  2. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Ever heard of packages?

  3. The End of USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This means that getting a bill from my credit card companies will take 15 to 30 days, which means the check payment for that months current charges will be late and later with each billing cycle.

    This will push the remaining people into e-payments, which will further decrease USPS revenue and further increase USPS expenses, a feedback cycle that the USPS will not escape from.

    The USPS-Titanic is going under water on the 100th anniversary of the real HMS Titanic sinking. How poetic. How tragic. What will history say about the United States of America, a "Super Power" country that cannot maintain a functional national postal service.

    What a disgrace.

    1. Re:The End of USPS by roc97007 · · Score: 0

      They might say a national postal service became redundant in the nineties, what took you so long?

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    2. Re:The End of USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never underestimate the bandwidth of a large hard-drive sent by post.

    3. Re:The End of USPS by riverat1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The USPS would be doing ok financially if they didn't have to fund medical coverage for employees who aren't even born yet. They have to fund 75 years of retiree health care benefits, $59 billion, in 10 years after the passage of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006. Who else has to do anything even close to that?

    4. Re:The End of USPS by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      They're half way there then.

      So they should see a huge expense plummet in 5 years and all will be fine.

    5. Re:The End of USPS by PPH · · Score: 2

      At the rate they're going, in 75 years there will only be a handful of people left at the USPS. When they split that $59 billion between themselves, they're going to be rich!

      (Hey, this is Slashdot. I was told there would be no math.)

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    6. Re:The End of USPS by mabhatter654 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Just jack the price of delivery up to its real value... I did a quick lookup at FedEx for sending a package across town... The lowest cost was $7. Add to that that UPS and FedEx essentially "cherry pick" only the profitable areas... Even locally they don't always deliver to suburbs and make you pick up the package.

      The Post is undervalued. That used to be offset with "junk mail". Each of those items subsidized the wages of the mailman that only brought 0-3 pieces of actual mail per day. To turn the figures around, for a person to deliver to your house, you probably need 5-10 pieces of mail each day... Or $2.50-$5.00. That comes close to FedEx quote for $7 I mentioned earlier. Also, there is no way that $.44 now equals $.25 from 20 years ago.

      Mail needs to cost more, I'd say the need to jump to $1 minimum. They also need to trim residential service days to Mon-Wed-Fri. I know I don't get ANY mail at least one day per week, and at least one other is only junk. I could easily get all my bills in one day per week, except that makes receiving things timely a problem. I think Businesses get enough mail to justify 4 day service, maybe take Wed off.

      I don't think for most individuals upping the price to $1 will hurt anybody.. You're paying $4 for an average greeting card now! Packages are a separate business that allows a higher price point already.

    7. Re:The End of USPS by DogDude · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The USPS would be doing fine financially if the gov't didn't mandate that the USPS is profitable. It's a red herring. Our military isn't (officially) profitable. Our schools aren't profitable. Our infrastructure isn't profitable. Our police and fire aren't profitable. The USPS exists to provide a basic level of delivery service to ALL Americans. If the USPS goes away, it'll be really, really difficult to live anywhere other than in cities and suburbs.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    8. Re:The End of USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is Congress which caused ALL of USPS problems. Their financial difficulties hit impossible when they was made to pay 59 billion in 75 years of health care benefits for the future all within 10 years. Such a thing is ridiculous and it's no wonder why USPS is in such dire straights especially when USPS is self funded. Add in the fact that USPS can not raise prices beyond inflation by law (they can't adjust pricing to meet actual costs), they basically lost their only option to deal with such crippling requirements. Basically, Congress raped USPS for no real reason. USPS is a weird hybrid between government and commercial where they get the worst of both worlds (government bureaucracy with no control and commercial self funding with no help government budget). Either make USPS fully government funded or make it fully commercial (no stupid restrictions).

    9. Re:The End of USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $0.25 in 1990 was equivalent to $0.41 in 2010.

    10. Re:The End of USPS by fnj · · Score: 1

      Shhhh. You're giving them ideas.

    11. Re:The End of USPS by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      FedEx, UPS, and the like cherry-pick profitable areas, but also have a far smaller volume than the mail services. USPS has the requirement of delivering all over the country at the same cost, but also has the right to place mail boxes all over the place, something FedEx and UPS can not do. So FedEx has to go and pick up the consignment, increasing their cost significantly.

      Also when delivering letters, FedEx may have a delivery in one out of every 10 homes in a street or less - USPS may have one or more for almost every address. That also makes their operations much more efficient thanks to economies of scale. It's also probably for that reason that I see mailmen routinely do their deliveries by bicycle, while FedEx always comes with a van. Much more expensive to run than a bike, but a necessity because of the relatively large distance between addresses. And of course FedEx specialises in packages, while USPS specialises in letters, which are far lighter and smaller.

      You can't easily compare the two, really. They have overlap in their services, but also operate under very different rules and regulations.

    12. Re:The End of USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As I understand it, both the UK and Japan have privatized their mail delivery. And a generic first class letter cost 46 pence or 80 yen which translates to about 0.80-1.00 US dollars. I think if the USPS was run like a business it would charge about a dollar per letter as well.

    13. Re:The End of USPS by jakeperson · · Score: 1

      This is being a bit disingenuous. While the USPS is getting screwed via mandates, there are deeper issues too. http://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/10k-reports/fy2008.pdf http://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/10k-reports/fy2010.pdf If you look at the USPS financial statements, their revenue was $72.7B in 2006 going up to $74.9B in 2008 but then dropping to $68.0B, $67.0B, and $65.7B over the next three years. Even assuming they funded retiree accounts at the 2006 level ($1.6B) they still lose $2.0B, $2.3B and $4.2B over 2009, 2010, and 2011. Falling revenues and being restricted from lowering costs matter just as much.

    14. Re:The End of USPS by Patch86 · · Score: 3, Informative

      The real problem is that not all deliveries cost the same. If you're a company in downtown Houston, Texas, and you want to mail something to the suburbs in Houston, Texas, the cost will be pretty small. If you want to deliver something to Anchorage, Alaska, the actual costs will be much larger.

      The point of universal postal service is that it allows businesses to treat all customers as equal. Imagine a situation where the cost to buy something from Amazon was dependent on your distance from an Amazon distribution centre; Amazon's business would quickly fall apart as they would be undercut by a hundred local competitors. Same for banks, mailing out bank statements. Or the cost of mailing your Congressman. Maybe that's a good thing, but the government's usual position is that it is not.

      USPS subsidise their tricky long distance deliveries by charging more for their simple local deliveries. If you were to allow private companies to compete on an even keel (but without legally mandating them to provide a universal service), they would simply undercut USPS on the profitable local deliveries, while leaving the taxpayer to carry the can for the expensive deliveries. It's one of those situations where you can't just change it a little bit without massive unintended consequences- if you're going to change it, you're going to need to do a complete overhaul and rethink.

    15. Re:The End of USPS by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Imagine a situation where the cost to buy something from Amazon was dependent on your distance from an Amazon distribution centre

      This position would be more substantial if I had ever received a package from Amazon through USPS. They almost exclusively use UPS for my deliveries.

    16. Re:The End of USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice, now do that for Norway.

    17. Re:The End of USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you consider that 87% of the US population lives in urban areas, it doesn't make such a large difference.
      http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2009/aug/18/percentage-population-living-cities

    18. Re:The End of USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point of universal postal service is that it allows businesses to treat all customers as equal. Imagine a situation where the cost to buy something from Amazon was dependent on your distance from an Amazon distribution centre; Amazon's business would quickly fall apart as they would be undercut by a hundred local competitors.

      ... Surely that's a good thing? If it's more efficient to use lots of local distribution centres than one big one, but government subsidies push you into the less efficient centralised scheme, then that has to be an argument for getting rid of the subsidies? You'd have lots of little local businesses, probably employing more people than Amazon, providing a similar quality of service at lower cost, without the same kind of quasi-monopoly power which Amazon enjoys now. What's not to like?

      (I'm not convinced that making Amazon pay a fair price for postage would change the mechanics so much that their business falls apart, I'm just pointing out that, if it did, that really wouldn't be a disadvantage. I'm also not convinced that lots of little distribution centres is more efficient than one big one, but it's implied by your argument that the local competitors would be able to undercut Amazon out of business.)

    19. Re:The End of USPS by mikechant · · Score: 1

      As I understand it, both the UK and Japan have privatized their mail delivery.

      The UK's mail delivery is *not* privatised.
      It *is* being prepared for privatisation, and as part of that the current regulated 46p 1st class charge will be uncapped and is expected to rise considerably.

      In theory, privatisation is supposed to lead to efficiencies, competition and a better deal for the consumer.
      In practice, in the UK we are being massively ripped off by the various monopolies and cartels (e.g in the water/energy sector) that were created over the last 20-30 years as a result of privatisation. And to put the icing on the cake, the taxpayer subsidies given to the private rail industry are about twice what they were when it was nationalised.

    20. Re:The End of USPS by alexhs · · Score: 2

      What is your point ?

      Maybe you should use statistics that matter, or use more than one and explain how you combine them.

      Percentage of urban population by country

      This statistic is more relevant than yours because distribution network works as a a mesh network of hubs, followed by a star network for delivery, and not some kind of globally meshed network.
      Due to economies of scale, the mesh network costs less to operate, so the most relevant aspect of operating costs is the efficiency of the star network, which improves with local population density, independantly from the global, average population density.

      --
      I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
    21. Re:The End of USPS by sourcerror · · Score: 1

      Imagine a situation where the cost to buy something from Amazon was dependent on your distance from an Amazon distribution centre; Amazon's business would quickly fall apart as they would be undercut by a hundred local competitors.

      Oh, the horror!

    22. Re:The End of USPS by swillden · · Score: 1

      Mail needs to cost more, I'd say the need to jump to $1 minimum.

      Which would just accelerate the move of most traditional mail traffic to e-mail and other Internet-based mechanisms.

      There's been a lot of talk in the comments attached to this article about competition with UPS and FedEx, and about high pension costs the USPS has been stuck with, etc., but none of that is what's really slamming the USPS. What's really doing it is that first class letters are rapidly going away. Personal letters are almost a thing of the past already. Electronic bills have become almost universally available, and some companies have even begun charging a fee for paper delivery. The bread and butter of USPS deliveries is all going on-line.

      We're approaching a point at which we're going to have to either accept that the postal service cannot operate without heavy subsidization, or else we're going to have to allow letter delivery to become a relatively high-priced service, not often used by most people. The latter option pretty much implies that Internet service will become a basic necessity for transacting the ordinary business of life.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    23. Re:The End of USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posten Norge is a state-owned monopoly.

    24. Re:The End of USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Neither my measure (can't be bothered to log in from this terminal) nor the urbanization rate is sufficient on its own. You can have low overall population density but easy delivery when the few people all live in a central location. But you can also have high urbanization, with 87% living in urbanized areas, and still have very difficult delivery if the remaining 13% are equally spread over an extremely large area. Assuming, of course, that you intend to deliver mail to everyone at equal quality at an equal price.

    25. Re:The End of USPS by Hatta · · Score: 0

      In other words, the USPS would be fine if we had single payer health care in the US.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    26. Re:The End of USPS by WillyWanker · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I've said the same thing many times. There isn't a single private business that would be able to survive if it was hamstrung by the same rules and regulations as the Postal Service. They have to fund 75 years of health care and pensions, can't layoff any employees, can't cut salaries or benefits, and can't raise rates without Congressional approval and a rise in the cost of living index (which hasn't happened in 3 years). Any other business would crumble in a heartbeat. The fact the USPS has managed to survive at all is simply amazing and a testament as to how well it really is run. But yeah, you don't ever hear about this stuff on Fox "News", do ya?

    27. Re:The End of USPS by hrvatska · · Score: 1

      Because of the way a 2006 provision forces them to account for future retiree benefits they'll be bankrupt before the end of 5 years.

    28. Re:The End of USPS by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      No one's willing to give them a loan to see over the short term? Or does them being part of the government mean Congress has to OK such a thing (since it would be government debt)?

    29. Re:The End of USPS by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      can't raise rates without Congressional approval and a rise in the cost of living index (which hasn't happened in 3 years).
      I assume this applies only to first class rates, since they definitely raised the rates on other items like postcards and also additional ounces on first class earlier this year. They also are going to raise the first class rate again in January. I am not sure if the gov't is finally admitting to Cost of Living going up though. They haven't admitted to it in recent years, though the actual cost of maintaining your standard of living continues to rise at 5-10% or more per year.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    30. Re:The End of USPS by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      Cost of living went up this year, hence the increases. But it's been stagnant since 2008.

    31. Re:The End of USPS by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Just jack the price of delivery up to its real value... I did a quick lookup at FedEx for sending a package across town... The lowest cost was $7
      How much for them to deliver a letter? Oh, wait, they're not allowed to. Well, then how much is that per ounce? Or more compareable, how much does USPS charge to deliver a package across town? I just did a calculator for a one pound package across town and USPS says $14.89. Fedex says $7.29. UPS says $10.76.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    32. Re:The End of USPS by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Imagine a situation where the cost to buy something from Amazon was dependent on your distance from an Amazon distribution centre; I thought it was? Or are you referring to the cost of the whole product and not just the shipping. If that is the case, that is a dumb argument to make. USPS' whole product IS shipping, whereas only part of the Amazon service is shipping and the shipping is dependent upon where you are. and USPS DOES charge more for shipping depending where you live...on everything but first class mail. And on most things that are not first class mail, USPS is not able to compete with private enterprise.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    33. Re:The End of USPS by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      What did history say about the Roman Empire circa 500AD? That's probably similar to what history will say about the USA in 20 years.

    34. Re:The End of USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    35. Re:The End of USPS by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Imagine a situation where the cost to buy something from Amazon was dependent on your distance from an Amazon distribution centre; Amazon's business would quickly fall apart as they would be undercut by a hundred local competitors.

      I doubt it, in europe the cost of sending stuff has always depended on which countries* the stuff is being sent between. Further amazon don't have anything like the tax advantages over local retailers that they have in the USA**. Neverthless amazon doesn't seem to be having any problems running their buisness in europe

      *countries in europe are comparable in size to US states
      **there is a dodge for low value items involving the channel islands but at least in the UK books are VAT exempt anyway so that dodge is only really useful for DVDs and music (games are usually too high value to qualify)

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    36. Re:The End of USPS by haruchai · · Score: 1

      USPS has been adapting and has been downsizing both their overall workforce and their permanent full-timers for over 2 decades. The ONLY reason they're not profitable is the ridiculous requirement that they fully fund 75 years worth of pensions within 10 years of 2006.

      From http://fulltextreports.com/2011/05/31/crs-u-s-postal-service-workforce-size-and-employment-categories-1990-2010/

      "USPS employed 671,687 persons as of September 30, 2010 (FY2010). USPS’s workforce size has dropped by 171,576 employees (20.3%) in the past 20 years, and USPS had 40,395 (6.0%) fewer employees at the end of FY2010 than it did at the end of FY2009. Since 1990, the career/non-career composition of the USPS’s workforce has also changed. The number of career employees has declined 23.2%, and the number of non-career employees has increased 6.3%.

      Facing financial problems, the USPS recently has instituted a hiring freeze, frozen the pay rate of managers, and offered some employees early retirement options. In FY2010, USPS operated with its smallest workforce in at least 20 years."

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    37. Re:The End of USPS by swillden · · Score: 1

      The ONLY reason they're not profitable is the ridiculous requirement that they fully fund 75 years worth of pensions within 10 years of 2006.

      You honestly think that the 20% decline in the volume of first class mail over the last four years has nothing to do with it?

      The reality is that statistic is just going to continue getting worse, too (or better, depending on your perspective). I'll bet that by 2020, first class mail volume will be no more than 10% of what it was in 2000. And first class mail is the primary revenue generator of the USPS. Even if dropping the pension requirements would get them in the black right now, they'd still be in the red in a few short years, because the biggest piece of their business is simply disappearing.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    38. Re:The End of USPS by haruchai · · Score: 1

      A decline is volume is a big factor but they've also been cutting staff over the years. But the payment they've been saddled with making into the pension fund is about the same or larger than their overall loss for the last few years.

      I fully support residential mail delivery should dropping to 3 times per week - Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday is my suggestion. And a change in rates for letter mail is called for, perhaps dividing the country into zones and having asymmetric rates for rural areas. Perhaps they could also diversify into other areas; after all the world's largest bank by deposits is the Japan Post Group.

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
  4. Good plan by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They're going to encourage people to use their services by dramatically reducing the service quality they offer.

    1. Re:Good plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't really think they are doing this by choice, they are not run by the government, they are government regulated and required to run but they are still a private business and they are needing to do something to keep afloat due to the decreased business they have been getting due to stuff like Email, Facebook, Fedex and UPS.

      Of course if they actually succumbed and become an actual government run service and ran off taxes instead of how they are run now, all this would become a moot point.

      The fact that such a vital service isn't an actual government provided service and hasn't turned to outright greed is commendable but the fact remains that the nation NEEDs a service like this to run correctly and this is 1 area that there needs to be a steady, stable government run service, allow others to compete with it, but there needs to always be something that we can rely on 100%.

    2. Re:Good plan by Anubis+IV · · Score: 2

      Or, phrased differently, they're going to cut their distribution costs in half (from 500 processing centers to 250) while providing virtually the same service in 58% of cases and only slightly diminished service for the other 42%. Considering I wasn't even aware of the fact that letters I mailed to someone local to my area would arrive next-day, I have to wonder how much others will miss it. I just figured they all took 2-3 days, and would've never noticed a different if this hadn't been posted here.

    3. Re:Good plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course if they actually succumbed and become an actual government run service and ran off taxes instead of how they are run now, all this would become a moot point.

      I don't know of any private business that doesn't have to pay property tax!

    4. Re:Good plan by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      well using their services in the past it was never really a compelling point

    5. Re:Good plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reminds me of Dr Beeching's operation on the British Railway network: Lets make start making a profit again, by closing every branch line, then people have to use a car or bus to get to the railway station.

      Rendering a service near useless DOES NOT make it more profitable!

    6. Re:Good plan by alexhs · · Score: 1

      To put things in perspective :

      French Post introduced a new rate a few months ago, called the green stamp (link in French, use your favourite translator if you care).
      Before, there was the green economical stamp (0,55€), advertised for a delivery in 4 days, and the red express stamp (0,60€), advertised for a delivery in 24 hours.
      The new green ecological stamp costs 0,57€ and is advertised for a delivery in 48h.
      At the same time they introduced the ecological stamp, they switched the default from express to ecological, which means that almost nobody uses the express rate anymore.

      --
      I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
    7. Re:Good plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why everyone thought Netflix had a special deal with the USPS since everything arrived the day after it was sent. Just first-class postage.

    8. Re:Good plan by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      the government can't even afford to provide the services it has. The reason for the decline in revenue of the USPS is they are being used *much less*, there are 21st century alternatives for most of what it does, especially for anything you imagine the nation needs. Most mail is business generated "junk mail". That doesn't need next day delivery, in fact once a week would be fine for that recycle-bin fodder. Personal letters? those too can wait a week, if not send an e-mail. Packages? UPS and FEDEX. What vital thing does 1-3 day postage mail do? Nothing, that's what.

    9. Re:Good plan by hrvatska · · Score: 1

      My daughter lives about 75 miles from me and I was aware that if I mailed a small package first class to her it usually got there the next day, never more than two days later. It's quite convenient, and we've come to expect it. When I first became aware of this level of performance I was amazed that the USPS could do it at the price they were charging.

    10. Re:Good plan by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Mine has never arrived next-day. It's always been 2-3 day where I'm at, both when receiving and sending. Guess I'm just too far from Netflix's distribution centers. Interesting factoid though. Thanks.

  5. It's a SERVICE by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The sad thing is to hear people bitch about the raising cost of a First Class letter - sent *ANYWHERE* for how much? 50 cents or so? Oh yeah, that's WAY out of line...

    People, the US Mail is a *service* to the public, there's no way it can every pay for itself and still move mail at the current rates. We fund this *service* with tax money, *not* postage.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      If are tax dollars aren't being used to kill someone or throw them in jail then it's just inefficiency and overreaching government!

    2. Re:It's a SERVICE by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The sadder thing is that the USPS's peak delivery year was 2006. Maybe there's been a very substantial downturn since then, but the internet was hardly new.

      What is new is a 2006 law requiring the USPS to bank their employees' retirement money 75 years in advance. Since then they've been paying the treasury $5,000,000,000 per year, to cover the retirement of people who haven't even been born yet.

      Some people think the Congress did this to kill the USPS.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anubis+IV · · Score: 4, Informative

      You do realize that the postal service is mandated that it needs to be able to support itself? And that it's been doing so just fine for quite some time? And that none of our taxes have gone to it in any significant amount in recent history? Just because Congress governs it doesn't mean that we provide for its funding.

      The USPS has not directly received taxpayer-dollars since the early 1980s with the minor exception of subsidies for costs associated with the disabled and overseas voters. Revenue in the 2000s has been dropping sharply due to declining mail volume, prompting the postal service to look to other sources of revenue while cutting costs to reduce its budget deficit.

      From Wikipedia

    4. Re:It's a SERVICE by DesScorp · · Score: 0

      The sad thing is to hear people bitch about the raising cost of a First Class letter - sent *ANYWHERE* for how much? 50 cents or so? Oh yeah, that's WAY out of line...

      People, the US Mail is a *service* to the public, there's no way it can every pay for itself and still move mail at the current rates. We fund this *service* with tax money, *not* postage.

      While I completely agree that the Post Office can never be profitable (mainly because it has to carry out Congressional mandates that private services do not), people have every right to complain about it. It's a bastardized organization that tries to act like a private shipping company, while at the same time under public shackles. USPS tries to do too much and be too many things. It should do two things: deliver letters and slow-boat packages. And due to the realities of labor costs, they should do it just a few days a week. And even if you're the biggest fan of USPS in the world, you have to admit that the tide of technology is against them anyway. More and more people do electronic commerce. The only way to make the post office dominant again is to make it a true monopoly by banning FedEx and UPS.

      There will always be a need for a small post organization. But reality is increasingly shrinking it to a very small, very specialized legacy service. Paper mail is the serial port of written communications. A few people will always have a requirement for it, but most people moved on to USB years ago (hey, it beats another damn car analogy).

      --
      Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    5. Re:It's a SERVICE by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 0

      You must be new to this country. Around here, if it's not sustained by a profit motive then it's communist and stupid.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    6. Re:It's a SERVICE by BrianRoach · · Score: 2

      Actually, no, it's not. At least not for the last 30 years or so.

      The only taxpayer money that goes to the USPS is ~ $100mm a year to cover things mostly for the disabled and overseas voters (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service). They are only expected to break even.

      And therein lies the problem. The basic fact of the matter is that e-mail has eroded their bread-and-butter; people needing to communicate with another person. Bills/invoices are also going this way. While not everyone uses e-mail, enough do that this is a buggy-whip manufacturing situation. Eventually there will simply be little reason for it to exist.

      The fact that they suck at delivering actual packages when compared to UPS pretty much rules them out of that business. They're slower, don't provide adequate or accurate tracking, etc, etc.

      Oh, and in new neighborhoods like mine? UPS, FedEx, etc actually bring things to my *house*, not a community mailbox a 1/4 mile away.

      What it comes down to is either it needs to be completely overhauled and shrunk to fit today's reality, or be subsidized heavily by taxpayer money.

    7. Re:It's a SERVICE by Ben_R_R · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, 0% of the USPS funding is through taxes. As an entity, it is entirely self supporting. See: http://about.usps.com/who-we-are/postal-facts/welcome.htm#H12

    8. Re:It's a SERVICE by Hadlock · · Score: 3, Informative

      Considering the condition Social Security is in, it seems to wise to plan ahead like that. Social security as we know it will be gone, or severely neutered by the time I reach retirement age. There's nothing wrong with making long term plans; you can't put everything on the national credit card forever.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    9. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Some people think the Congress did this to kill the USPS.

      Wouldn't be the first time. Shame. The USPS could actually make money, and provide great services which are greatly in demand, and largely unfulfilled... But between Congress and their labor union, pffft.

    10. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This just isn't true. The USPS was historically self sufficient and ought to be so even today. However, Congress has tied its arms: * When they were making profits, by law, they had to "invest" them in US government bonds. * They have to jump an incredible series of hoops before they can close any local office, again, by law. * Most outrageously, they were required to pay-in-advance 75 years' worth of worker retirement benefits, into another special fund. Basically, the US Congress has driven the postal service into the ground. The big drop in mail volumes would hurt any business, but nobody in the private world has to put up with shit like that. Usually people suggest that all of this is a concerted effort from above to drive yet another government enterprise into the ground. I want to assume stupidity instead of malice, but, I also know that UPS and FedEx are both very politically active. Anyway, you have the right intentions, it seems, as the Constitution does include mail service. It's just that the market does actually bear the cost of a well-functioning USPS, if not for our elected representatives going to new heights to make a mockery of effective government.

    11. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, actually, the USPS does not receive tax dollars. You can look it up.

    12. Re:It's a SERVICE by captainkoloth · · Score: 5, Informative

      The USPS is totally self funded and profitable. The problem is Congress gave them a near-impossible pension funding mandate so that they could borrow against those pension funds. It's more like the government is leeching off of USPS. Not the other way around

    13. Re:It's a SERVICE by RalphSlate · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The USPS sucks at delivering packages? And doesn't provide adequate tracking? What country do you live in?

      * UPS does not typically deliver on the weekend unless the sender pays extra. USPS does.

      * I can go to the USPS website to track my packages.

      * Anecdotally, UPS packages seem to take longer to deliver than USPS. They don't seem to be able to accurately predict delivery time either. With USPS, a priority package arrives in 3 days, and often 2.

      * If I am required to sign for a USPS package and I'm not home, I just have to drive to post office within 1/4 mile of my house. If I miss a UPS delivery, I have to drive 5 miles to the next town to their shipping terminal.

      I'll take the USPS any day over UPS. The reason USPS is hurting is that UPS is allowed to cherry-pick the profitable package business while avoiding the daily mail responsibility. Seems like in order for the competition to be fair, anyone competing should have to play by the same rules.

    14. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Post Office isn't funded the same way that other Government agencies are. It is expected to be self sufficient, which makes the fact that you get the service you do on the cost of postage even more astonishing.

    15. Re:It's a SERVICE by Uberbah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Social security as we know it will be gone, or severely neutered by the time I reach retirement age.

      Only if you let corrupt politicians take it from you. There's nothing wrong with Social Security. At all.

      The "crisis" bullshit is propaganda to get you to accept cuts now so they can continue to use the 'trust fund' surpluses to fund tax cuts for the rich and the military-industrial-congressional-survellance-contractor complex.

    16. Re:It's a SERVICE by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Assuming incompetence before malice is usually a good practice, but not necessarily when referring to Congress. They knowingly and willfully structure accounting to hide as much as they can. It would not surprise me to find out the pre-pay requirement for employee healthcare was structured solely for the purpose of helping disguise the budget deficit.

      I don't mean the above to say it was meant to disguise ALL the deficit; that would be sheer stupidity to claim. But you can certainly shrink the appearance of a gaping hole with nickel-and-dime accounting. Just look at how much companies like Enron and Worldcom were able to cover up, and how long they were able to cover it up.

    17. Re:It's a SERVICE by QuantumRiff · · Score: 2

      Why not make congress or hte military or amtrak or any other government agency do this then?

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    18. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is not funded with tax money.

    19. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod parent to +50

    20. Re:It's a SERVICE by khallow · · Score: 2

      Only if you let corrupt politicians take it from you. There's nothing wrong with Social Security. At all.

      We're about 80 years too late for that. Social Security had the seeds of the current problems in it from the beginning. Plus there have been innumerable projections of Social Security. They all show the same thing. It doesn't work in the long term, unless benefits are cut or Social Security taxes increased.

      The "crisis" bullshit is propaganda to get you to accept cuts now so they can continue to use the 'trust fund' surpluses to fund tax cuts for the rich and the military-industrial-congressional-survellance-contractor complex.

      This is why I advocate ending Social Security. It's been one of the chief bribes for the "military-industrial-congressional-survellance-contractor complex". My view is that if you want to end the corruption, then you need to end the voter bribes as well.

    21. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Social security as we know it will be gone, or severely neutered by the time I reach retirement age.

      Only if you let corrupt politicians take it from you. There's nothing wrong with Social Security. At all.

      The "crisis" bullshit is propaganda to get you to accept cuts now so they can continue to use the 'trust fund' surpluses to fund tax cuts for the rich and the military-industrial-congressional-survellance-contractor complex.

      You're kidding, right?

      The "lockbox" was a hoax; Social Security has no funds banked ahead of time. All of its "surplus" is already immediately spent on other things.

      We are almost at the point where it becomes revenue negative, and then it starts falling apart for real, as benefits have to be reduced to equal income.

      I have known for 20 years that it would not exist for me, and I've just been waiting to see if any politician will be honest enough to tell me so. I was ready then, and I am ready now, for someone to honestly tell me that I have to pay to cover the people before me, but I won't ever get my benefit. I know I was already robbed by the previous generation. I just want someone to fess up and apologize for it.

    22. Re:It's a SERVICE by overdoze · · Score: 2

      Social Security is in no "crisis", it's actually solvent until around *2037* where the payroll tax base will be sufficient enough to cover only about 75% of promised benefits until *2085*. Since the 1980s when the Great Income Divide began between the super wealthy and the rest of us, Middle class incomes have also stagnated for the past thirty years. Considering the immense concentration of "trickle down" wealth over the same time period (62% of income gains earned from 2002-2007 went to the top 1% _alone_), the payroll tax capped at around 110k/year doesn't touch the immense gains that the richest in the country reaped, and along with the aforementioned stagnant Middle class gains, a future budget shortfall is created from the lost revenue. The bipartisan effort to "reform" Social Security with cuts is logically absurd: "we are facing shortfalls in the future, so to prevent them we must achieve the equivalent by making cuts *now*."

      http://www.salon.com/2011/07/08/social_security_deficit/singleton/

    23. Re:It's a SERVICE by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      Only if you let corrupt politicians take it from you. There's nothing wrong with Social Security. At all.

      I remember in the '90s, the Republicans wanted to "save" it by stealing all the money, and the Democrats wanted to "save" it by only stealing 2/3 of the money.

      Oh, and back then a lot of cons in Congress were saying it was about to collapse. Just like last decade. And this decade.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    24. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you're wrong. The USPS is overwhelmingly funded by sales and services. While they do receive some small funding from the government for handling overseas ballot mailings, services for the blind, and additional services provided to state and local child support enforcement agencies. (Source: http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/consumerawareness/a/uspsabout.htm)

      Before you go spouting your mouth off, you should get the facts right.

      (And yes, I'm aware the USPS has received loans from the government, however the issue here is that as a business, they are expected to pay those back. We do not fund the post office with tax dollars.)

    25. Re:It's a SERVICE by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 1

      The Libertarians and Republicans will never believe that.

      Cite all the documentation and facts you want about social security revenue and solvency. But you are never going to convince them. They are adamant that its broken and bankrupt.

      They want to give all that money to the motherfuckers who broke the economy to begin with.

      --
      If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
    26. Re:It's a SERVICE by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      Yes, there is something wrong with Social Security. It assumes that the population will continually be growing at a given rate - and that's why it's a Ponzi scheme. Back when SS was created, the US population was growing rather rapidly and the elderly didn't tend to live particularly long (since we didn't have all of the medical treatments to keep someone alive in a hospital bed for years). Now that people live much longer and there are far fewer people paying in per retiree, the system is collapsing. Contrary to popular myth, it's not supposed to be a "retirement savings" - it's direct wealth transfers from the younger members of society to the elderly.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    27. Re:It's a SERVICE by Ichijo · · Score: 2

      I can go to the USPS website to track my packages.

      Sort of. If it's Express Mail, it shows you point-by-point tracking details. All other trackable mail services only tell you when it went out for delivery.

      The reason USPS is hurting is that UPS is allowed to cherry-pick the profitable package business while avoiding the daily mail responsibility.

      False. UPS is not allowed to deliver first class mail.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    28. Re:It's a SERVICE by mentil · · Score: 1

      They will continue to pillage the trust fund whether people 'accept' the benefit cuts or not, and that won't change until the NRAARP marches on Washington saying "you can take my Social Security when you pry it from my cold, dead hands!"
      Disgruntled whining can be safely ignored, there needs to be some implication of something at least resembling a voting bloc to have real power.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    29. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They hate Social Security because it's the most fiscally sound part of the entire federal budget.

    30. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they're not bringing in $$$. Congress spends money. Military spends money. Amtrak doesn't make money.
      Post Office actually makes money.
      Guess who's going to have to pay.

    31. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually meant as a safety net, i.e. a welfare program. Not everyone can afford to save for retirement (especially people who are barely making ends meet to begin with), and it's better than leaving a bunch of indigent seniors out on the street. Or worse ... forcing them move in with their children! Or is that what having children is all about?

      The fact that it's an entitlement program with benefits based on personal income is to get people to go along with forking over a portion of their paycheck, since people are apparently not too fond of welfare programs unless they're the ones benefiting. On the other hand, its effectiveness as a welfare program has been compromised by the fact that Congress has been siphoning it to pay for other government projects. The payroll tax is also limited because it's capped, and it also doesn't cover non-payroll sources of income like capital gains.

      Now how to actually pay for it? Who knows.

    32. Re:It's a SERVICE by roman_mir · · Score: 0

      Pure nonsense. USPS is not self supporting anymore than SS is.

      For USPS to be self supporting, the prices at least would have to keep up with the rising inflation, which is 11-15% a year for 20 years now, that didn't happen, it's not allowed to happen by Congress.

      The prices for postage with USPS have to be much higher than prices of UPS and Fedex for USPS to be self supporting. Their prices are completely subsidized with all the air mail costs and other costs being subsidized, the only reason why gov't can pretend it's self supporting is because gov't is just as good at shady accounting as Madoff was.

    33. Re:It's a SERVICE by 9jack9 · · Score: 1

      What is new is a 2006 law requiring the USPS to bank their employees' retirement money 75 years in advance

      it seems to wise to plan ahead like that

      You're right.

      The government should require all government agencies to plan ahead like that. What you say, Mr. Government Accountant? No government agency could begin to fund such a thing? Interesting.

      No doubt the private sector has already integrated such wisdom into the economy, given that the invisible hand guarantees the greatest good for the greatest number. What you say, Mr. Private-sector Accountant? No company could begin to fund such a thing? Interesting.

    34. Re:It's a SERVICE by geoskd · · Score: 1

      The USPS sucks at delivering packages? And doesn't provide adequate tracking? What country do you live in?

      * UPS does not typically deliver on the weekend unless the sender pays extra. USPS does.

      Not for much longer

      * I can go to the USPS website to track my packages.

      Only the premium ones. UPS and FEDEX provide tracking for all packages in extreme detail

      * Anecdotally, UPS packages seem to take longer to deliver than USPS. They don't seem to be able to accurately predict delivery time either. With USPS, a priority package arrives in 3 days, and often 2.

      UPS offers guaranteed time in transit on *all* packages. not just premium services. USPS does not guarantee delivery on anything.

      * If I am required to sign for a USPS package and I'm not home, I just have to drive to post office within 1/4 mile of my house. If I miss a UPS delivery, I have to drive 5 miles to the next town to their shipping terminal.

      Only until the USPS closes down the 50% of sort facilities, then you'll have to drive the same 5 miles...

      I'll take the USPS any day over UPS. The reason USPS is hurting is that UPS is allowed to cherry-pick the profitable package business while avoiding the daily mail responsibility. Seems like in order for the competition to be fair, anyone competing should have to play by the same rules.

      UPS delivers to everywhere the USPS does every day. Any valid US postal address in the US (if the fire dept and police can find you, UPS will), and bunches of places that the USPS only delivers to as P.O. Boxes.

      -=Geoskd

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    35. Re:It's a SERVICE by geoskd · · Score: 1

      Actually, 0% of the USPS funding is through taxes. As an entity, it is entirely self supporting. See: http://about.usps.com/who-we-are/postal-facts/welcome.htm#H12

      Except for the billions of dollars in no interest loans from the fed. The USPS currently owes the fed in excess of USD 13Bn in 0% interest loans. If the USPS goes under, the tax payers get to foot that bill... In the mean time, the USPS is not paying a single penny of interest on that money. Its a subsidy any way you try to hide what its called. Just a few years ago, congress voted to excuse the USPS from $4Bn worth of those loans. Just because they claim to be self sufficient doesn't make it true.

      -=Geoskd

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    36. Re:It's a SERVICE by geoskd · · Score: 1

      Even after you take out the pension costs entirely, the USPS is still loosing almost a billion per year over the last 4 years. Their last year in the black was 2006, and that was only because they weren't funding their pension properly, which is why congress stepped in and changed the pension requirements for the USPS.

      -=Geoskd

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    37. Re:It's a SERVICE by RalphSlate · · Score: 1

      * I can go to the USPS website to track my packages.

      Only the premium ones. UPS and FEDEX provide tracking for all packages in extreme detail

      That doesn't seem like a fair response; UPS and FEDEX don't offer non-premium services.

    38. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Considering the condition Social Security is in, it seems to wise to plan ahead like that."

      You mean like how it's solvent until 2038?

      If only we would have planned ahead wrt insolvency of the big banks... but no, they get bailed out.

    39. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which 2006 law?

    40. Re:It's a SERVICE by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      Social Security was plundered long before the 2008 banking crisis

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    41. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People, the US Mail is a *service* to the public, there's no way it can every pay for itself and still move mail at the current rates. We fund this *service* with tax money, *not* postage.

      I'm pretty sure the USPS receives zero tax dollars.

    42. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop lying, it's current employees, not future employees.

    43. Re:It's a SERVICE by RedHat+Rocky · · Score: 1

      Given that I average 3-4 pieces of crap mail EVERY DAY, I simply don't understand how they can be losing this much money.

      The demand is there, the need is there. Someone needs to kick their spending in the shorts.

      --
      Anything is possible given time and money.
    44. Re:It's a SERVICE by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Not to mention, Congress picking on the USPS distracts our attention away from the real problems like: Medicare expansion, Corporate welfare, Social programs that have little evidence of actually meeting their mandates, Defense contractors who work on stuff outside of actual defense, Lack of true bank reforms, The possible upcoming incentive package that will mostly benefit banks and large corporations, Three different government programs that provide health benefits to the poor, the elderly, and the military veterans (why not consolidate?), The multiple government agencies that do similar tasks, The creation of new government agencies that supervise an almost as new government agency who was tasked to watch other government agencies (i.e. DHS->FBI,CIA,NSA,TSA,DOD, USCP, ISICE, USS, FEMA, USCG). I tried to give equal blame to both sides of the political spectrum.

      Yes our time and effort is best spent dismantling the USPS.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    45. Re:It's a SERVICE by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Actually, 0% of the USPS funding is through taxes.

      Except for the few billion dollars worth of mail trucks Congress bought them a few years back.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    46. Re:It's a SERVICE by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      near-impossible pension funding mandate

      Are the funding requirements in excess of their obligations?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    47. Re:It's a SERVICE by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      Practically the only thing Obama has done in office is to suspend SS payroll deductions...

    48. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, we want to stop that money from being stolen from our paychecks so we can actually invest for the future rather than subsidizing the people who were too lazy to care for themselves.

    49. Re:It's a SERVICE by Alomex · · Score: 1

      UPS offers guaranteed time in transit on *all* packages. not just premium services. USPS does not guarantee delivery on anything.

      They might offer "guaranteed" delivery, yet of the last five packages I sent none made it in less than a week. They gave fake excuses such as address was incorrect (it wasn't) and person wasn't at home (person was at home).

      UPS sucks.

    50. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And doesn't provide adequate tracking

      It *USED* to work. Then around 2008 it broke then never has worked since. I can on their competitors sites see every leg and see if their estimates are way off or fairly close. It many times updates after I got the package. I have seen up to 2-3 days later. USPS tracking blows compared to the competition. I'm sorry.

      Other than that I have no issue with USPS.

      You know what else makes packages show up nicely? Go out and talk to your delivery guy. Be nice. It goes a long way. Dont treat them as scum.

    51. Re:It's a SERVICE by khallow · · Score: 1

      Cite all the documentation and facts you want about social security revenue and solvency.

      If this actually had been done rather than assert delusional propaganda, then we'd see a position closer to the one that libertarians and some Republicans take. Social Security suffers from several major problems.

      First, it's a mandatory program in a democracy. Forcing people to do things is fundamentally inimical to a democracy. Second, it does a poor job of the things it's supposed to do. Even with the crap that the US economy has had to undergo over the past 10 years, it'd still be much better to invest in the stock market or buy a house than put it into Social Security.

      Third, it makes US labor roughly 15% more expensive than it'd otherwise be. Fourth, it's primary purpose has always been more money for what the grandparent calls the "military-industrial-congressional-survellance-contractor complex". In the 60s through to the 80s, it was providing something like hundreds of billions of dollars extra per year that Congress could spend on pork and other such things.

      In other words, it's a bribe for the older generations to let Congress spend more money.

      Cite all the documentation and facts you want about social security revenue and solvency. But you are never going to convince them. They are adamant that its broken and bankrupt.

      All of the documentation and facts includes many projections which show that Social Security benefits will need to be cut back in order to balance the federal budget.

      They want to give all that money to the motherfuckers who broke the economy to begin with.

      Or we could just not take it in the first place. Then we'd be giving the money to the people who are making the economy as we speak.

    52. Re:It's a SERVICE by khallow · · Score: 1

      It's actually meant as a safety net, i.e. a welfare program.

      Let me point out the obvious. It works poorly as a safety net. If they really wanted a program that keeps granny from eating catfood, then they should have made it needs-based.

      The fact that it's an entitlement program with benefits based on personal income is to get people to go along with forking over a portion of their paycheck, since people are apparently not too fond of welfare programs unless they're the ones benefiting.

      In other words, if we didn't force people to participate, then nobody would. A huge sign that Social Security should never have existed in the first place.

      Now how to actually pay for it? Who knows.

      OF COURSE, you don't have a clue. It's simple. Cut benefits and raise taxes until it can linger a few more generations and harm the US's future for another century or so. That will work.

      Or we can get rid of the program (that is, cut benefits and taxes eventually to zero) with some period of winding down for the people who were dependent on it, and get rid of this unhealthy drag on the US economy and its citizens.

    53. Re:It's a SERVICE by pedrop357 · · Score: 1

      When private companies get tax breaks, people call them subsidies. Well, the USPS gets massive subsidies compared to any other company-no local taxes, no vehicle taxes, they also don't pay parking tickets or tolls, etc.

      If a Congressman proposed to directly and completely exempt a company or industry from all taxes and fees, it would be called a subsidy (and would generate considerable outrage). Whether or not it's appropriate to subsidize the USPS is a separate matter, but they are being subsidized.

    54. Re:It's a SERVICE by lightknight · · Score: 1

      Of course, that's what libertarians are about, you know, giving money to corrupt industry leaders and politicians, and bailing out huge banks. - Sarcasm, to the 9th degree.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    55. Re:It's a SERVICE by lightknight · · Score: 1

      Law of unintended consequences.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    56. Re:It's a SERVICE by lightknight · · Score: 1

      UPS Ground?

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    57. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UPS does not typically deliver on the weekend unless the sender pays extra. USPS does.

      Big deal, most people don't need delivery on the weekend anyway.

      I can go to the USPS website to track my packages.

      I can do that at UPS also, and I've never had any problems getting an accurate day of delivery.

      Anecdotally, UPS packages seem to take longer to deliver than USPS.

      I have had Priority Mail packages that took 2 weeks to get delivered.

      If I am required to sign for a USPS package and I'm not home, I just have to drive to post office...

      UPS attempts redelivery up to 3 times. And I've had USPS packages that required a signature get sent back because I was not at home one time. They don't always hold them.

      The reason USPS is hurting is that UPS is allowed to cherry-pick the profitable package business while avoiding the daily mail responsibility.

      UPS cannot deliver daily mail BY FEDERAL LAW.

    58. Re:It's a SERVICE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to Richard Fisher of the Dallas Federal Reserve, as of 2008 the unfunded liabilities of Social Security totaled $13.6 trillion. To pay out what has been promised but has no currently existing funding mechanism requires roughly the country's entire GDP. http://www.dallasfed.org/news/speeches/fisher/2008/fs080528.cfm

      Nothing's wrong?

    59. Re:It's a SERVICE by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      there's no way it can every pay for itself and still move mail at the current rates.
      You're right. Let's cut them back to $0.25. They seemed to do better back when it was a quarter. Of course, stuff cost maybe 20% less back then.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    60. Re:It's a SERVICE by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      There's nothing wrong with Social Security. At all.
      The only thing wrong with Social Security was that it was started at all. Once started, it can't be gotten ridden of, and unless we can find a Moore's law for GDP, at some point it is going to fail, but conveniently enough that is some point in the future. Those guys would have made good CEOs.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    61. Re:It's a SERVICE by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      There's nothing wrong with Social Security. At all.
      What does this mean? They are still deducting SS from MY paycheck.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    62. Re:It's a SERVICE by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Isn't not charging them money that they would normally have to pay pretty much the same thing as giving them money? From the economics side of thing, it works out the same way.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    63. Re:It's a SERVICE by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      Of course, that's what libertarians are about, you know, giving money to corrupt industry leaders and politicians, and bailing out huge banks. - Sarcasm, to the 9th degree.

      Back in the day, libertarianism was about liberty. These days it's just about guns and unbridled capitalism.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    64. Re:It's a SERVICE by suutar · · Score: 1

      which is somewhat less than what they've been required to sock away for the '75-year retirement' plan Congress dropped on them in '06. If they hadn't had that requirement, they wouldn't have that debt...

    65. Re:It's a SERVICE by airdweller · · Score: 0

      Just 2? Mods, wake up!

    66. Re:It's a SERVICE by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      I should have said "partially suspend". You should be paying 1/3 less towards your retirement

    67. Re:It's a SERVICE by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      I should have said "partially suspend". You should be paying 1/3 less towards your retirement
      Oh, yes, it definitely went down to 4.2%. The company still has to pay 6.2%, so still about 10.5% of my salary is going to fund SS. However, I am not putting 1/3 less toward my retirement, just toward SS. Thanks to this change, the amount going toward my retirement has INCREASED.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    68. Re:It's a SERVICE by lightknight · · Score: 1

      Still is, but since we have an election (here in the US) coming up shortly, I've developed an allergy to everything even remotely political.

      While I don't mind my political (or any, for that matter) views being challenged (and either confirmed or mended, as the occasion merits), I am loathe to spend time with people with whom logic and reasoning (let alone science, math, or philosophy) is as a forgotten third-removed cousin, even among people who agree with my views.

      I'm just not a fan of the NFL way we are running politics.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    69. Re:It's a SERVICE by Pseudonym+Authority · · Score: 1
      Fuck off you idiot.

      For USPS to be self supporting, the prices at least would have to keep up with the rising inflation, which is 11-15% a year for 20 years now, that didn't happen, it's not allowed to happen by Congress.

      The prices for postage with USPS have to be much higher than prices of UPS and Fedex for USPS to be self supporting.

      Nonsense, being self supporting has nothing to do with inflation, nor does the prices. How in the fuck would you even make that connection? You will resort to anything, even blatant lies and nonsense to make your `argument', won't you? Typical Randian cultist.

    70. Re:It's a SERVICE by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Fuck off you idiot.

      , no, you are the idiot who should 'fuck off'.

      Nonsense, being self supporting has nothing to do with inflation,

      - obviously it does, you moron, as the union wages are tied to inflation adjustments and thus the prices must also be inflation adjusted, if they are not, then the enterprise becomes a money loser.

      Of-course USPS has been losing money for a very long time and to deal with it, they've been cutting their costs. They used to deliver 7 days a week, 2 times a day. That ended long ago, obviously they couldn't afford that many employees and shifts. Now they are selling 'forever stamps', which is the only reason they were able to raise 200 million this year - people buying stamps as an inflation hedge. Of-course this will kill USPS later on, as they won't be able to sell more expensive stamps and will have to honor the 'forever' stamp to send the packages around, but they will be bailed out by the Fed, everybody gets bailed out.

      But what would you know, dumb ass?

    71. Re:It's a SERVICE by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      Considering the condition Social Security is in, it seems to wise to plan ahead like that. Social security as we know it will be gone, or severely neutered by the time I reach retirement age. There's nothing wrong with making long term plans; you can't put everything on the national credit card forever.

      So then Congress should require the US Govt. to pre-fund all social security for the next 75 years as well. Fair is fair after all.

      They don't because this move wasn't about fiscal responsibility at all.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    72. Re:It's a SERVICE by ULTRAJOE · · Score: 1

      False. UPS is not allowed to deliver first class mail.

      what do you mean, "False"??? that's exactly the point he's trying to make!

    73. Re:It's a SERVICE by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      Can you just directly link to whatever it is you read, rather than making vague references to it?

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    74. Re:It's a SERVICE by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Because you'd prefer the elderly to die in the streets?

    75. Re:It's a SERVICE by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Disgruntled whining can be safely ignored, there needs to be some implication of something at least resembling a voting bloc to have real power.

      That's why the two parties have the game no nicely rigged. For 2012, your choices will be 1) A Democrat that wants to cut Social Security or 2) a Republican that wants to cut Social Security.

      The actual desires of the American people can be safely ignored.

    76. Re:It's a SERVICE by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Yes, there is something wrong with Social Security. It assumes that the population will continually be growing at a given rate - and that's why it's a Ponzi scheme.

      False. The whole reason we have a "trust fund" in the first place was to pay for the Boomers. Where are the Boomers going to be when the "trust fund" runs out? Dead, mostly. Before we had a "trust fund", Social Security was a "paygo" system - money coming in from current workers was sent straight back out to retired workers, and that's what we'll go back to that after the Boomers are gone. It's literally impossible for Social Security to go bankrupt as money will always be coming in from payroll taxes, and is forbidden by law to add to the deficit.

      This was planned for. Think tanks, Republicans and now Democrats have been lying to you. The shame is now on you if you choose to keep being fooled.

    77. Re:It's a SERVICE by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Let me point out the obvious. It works poorly as a safety net. If they really wanted a program that keeps granny from eating catfood, then they should have made it needs-based.

      And let me point out the obvious: this is just more Randian propaganda designed to whittle away at Social Security.

      It works poorly as a safety net.

      It keeps millions of elderly from going homeless and without food. It has an amazingly low overhead. It has no chance of being stolen by Goldman Sachs.

      If they really wanted a program that keeps granny from eating catfood, then they should have made it needs-based.

      Nonsense. Social Security isn't just a safety net, it's insurance against getting old. You pay in, you get old, you collect. It's that simple. Would you try and make car insurance needs-based as well? Sorry, Mr. Rich Guy, we know you've been paying your premiums for 40 years, but you'll have to eat the loss of your stolen Lexus because you can afford it.

      Applying needs-testing to Social Security will turn it from an insurance program into a welfare program - and we all know how you Randians hate welfare programs.

      Finally, Social Security benefits are paid out on a progressive scale - you get more back in benefits from the first dollar you paid into Social Security than the last dollar you paid in.

      In other words, if we didn't force people to participate, then nobody would. A huge sign that Social Security should never have existed in the first place.

      Question: do you guys actually believe any of this stuff you throw out? Social Security is one of the most popular government programs ever created - if not the most popular - and messing with it has long been known as the "third rail of politics". As in any politician that touches it will be electrocuted.

    78. Re:It's a SERVICE by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Of course, that's what libertarians are about, you know, giving money to corrupt industry leaders and politicians, and bailing out huge banks. - Sarcasm, to the 9th degree.

      Batshit irrelevant to the subject of Social Security, to the 9nth degree. Care to try again, this time without the red herring and attempted deflection?

  6. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What people are still reading paper books ?
    Silly man, of course people still send non electronic messages.
    Good old fashoined paper letters are PRIVATE.
    e-mail is not private, and good luck getting your contacts to use pgp or s-mime.
    e-mail is best effort, paper mail on the other hand is guaranteed delivery (and for registered mail it leaves a paper trail).
    e-mail is so impersonal, hand written letters on the other hand are much more personal.
    Congresspeople don't give a fuck about e-mail petitions, they hear on the other hand the power of hand written letters.
    Etc....

    TV didn't kill the radio, Internet didn't kill the radio; why do you think that email will kill paper letters ?

    Of course if all you write is in sms-style then yes using paper is a waste of resources.

  7. Wedding invitations & Birthday Cards by Hadlock · · Score: 1

    The last 10 non-bill mail I recieved were wedding invitations and birthday cards. It's trivially easy to find someone on facebook or similar and email them. I can't imagine why I would write a letter these days except for the novelty of it - in which case it's generally not time sensitive. It's not like people are writing to their doctor for twice weekly consultations on their condition and expect a response by mail.
     
    It's been proven for at least a decade that if you absolutely, positively need it there tomorrow, people are willing to pay $13-25 to make sure it gets there through carriers like UPS and FedEx.
     
    It's worth pointing out - kudos to the US Postal system for not taking taxpayer money to prop up a self-admitted outdated business model. It's sad to see those jobs disappear, but it's a real mark of leadership that they are taking initiative and solving their own problems. I wish the same could be said for other parts of our government.

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
    1. Re:Wedding invitations & Birthday Cards by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      It's been proven for at least a decade that if you absolutely, positively need it there tomorrow, people are willing to pay $13-25 to make sure it gets there through carriers like UPS and FedEx.

      And unavailable at any price if it's to somewhere FedEx or UPS don't deliver, whereas the USPS delivers to *every* address, 6 days a week.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    2. Re:Wedding invitations & Birthday Cards by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      If you run a business that is at a location that can't accept UPS or FedEx deliveries, I sure hope you'd have some sort of courier arrangement (Like a PO Box, or MailBoxes Etc) setup! Hundreds of years ago people would put mail in bags on ships set for the other side of the ocean - a surprising amount of it found it's way to it's recipient. While I agree we probably do need a once or twice weekly mail system, the world would not collapse if the post office stopped 6 day a week service tomorrow.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    3. Re:Wedding invitations & Birthday Cards by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      I get about a pound of junk mail every week. Coupons, Real estate offers, Credit card offers, Store sale circulars, New and Used car ads, Letters begging for money from my alma matter, and offers to save money on Insurance.

      What's your secret?

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    4. Re:Wedding invitations & Birthday Cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People keep saying that, but when is the last time you tried to send something to an address UPS doesn't deliver to? It's never happened to me. Ever. Not once in 49 years so far.

    5. Re:Wedding invitations & Birthday Cards by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      If you run a business that is at a location that can't accept UPS or FedEx deliveries, ...

      I was thinking more about FedEx and UPS not delivering to the destination, as they're not required to (and do not) deliver everywhere like the USPS.

      the world would not collapse if the post office stopped 6 day a week service tomorrow

      Agreed, but it's Congress that sets the USPS operating rules (and price). Critters from rural districts want to keep Saturday delivery.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    6. Re:Wedding invitations & Birthday Cards by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      I was thinking more about FedEx and UPS not delivering to the destination, as they're not required to (and do not) deliver everywhere like the USPS.
      Fedex does deliver to all addresses. Don't know about UPS. USPS does not.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    7. Re:Wedding invitations & Birthday Cards by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      It's trivially easy to find someone on facebook or similar and email them. Unless of course, they are not ON facebook or similar. granted, I guess you have a similar problem if the person you want to invite is homeless.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    8. Re:Wedding invitations & Birthday Cards by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Fedex does deliver to all addresses. Don't know about UPS. USPS does not.

      By law, the USPS is mandated to provide universal delivery. From: Postal Facts

      A self-supporting government enterprise, the U.S. Postal Service is the only delivery service that reaches every address in the nation, 150 million residences, businesses and Post Office Boxes.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    9. Re:Wedding invitations & Birthday Cards by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      By law, the USPS is mandated to provide universal delivery.
      I am aware of the law, but apparently there are loopholes. My friend does not get mail delivery. However, there is a loophole in the law that says that if they do not feel like providing you with home delivery service, they can instead offer you a base model post office box for free. My friend gets FedEX and UPS deliveries, but USPS will NOT deliver, mail or packages.
      It is quite a nuisance, because a lot of companies will not take a PO BOX as a valid address for shipping. Also, sometimes places will ask for an address and he has to specifically note that he cannot receive mail there, but they will sometimes go ahead and send it there anyway, and then get it returned.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  8. get the ponies! by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    it's time for the Pony Express to come back!

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  9. What a great idea! by MYakus · · Score: 1

    Reduce service to your customers when you are having financial problems? Of course, those are more related to pensions and health care than operations, but who's going to care that there letters will be intentionally delayed? What could go wrong?

    Only the government thinks this way.

  10. And now the plan becomes clear... by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

    Let Google deliver all your stuff! Once Google has a 'Google Locker' ability to compete with Amazon Locker, all will be right with the world. Just have Google deliver all your mail that once went through USPS.

  11. fallout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this further fallout from the republican bill that hosed the postal service?

  12. Best solution... by gstrickler · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Get Congress to allow 3 day a week delivery on residential routes (and maybe commercial routes), Mon-Wed-Fri for half, Tue-Thu-Sat for the other half. Still offer daily delivery to post office boxes. Anyone who thinks they really need daily delivery can rent a PO Box and pick it up daily.

    --
    make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    1. Re:Best solution... by mikael_j · · Score: 1

      How is this the best solution? Because you offer no explanation other than "Best solution..." in the title. As for the "Anyone who thinks they really need [...]" bit I could point out that you also don't need broadband, telephones (definitely not cellphones), cars, airplanes, electric/gas stoves and many many other things so don't try going that route.

      Please explain why this is the best solution.

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    2. Re:Best solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Um, because it reduces the amount of man hours and transportation costs utilized by the USPS? Is it really that hard to figure out?

    3. Re:Best solution... by jonwil · · Score: 1

      Except that the power of the postal workers unions (and possibly also laws passed by congress) mean that the USPS wouldn't actually be able to fire all those posties.

    4. Re:Best solution... by mikael_j · · Score: 1

      First: You're not the parent, you're an AC so you're most likely trying to drag me into an annoying trollish argument...

      Second: You don't see how only providing half the service they used to provide might be seen as a reason to choose another company? Really?

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    5. Re:Best solution... by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      How many people will really need their stuff delivered one day sooner that they will deliver via a more expensive carrier? Not that many, I'd wager.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    6. Re:Best solution... by xstonedogx · · Score: 0

      First: You're not the parent, you're an AC so you're most likely trying to drag me into an annoying trollish argument...

      So sayeth the pseudonymous troll with his mighty logic.

    7. Re:Best solution... by mcavic · · Score: 1

      3 day a week delivery

      Yes. We need postal service, but not every day. It would be a bummer for Netflix, but Monday, Wednesday, and Friday would be fine for the important stuff. And anything more urgent can be sent via Fedex letter or other means.

    8. Re:Best solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, because it reduces the amount of man hours and transportation costs utilized by the USPS? Is it really that hard to figure out?

      It also reduces the frequency of delivery, which is an unacceptable compromise.

      How about...increase the stamp costs to reflect the increased delivery costs? Problem solved, and it wasn't even that hard.

    9. Re:Best solution... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Give commercial interests preferential treatment from a government agency and penalizing residences who aren't able to drive to the nearest PO Box. What a novel concept!

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    10. Re:Best solution... by gstrickler · · Score: 1

      Well, I am the parent, and the AC was correct. Is it really that hard to figure out?

      As for your other comments, people pay directly for their broadband, etc, whereas they don't pay directly for mail delivery (they pay only for sending mail, and that's dirt cheap). A one day delay in delivery is almost never an issue, and when it is, the sender should send it via an express service (USPS Express Mail, FedEX, UPS, etc). And businesses or other recipients who insist they need daily delivery can pay for a PO Box and receive daily.

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    11. Re:Best solution... by gstrickler · · Score: 1

      Unacceptable to whom? Clearly you didn't read my full post, anyone who considers every other day to be "unacceptable" can rent a PO Box and get it daily. If daily delivery is that important to someone, the cost of a PO Box and going to pick it up shouldn't be a problem. Every other day delivery is a two day delay at most, assuming you would have received it on a Sat and receive it on a Mon instead. However, in ~50% of the cases, it's no delay, and in ~43% it's a 1 day delay, less than 7% of mail would encounter that 2 day delivery delay.

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    12. Re:Best solution... by gstrickler · · Score: 1

      Do you want your bills to be posted 1 day late (and you encounter a late fee) because the mail delivery was delayed a day? "Commercial interests" are often also consumer's interests. Besides, those "commercial interests" already send the vast majority of mail via USPS, so they're the one's paying the vast majority of the USPS revenue.

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    13. Re:Best solution... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Do you want your bills to be posted 1 day late (and you encounter a late fee) because the mail delivery was delayed a day?

      What does that have to do with your parent? You assume everybody waits to the last minute to pay their bills and that the last minute may fall within the 3 days that you proposed. I don't see much value in having it there the next day when you're limited by a pickup schedule. Also if they have to drive into town to go to a PO Box then they could just go to the drive up lanes that most utilities and banks have.

      I much rather have 1st class mail quietly take 2 days minimum to reach its destination. This would also add value to the next day service that the USPS also provides at a higher rate. The USPS never guaranteed First Class mail makes it to its destination the next day. It just so happens that First Class mail arrives overnight for most local deliveries.

      They could also sell more last mile services to the commercial companies like FedEx; This would allow the commercial companies to spend less money delivering to rural areas or to all areas on Saturday. This would serve as a way for the USPS to keep 6 day a week deliveries.

      Besides, those "commercial interests" already send the vast majority of mail via USPS, so they're the one's paying the vast majority of the USPS revenue.

      That's an unfair comparison. How can a residential customer compete with Junk mailers or billing companies? These commercial entities already pay a discount for pre-sort and volume.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    14. Re:Best solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about closing all the post offices that are cost centers. My mother-in-law works out of an office that sees 6 customers a day. A record day for her is breaking even. There are 2 post offices in larger towns 10 mins north and south of here. Why is there a post office there? Because there must be a post office in every town, regardless of how many are close. You close the redundant post offices that are no longer needed, you would see a big savings

    15. Re:Best solution... by gstrickler · · Score: 1

      The point is that there is no need for 6 day-a-week deliveries for residential (and many business) customers. "Most local delivery" is not overnight currently, some arrives overnight, but not most. The fact that not everyone waits until the last minute to mail a bill if irrelevant to my point. Mail gets delayed for a variety of reasons, and reducing commercial deliveries to every other day increases the odds that a payment mailed will be received a day later, which could result in late charges. It's one valid reason to "give commercial interests preferential treatment".

      My comparison is a direct response to your post. It's not unfair at all, it's a simple acknowledgement of the market forces. You'll also note that I in my original post I suggested that even commercial routes might also be reduced to 3 day a week service with only PO Boxes receiving daily delivery. If you're willing to pay extra for the PO Box to receive daily delivery, you should get preferential treatment as saves the USPS gasoline and delivery time vs home/business delivery and you're paying extra to rent the box. Nothing unfair about it.

      6 day a week delivery is simply unnecessary, and it's impractical to delivery that often to every address. 3 day a week delivery would save significantly on carrier time and fuel costs for those deliveries. It may still be necessary to increase the cost of postage and/or decrease the amount of "air mail", but 3 day a week delivery is still the single best cost saving measure for the USPS.

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    16. Re:Best solution... by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Except going to the post office to pick it up is already more than the cost of one first class stamp if you live further than half a mile from the PO. And your box might be empty. I for one DO have a PO Box for our business, and I always thought it would be a good idea for the USPS to offer the service of some sort of notification that an item or items are IN your PO box. In fact, for what I pay for a PO box, I would expect something like that to be included. In fact, the information is all already there in the system for them to do things like tell you the number of items that were put there on a given day AND at least the zip+4 where they originated and possibly more information.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    17. Re:Best solution... by gstrickler · · Score: 1

      Well, if it's that important that you get you mail every day, it'll be worth the trip. If not, you can wait 24 hours. Your argument is based upon you personal convenience, not one of need or practicality. Still doesn't justify having 6 day a week delivery to every address.

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
  13. The USPS is *not* a traditional business by Elrond,+Duke+of+URL · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I really wish Congress, and the Post Master General for that matter, would stop pretending that the USPS is just another business and should be operated as such. It's not! Mail has been a public service almost since this country was founded and the idea goes back even further in time in some other countries.

    Given what the USPS does, it cannot operate like a normal business and it shouldn't have to. Considering how much money they are losing each year, it's clear they need to change something, and I wouldn't mind paying a bit more for first class postage, but this idea that the USPS needs to break even needs to stop soon before Congress completely ruins the postal service.

    Packages aside, you simply can't send everything through email. I still get plenty of real non-junk mail all the time, from bank notices to insurance EOBs. This is far more secure than email could ever hope to be. Yes, it would be nice if everybody encrypted their email (especially banks), but until that happens, regular mail is a lot more secure. We actually have laws against this sort of thing and most people even take them seriously. There is little, if anything, to prevent electronic eavesdropping.

    I certainly don't want to see the end of the traditional post office in my lifetime, but at the rate Congress is going, who knows. And while I would expect the Post Master General to be fighting the good fight *for* the USPS, every time I hear him talk it seems like he's gung ho to implement whatever idea Congress throws his way.

    The USPS is a public service, not a business...

    --
    Elrond, Duke of URL
    "This is the most fun I've had without being drenched in the blood of my enemies!"-Sam&Max
    1. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by Atmchicago · · Score: 1, Insightful

      They can still take a few cues from business. For example, charge more for rural delivery. Why should a letter to Middle-of-Nowhere Alaska cost the same as one to New York City? To put this another way, why should peope who live in NYC subsidize mail delivery to Alaska?

      --

      You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it dissolve.

    2. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by sethstorm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Looks like you forgot about the "public service" bit.

      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    3. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 2

      If it is a public service, it designed to be fair irrespective of service location.

    4. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by antifoidulus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I always thought this "should be run like a business" stuff was very hypocritical. Pretty much all the "run x like a business" (where x is Amtrak, USPS etc) politicians will then turn around and beg for fat subsidies for airports who often bleed cash like it was going out of style. I guess the difference is that poor people actually use Amtrak and the postal service, but rarely use airports......

    5. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      Mail has been a public service almost since this country was founded

      Which is why it's one of the very specifically enumerated responsibilities of the federal government as set out in the Constitution. They didn't say much in black-and-white, but this is one of them:

      The Congress shall have Power ... To establish Post Offices and post Roads

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    6. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so that when they go to Alaska they can send a postcard home?

    7. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by lakeland · · Score: 1

      Public service and all that... So that the folks in Alaska are not disadvantaged and there isn't another big reason not to live there.

    8. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1

      Problem the USPS has is the fact that it has a lot of legacy costs. It got used to doing business one way and like a lot of large bureaucratic organizations has a problem changing to adapt. Especially when it had no incentive to do so as it was a government backed monopoly and one defined in the "postal clause" of the constitution.. And while it is not a "traditional" business , it is going to have to adapt for a new age. An age where the federal government is going to have to get smaller across the board.

      For instance, we have a lot of post offices in small towns. It costs a lot of money to keep those facilities maintained and staffed. Thing is allowing other local businesses to sell stamps and accept parcels for post can and do offer the same service. It's worked for UPS and FedEx the past 20+ years. I know the USPS has started doing the same in the past few years, but it was something that should have started 15 years ago. But that does mean fewer postal workers in general, which has been opposed by the union at every turn.

      With that being said, the USPS have been getting better with things like the ability to order stamps for delivery online as well as the flat rate shipping boxes have been extremely handy. But those have been services don't require a building with staff in my town operated 320 days a year.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    9. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by somename · · Score: 1

      I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying generally, but Amtrak's problem is completely different from that of USPS. Amtrak has been at least as expensive as air flight for a sometime, and it hadn't provided much of a benefit to general public, much less the poor population, for a while now. Amtrak needs a sizable influx of capital to ever hope to compete with other transportation services, and it likely won't get it as a government owned entity. I really do wish there could be a viable passenger rail system in US, but unless something like Union Pacific buys out Amtrak, I doubt it happens.

    10. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by rueger · · Score: 1

      Run like which business? Enron? Worldcom? Lehman Brothers?

      Shocking but true - lots of businesses are very poorly run.

    11. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by Kjella · · Score: 1

      If it is a public service, it designed to be fair irrespective of service location.

      Just because a private service wouldn't offer an acceptable service doesn't make a completely flat fee a necessity. Many public services are zoned so you do carry part of the cost yourself. Other variations leaves it up to supply and demand but with a maximum cap so everyone gets service at a reasonable price. Generally you shouldn't apply subsidies just to do it, they must have meaning.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    12. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by jmottram08 · · Score: 0

      Are you joking? no one uses amtrack since its prices have been the same as airplanes for the last two decades.

    13. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by PSandusky · · Score: 2

      Amtrak has been at least as expensive as air flight for a sometime, and it hadn't provided much of a benefit to general public, much less the poor population, for a while now.

      Citation needed. I'm guessing you haven't travelled by Amtrak over this span of time. I was traveling to western PA from FL last December for the holidays, and the round trip cost me $250. Flights would've easily cost me considerably more, because connections end up being cheaper through Amtrak than through United Airlines, which is the sole carrier at my hometown's airport. (This is even before we get into baggage fees!)

      Last December's Snowpocalypse sent a considerable number of travelers to Amtrak -- I can attest to this, because the train south was packed to the gills with people who were stranded in New York and Philadelphia. This influx was in addition to that which already crowded trains -- often people who can't afford round trips by air, or for whom the length of the trip (maybe across the state) would make air travel impractical. I can remember making the trip across PA to NYC several times... and never, over all the trips I made over the years, did I travel on a train that didn't have a fairly significant number of people in each car. Amtrak gets a lot more use than most people give it credit for, which I imagine is part of the reason it doesn't do as well as it can, and its national route system is terribly sparse when you get beyond the NE corridor. Still, with what it has, it does fairly well.

      --
      "What's the use in being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes?" --Fourth Doctor, "Robot"
    14. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by 9jack9 · · Score: 1

      Why should a letter to Middle-of-Nowhere Alaska cost the same as one to New York City?

      So, Atmchicago, just a wild guess, but do you happen to live in a big city?

    15. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      So that the folks in Alaska are not disadvantaged and there isn't another big reason not to live there

      Why is that the problem of someone who lives in a condo in NYC, where one letter carrier can service 500 customers?

      If you choose - for your own reasons - to live in an area were it costs you more to drive around, costs you more to heat your house, costs you more to drill a well for drinking water, and costs you more to get to a hospital because you need a boat or an aircraft... if you've made all of those choices already, which impact a typical person's budget in the thousands of dollars a year, is it really unreasonable to ask that they pay a rational amount for mail service to the remote outpost they've elected to call home?

      If you want to live remotely, you take on substantial costs. If first class mail went up 500% for those people, it wouldn't come close to impacting them they way that the delta in fresh vegetable costs does.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    16. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      None of your arguments or points make sense, you are just nostalgic for buggy-whips. I go to my insurance company or bank's ssl web site and download documents. I get texted notifications of account activity. I can bank by phone. Most mail is "junk mail" which can be done another way (radio, television, internet adds, voluntary subscription to coupon service"), and at any rate doesn't matter if delivered within a week. The USPS is mostly obsolete and for the rest can be cut to 25% of what it is now with no impact since superior alternatives exist in most cases.

    17. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by khallow · · Score: 1

      If there was competition at your airport, especially from the discount airlines, then you would have seen prices below $250. These sorts of monopolies are the only reason airlines like United are still around.

    18. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amtrak tickets are generally more expensive than plane tickets - I don't think being poor has anything to do with the decision to travel by train.

    19. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For citation, just do a comparison using Kayak or some other online flight booking service. I see plenty of cheaper than $250 round-trip flights from FL to PA some even $205.

      Just because Amtrak's $250 happens to be cheaper for your single case does not make Amtrak cheaper than air travel for most people.

    20. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Fair would be for rural people to pay what the service costs.

    21. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by lakeland · · Score: 1

      Because it is often advantageous to a country's strategically to not have more people living in rural communities than the free market would naturally select. A country needs a certain number of people to make infrastructure economic and if it does not effectively subsidise people living there then you get critical supporting infrastructure deciding it is uneconomic to support the farmers, and so you lose the ability to farm there.

    22. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      That is anecdotal (and from some posts below, also still nowhere near a bargain). From my location, I looked at rail as a possibility to go to Disney World with my family. It ended up being much more expensive than air, and was going to take 100 times as long. FWIW, driving ended up being the cheapest option, even though it took four times as long as flying would have.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    23. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      and so you lose the ability to farm there

      Or, you just ask the farmers to, you know, build the $10 or so they might spend on postage in a month into the price of the tons of food they sell every year. Just like they build in the costs of the fuel that goes up the farther away they live from handy facilities.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    24. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by Atmchicago · · Score: 1

      I live in a US city that's not in the top 10. Is it big? By some standards, I guess. What does it matter? Part of my decision to live where I am revolves around transportation costs, rent, and so forth. These are supposedly "market driven." I can live elsewhere, if the cost of living or some other factor there suits me more. People who choose to live in a rural place should pay for the consequence that mail is more expensive to deliver, just like people in NYC pay high rent.

      --

      You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it dissolve.

    25. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by 9jack9 · · Score: 1

      I was just jerking your chain. The idea that someone with "chicago" in their user name was advocating charging people not in big cities more was too irresistable to pass up. But you might be right. Maybe rurals *should* pay more for mail delivery. I'll have to think about that. Of course, I live in a big city, too. It's always easier to see the merits of one's own position when it coincidentally costs the *other* guy more.

    26. Re:The USPS is *not* a traditional business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seems to have your brain stuck to an era where people who live in rural area are in a big castle.

      FACT: people who live in rural area are at the bottom 1% in terms of income and assets.

  14. They could have undone the pension requirement by sethstorm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This just sounds like someone wants to kill the USPS and loot it.

    Get rid of the pre-loading of pensions for 75 years as required by Congress, and they'd be a LOT closer to solvent - and no need to have slower packages.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:They could have undone the pension requirement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      They'd not only be solvent, they'd be *profitable*. The pre-loading costs them five BILLION dollars a year. Basically the government is propping up FERS by looting the USPS. One wonders who they'll go after next once the USPS craters.

    2. Re:They could have undone the pension requirement by Greyfox · · Score: 2

      Yeah. It's not like Congress has been against looting pension funds for anyone else, why should the postal service be any different?

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  15. "People are still...." by DesScorp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People are still sending around non-electronic messages?

    This is a really tired expression. We didn't stop using the axe when the chainsaw came along, and we didn't stop using the broom when the vacuum came along, and we didn't stop using land line phones when cell phones came along. Most long lived legacy technologies and services survive for a good reason. They don't survive in great numbers mind you, and are used in very specialized situations, but they survive nonetheless. It should come as no more of a surprise to you that some people send letters any more than it should surprise you that some guys still cut wood with a metal blade attached to a wooden handle.

    --
    Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    1. Re:"People are still...." by DogDude · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Case in point: I just bought a brand new USR 56K modem yesterday. Needed it for backup for when the Net goes down at work. POTS is certainly more reliable than DSL!

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:"People are still...." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fatality.

    3. Re:"People are still...." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spitting firewood and cutting down a tree are different. Can't think of the last time I've seen someone cut down a tree with an axe. Ditto brooms and vacuums are different. Land lines... I haven't had one since '99 actually.

    4. Re:"People are still...." by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      Spitting firewood and cutting down a tree are different. Can't think of the last time I've seen someone cut down a tree with an axe. Ditto brooms and vacuums are different. Land lines... I haven't had one since '99 actually.

      That's kind of the point. Emails and their electronic cousins have certainly stolen a fair chunk of the usage from the postal service, but there are still some uses where the postal service is better. Package delivery, for one. Anything that needs formal recorded delivery for two. Delivery of certificates, official documents, and whatnot for three. They're the "splitting wood" to the postal service's "axe", if you catch my drift.

    5. Re:"People are still...." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... and we didn't stop using land line phones when cell phones came along.

      I did, my parents did and even my grand-mother did. None of us have a land line phone any more. What would you need it for?

    6. Re:"People are still...." by neyla · · Score: 2

      axes suck for splitting firewood too. One guy with a hydraulic splitter does more splitting in an hour than a pro with an axe does in a day.

      There's uses for an axe, sure. But for 90% of the situation where an axe *used* to be the right tool, it no longer is.

      Same for paper-letters. There's uses for it, but 90% of the messages you get are better sent electronically.

    7. Re:"People are still...." by dkf · · Score: 1

      One guy with a hydraulic splitter does more splitting in an hour than a pro with an axe does in a day.

      He'll have to; that's a lot of capital to invest in splitting wood compared to an axe.

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    8. Re:"People are still...." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we didn't stop using land line phones when cell phones came along.

      We didn't??? Who the hell do you know that still has a landline?

    9. Re:"People are still...." by SenseiLeNoir · · Score: 1

      And is a person going to spend hundreds of dollars on a "hrydaulic splitter" for the odd occasion to split wood for his/her home, or just get by with a cheaper axe?

      Sure the machine may be quicker, but practically does it make any real difference?

      Spend the money saved enjoying the log fire instead......

      --
      Have a nice day!
    10. Re:"People are still...." by HBI · · Score: 1

      Should I ruin this example by pointing out that an axe is not how you generally split wood?

      It's a sledgehammer and a steel wedge or three. Or you can use wooden wedges as long as you have one steel wedge.

      The reason you don't use an axe is that on any appreciable sized log, the axe will just stick inside of it and never come out.

      I split a lot of wood as a kid and had an old (90+) carpenter watching over me, teaching me how to split logs and piss on my cuts.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    11. Re:"People are still...." by nauseum_dot · · Score: 1

      That's funny!

      Especially considering that in a modern CO the blade(s) that is serve as the DSLAM is also the point where the analog signal is split out from the network and is in some instances responsible for providing dial tone. So if the DSL goes down, often times your POTS will go down with it!

      --
      Crap! I just kissed my karma good-bye.
    12. Re:"People are still...." by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "Spitting firewood and cutting down a tree are different."

      Log splitters cost only a couple of hundred bucks too nowadays.
      Here's a small one for 259$

      http://www.logsplittersales.com/p137-WoodEze-4-Ton-Electric-Log-Splitter.html?osCsid=f8f307983572bfe46aaf8b2b0c25196b

    13. Re:"People are still...." by Relayman · · Score: 1

      I just had the opposite: For a week, the POTS was down (no dial tone, no ringing) but the DSL worked just fine. The technician explained that DSL only uses one wire of the pair and that the other wire was broken. Strange, eh?

      --
      If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
    14. Re:"People are still...." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most people use a chainsaw for felling and de-limbing trees. Most people who choose to use an Axe, use it to split wood.

      A chainsaw would be inefficient for splitting wood. An Axe is inefficient for felling a tree...

    15. Re:"People are still...." by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      That's what you get for splitting green wood. An axe will split seasoned wood (2 years) with no problems (except for really big knots).

    16. Re:"People are still...." by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      There are different failure modes to consider for an "DSL internet connection"

      1: The DSL link itself is fine but something further along in the "ADSL backend network" fails (usually this manifests as the router achiving sync but failing to establish a PPPoA session).
      2: The DSL link itself is fine and succesfull link is established through the "DSL backend network" to an IP network but the packets don't actually get through to the internet
      3: the phone line has a fault that is a killer for DSL but doesn't kill off voiceband operation (the reverse can happen too of course)
      4: the phone line is completely dead and doesn't pass either voice or DSL

      Which failure modes are most common will depend a lot on where you live relative to the exchange and how the providers network it set up. In my experiance (admittedly in the UK and in a fairly built-up area) sucessfull sync followed by failure to establish the PPPoA connection is the most common failure mode. Still you should certainly consider the common failure mode in your planning.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    17. Re:"People are still...." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or a splitting maul, though I have also used one of those to chop down a tree, so I'm probably not the best authority on the proper use of sharp objects. I'm guessing not too many people keep an axe around to chop ice either... I don't have to deal with firewood or large trees though, so an axe and a hand saw are usually sufficient for my needs (and probably a bit safer than the gas-powered alternatives); in fact, a pocket saw and brute force are generally all I need to cut up and remove fallen trees and branches around here. Simplicity has its advantages.

    18. Re:"People are still...." by AJH16 · · Score: 1

      Actually, lots of people DID stop using land lines when cell phones came along. Perhaps not everyone, but the numbers are growing fairly quickly. Even many "land lines" are now simply VoIP. I would challenge that a minority of people probably have true PSTN land lines at this point.

      That said, it is signficantly different from the e-mail example and the other examples you gave as e-mail serves a different purpose from postal mail and while true that many of the things postal mail did are now better done with e-mail, there are still needs for postal mail. Similarly an axe is useful in situations where a chainsaw isn't and a broom is useful in situations where a vacuum isn't. The same can't be said about land lines as everything that can be done with a land line can be done with a cell phone or a VoIP phone and that is why they are dieing.

      --
      AJ Henderson
    19. Re:"People are still...." by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      There's uses for an axe, sure. But for 90% of the situation where an axe *used* to be the right tool, it no longer is.
      I would have to agree with that. I don't even own an axe. I do have a pick-axe, which is good for tree roots and stuff. As far as splitting logs, I use the sledge and wedge. For cutting the trunk itself I have a chainsaw. I would say that the axe really is a technology where specialization has all but killed it off. But...they do still sell them. So SOMEBODY is still using them.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    20. Re:"People are still...." by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Who the hell do you know that still has a landline?
      Just about everybody I know still has a landline.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    21. Re:"People are still...." by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      There is this category of person that's the opposite of a luddite. They have their group of friends and they have no clue what happens outside that group; all of them have iPhones therefore doesn't everyone? They don't use cash anymore so it's clearly obsolete world wide. I've actually seen some of these get angry if some lower tech method is used (such as a voice call instead of texting). These guys don't even know what you're talking about when you say cut wood because they've never been outside of their urban core.

      Then there's the other type of person who's just showing off. He can't flash his iPhone 5 at you in person so he'll laugh that someone still uses mail as a way of proving that he's cool.

    22. Re:"People are still...." by neyla · · Score: 1

      You'd buy pre-cut and pre-split wood and do without either ? The person who *did* split that wood though, did so using a hydraulic splitter.

      If you split your wood yourself, you either like splitting wood, value your time -very- lowly, or you buy a hydraulic splitter, yes. Sure, if it's a one-time tiny-amount exception kind of thing, an axe makes sense. But if you do a larger amount (as in the wood you'd need for a winter for an average house), then the splitter is *definitely* worth it.

    23. Re:"People are still...." by neyla · · Score: 1

      It's significantly more expensive, yes, but not "a lot of capital".

      We're talking a machine starting at $350 here. That's like 1-2 days pay.

      I could buy a machine, use it for 1 day (during which I've split as much wood as a guy with an axe manages in a week!) toss it away, and still come out ahead of the axe-guy.

      The break-even point depends on your salary-level. I earn around $50/hour. Thus if the job takes 9 hours with axe, and 2 hours with the splitter, I've saved 7 hours, and come out ahead.

      A machine that breaks even after *2* hours of use is a nobrainer to buy.

  16. My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I would like to ask that the post office only deliver once a week. And that should be the day before garbage/recycling day. 60% of the mail I get goes straight into recycling. The next 30% goes into the shredder and into yard waste bin.

    We get so little mail which is direct and important correspondence any more that we only check our mail once or twice a week. Every few months the mailman puts a slip in our box saying we have to go the post office to pick things up because our box is full.

    We had 9lbs of mail last time we picked it up. We kept two letters out of everything (2oz).

    The problem is not with their service, rather, they have discounted their service so much for things that people don't care about that it has degraded and made the delivery of important items a secondary item. Those who say "they make all their profit on bulk mail". I argue, if they didn't have to stop at EVERY BOX and transport TONS of material every day, they should be able to deliver the first class mail much faster and require half the staff.

    And talking about staffing, when they closed a mail processing center in the midwest recently, I saw that nobody lost their jobs. Instead, the unions said the employees took new jobs and were "forced" to deliver mail door to door.

    I have no sympathy.
     

    1. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by Osgeld · · Score: 2

      This is true, I personally expect 3 bills and 2 checks a month, I throw 6 grocery store bags of shit away during that same time, and its all penny bullshit bulk rate garbage that I never even look at.

      It would probably not cost me damn near 10 bucks to send a couple 5.25 floppies to a fellow retro computer dude if the USPS was not charging 0.01 cents per pound to drive around 400lbs of junk mail daily, in the 3+ $ a gallon gas age.

    2. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by jgdobak · · Score: 1

      "I don't use it so it must be worthless" is the Slashdot marching song

      Yet you still all wonder why everyone hates the help desk and computer janitors in general.

    3. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by Windows+Breaker+G4 · · Score: 1

      Do you realize how many jobs come from so called junk mail? You do realize it is sent because the return rate is something like 2% (which in the world of marketing is HUGE!) right? Just sayin.

      --
      brickspeed.net for your old Volvo performance addiction
    4. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      They should set up an opt-in system where they simply trash any mail destined for your address which is addressed to "residential customer." (or whatever it is they actually use)

      Then, they still get paid by advertisers who want to mail bulk rate advertisements but don't have the overhead of actually transporting that mail past the first sorting facility it goes to.

    5. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by syousef · · Score: 1

      I would like to ask that the post office only deliver once a week. And that should be the day before garbage/recycling day. 60% of the mail I get goes straight into recycling. The next 30% goes into the shredder and into yard waste bin.

      That is criminal. If the shopping malls can start eliminating or charging for plastic bags, for "green" reasons, there is no reason junk mail should be permitted. Find another way to advertise.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    6. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I heard there was a way to opt out of the weekly bulk mail (e.g., pennysaver, weekly supermarket ads, weinerschniztel coupons, etc.) If anyone knows how to opt out it needs to be posted...

    7. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by vlm · · Score: 1

      It would probably not cost me damn near 10 bucks to send a couple 5.25 floppies to a fellow retro computer dude if the USPS was not charging 0.01 cents per pound to drive around 400lbs of junk mail daily, in the 3+ $ a gallon gas age.

      Sorry, you have it completely backwards. My wife was the postman's daughter, I know about this. "Junk Mail" is a lot more expensive to send that you think. Without it, you'd probably have to pay $20 or $30 to send those floppies.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    8. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by Aladrin · · Score: 1

      While my numbers aren't as bad (probably 30% is actually for -me- and not a random citizen), my apartment complex has a garbage can next to the mailboxes. It's always full. Every single day.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    9. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now that is a service I would PAY for.
      I would easily pay 5-10 USD/month if the junk mail never hit my box.
      And I would smile every time I paid it.

    10. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Yeah, like with email or banner ads on web pages... uh... no.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    11. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      You get bills and checks in the *postal mail*??!! man, you're doing it wrongly. I'm all online and EFT with that stuff.

    12. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by tsotha · · Score: 1

      People involved in sending me junk mail should find other jobs.

    13. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by Windows+Breaker+G4 · · Score: 1

      Yea cause you know there's a surplus of those around right now *rolls eyes* Again it has been proven junk mail works, that's why they send it so it drives business (many times to local businesses).

      --
      brickspeed.net for your old Volvo performance addiction
    14. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Yea cause you know there's a surplus of those around right now *rolls eyes*

      Yes, cause I want drug dealers and scam artists to keep doing what they're doing too, since it would be too hard to find another job *rolls eyes*

      Again it has been proven junk mail works, that's why they send it so it drives business (many times to local businesses).

      But it only works because people like me aren't being compensated for getting rid of all the crap they're dumping on me. I have to spend time dealing with it, I occasionally lose an important letter because (presumably) it gets nestled discretely inside some advertising circular, and I pay extra for the landfill or recycler to take stuff I never even open. If they're willing to compensate me for all that then I'll have less objection.

      And just because junk mail works doesn't mean businesses don't have other ways to get their message out. They can use electronic media or web advertising. Also, I don't mind if they send mail to people who've expressed an interest in getting it.

    15. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      You get bills and checks in the *postal mail*??!! man, you're doing it wrongly. I'm all online and EFT with that stuff.
      Sorry, but I don't find it "convenient" enough to pay their "convenience fees" which are more expensive than 4 stamps and when in fact all the convenience is on their side since they don't have to pay someone to open and handle the mail.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    16. Re:My mailbox is filled with bulk mail! by Windows+Breaker+G4 · · Score: 1

      Is that really that much better? It's visual spam. And typically the response rate is pretty poor. Also it's harder to localized ads (specially with people on mobile devices, verizon for example has my location set as kansas city despite the fact that I live in CA).

      Also you can always opt out http://consumerist.com/2008/03/8-ways-to-opt-out-of-junk-mail-lists.html

      In terms of advertising, I feel like direct mail is some of the most intrusive in my life. It doesn't pop over the article I am trying to read, it doesn't make noise, it's not actively trying to get my attention, it's not flashing.

      --
      brickspeed.net for your old Volvo performance addiction
  17. with apologies to Andrew S. Tannenbaum... by KingAlanI · · Score: 2

    never underestimate the bandwith of a postal delivery truck full of optical discs hurtling down side streets. :)

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
    1. Re:with apologies to Andrew S. Tannenbaum... by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Latency is a bitch, but nothing compares to the bandwidth you get.

    2. Re:with apologies to Andrew S. Tannenbaum... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad I just ran out of mod points. What a clever rewrite of the old familiar quote.

  18. Re:and nothing of value... by DesScorp · · Score: 2

    ...was lost.

    Oh, I disagree with that. I don't want the post office to go away. I just want it to reflect reality. That means fewer post offices doing less stuff (and specifically, a post office that no longer tries to be a FedEx or a UPS. They can't accomplish that with their mandated unprofitable duties).

    Let the private shippers do packages, and just deliver my letters a few times a week, thanks.

    --
    Life is hard, and the world is cruel
  19. USPS Been Great Least Common Denominator by AndyMcL · · Score: 2

    Sad to see the USPS getting worse and worse over the years. It has been a very successful least common communications denominator for over 200 years. It delivers all over the world and does a great job doing so. I would have been using them almost exclusively all along if they would have had a package tracking system like the other guys. USPS keeps rural areas connected to everything else. It is still amazing to me that I can be in such far off places as Hawaii, Guam, or Palau and for less than 50 cents send a letter or postcard to someone living at the bottom of the Grand Canyon or middle of Maine and almost never fail it gets there and quickly (3-5 days). This is definitely not the case in some other countries. Of course I know the Internet has changed things (been using Internet since 91), but still things such as legal contracts, business with governmental departments, shipping of precious metals, etc are still done largely via US Postal service because of its reliability and legal protections.

    I think the USPS is a public good and an important part of keeping such a large country with spread out citizens on more equal level. Does this mean they need to find ways to be more efficient? Sure! Does this mean they need to compete with fully private companies? Sure! But I think we need them to stay around and be healthy. This means tax payer money needs to added in because some parts of the business will never be very profitable. Someone needs to deliver the things to people who do not live in high populated areas and the letters to Santa.

    1. Re:USPS Been Great Least Common Denominator by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      They are competing quite nicely, actually. The problem, as usual, is the government... although they supposedly operate as an independent agency, they get a lot of protectionism from the federal government... along with the chains of the federal government, too. Although they are profitable right now, and able to fund pensions, they are being mandated to pre-fund the pension plan for 75 years, and they have to do it in 10...

      In 2006, Congress passed a postal reform law requiring the USPS to pre-fund 75 years of future retiree health benefits over a ten-year span.

      There's no other federal agency or private enterprise in the US that's forced to pre-fund benefits like this.

      "This is like saying you're going to have your house payment of 30 years and then they come back and say, 'We' are giving you five years to pay it.' That's pretty much what they're saying. It doesn't make sense," says John Beaumont, president of the California State Association of Letter Carriers. "If we didn't have to make these payments, the Postal Service would be in the black at present time."

      Source: Postal Service Employees Rally to End Manufactured Crisis.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
  20. Re:What? by DigiShaman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Almost everyone accepts electronic bill payment these days. But sometimes one-off payments (medical, dental, etc) need to be in the form of a check. Also governmental agencies such as the USCIS require checks to be mailed in as electronic payment isn't an option yet. Oh, and lets not forget the elderly who still hand-write letters in cursive to other family members.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
  21. Re:and nothing of value... by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    Letters? Remind me, what are those again? On the rare occasions I have to send one, I have to look up online the current rate of postage. Strong indications that the service is redundant, from a couple of standpoints.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  22. E-mail + UPS/FedEx USPS by Zargg · · Score: 1

    USPS does need to get rid of a lot of it's current functions, they are redundant and wasteful compared to e-mail and privatized delivery (UPS/FedEx/etc) . USPS should serve as a government backed, secure mail service for things like legal documents where a physical piece of paper is necessary and next day delivery wouldn't be necessary. Any pure information is relayed through e-mail, and bulk packages are best handled by current delivery services that have much better customer experience and much more consistent results, probably because they aren't government workers. I also always figured the USPS made money from delivering so much spam mail to everyone, but I guess not.

  23. Subsidize the USPS by Kotoku · · Score: 1

    This is going to be a little bias as I ship a lot of packages but I think to compete with cheap imported goods from other nations we should subsidize package delivery in this country. When I can order something from China for $3 including shipping something is wrong. Shipping costs account for nearly 15% of my costs and in an economy where so many items are ordered online subsidies to shipping companies would benefit us all.

    1. Re:Subsidize the USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shipping by sea is REALLY cheap. Shipping by land and plane is not. Subsidies won't change that, it'll just shift the cost to taxes on those who never receive goods.

    2. Re:Subsidize the USPS by wshs · · Score: 1

      I do a lot of shipping between east coast US and asia-pacific. Packages coming from Japan arrive faster and for far cheaper than the same delivered by USPS domestically via first class standard. Fedex and UPS also have the courtesy to knock before affixing the "sorry we missed you" sticker and vanishing into the night. If they didn't have massive pensions, stopped stealing packages, honored insurance claims, and stopped forcing people to travel to the post office to pick up packages that were supposed to be delivered, USPS wouldn't be sinking like the Titanic. The problem with the postal service isn't the finances. The problem with the postal service is that it's filled with postal employees.

  24. check online? by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 1

    You could of course check your credit card bill online and pay it on time, like you mentioned yourself. I don't hear people complaining about the lack of jobs in the wooden-wheel-making-market, or the horse-and-carriage driver business lately. Maybe quick mail isn't that what it's used to be and a few niche players will fetch more money for the few letters that still need fast delivery. The rest of the dead tree spam doesn't need to be anywhere in a hurry, so why bother?

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
  25. Entrenched tenured incompetence by macraig · · Score: 0

    USPS is forced to do this because it refuses to excise the wasteful incompetent personnel it employs, even when the incompetence is documented in detail. They even get Congress to pass Federal laws that allow them to further shirk liability and responsibilities. In my postal zone, the only way even a lowly mail carrier can get fired is if he's caught on video killing someone's dog. If he's responsible for the theft, damage, or loss of packages, even when it's documented, he'll be back the next day and every day after that, for so long as he shall live. If you thought the SCOTUS judges had it made with their continued employment prospects, they ain't got nothin' on mail carriers.

    1. Re:Entrenched tenured incompetence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The USPS would be making a profit if it weren't forced by a unique law that only applies to the USPS to pay five billion a year for retirement benefits for employees who aren't even born yet.

      Oh but no it's always "lazy/incompetent federal employees". Doubtful this will penetrate the Fox News alternate reality bubble, but here's a news flash, the USPS is slashing jobs left and right.

    2. Re:Entrenched tenured incompetence by haruchai · · Score: 1

      I can't say if what you claim is true but they have been shrinking the workforce for a long time, dropping 200,000 employees - 25% of the full-time workforce - in the last decade alone. http://about.usps.com/future-postal-service/postalfacts-2011.pdf , see pg 6

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    3. Re:Entrenched tenured incompetence by macraig · · Score: 1

      They're not slashing the jobs of incompetent workers, they're slashing the jobs of better-paid less incompetent workers... because that has been the corporate short-term tactic for decades to make the balance sheet look good even though a big chunk of its potential productivity has just been summarily jettisoned out the airlock. If the corporation even survives that short-sighted stupidity, it will be forced to rehire those people or others like them later... though of course they always seek to do it in cut-rate fashion.

      I've witnessed this behavior first- and second-hand. Now here's the postal service doing it. And the carrier I mentioned is very real; my neighborhood has endured this failure for at least the five years that I've lived here. No amount of photographs and other proof has been sufficient to get him replaced.

      Not that this incompetence is unique to USPS. You hear a lot said by delivery services about how the package is sacred, right? It's not, not for all of them; USPS is just one that takes liberties with that commitment. Are you familiar with OnTrac? It's driver(s) have dropped packages six feet over a gate onto concrete several times, breaking one and leaving another exposed to get soaked by rain, and another one left in full view of the public to get stolen, which it did. I'm not playing favorites here, I'm calling the bad actors as I observe them.

      Oh, and that OnTrac driver? He's still on the job, too. I'm sure you'll look up the corporate report for OnTrac and tell me they've been busy downsizing, too... but they're downsizing the people whose paychecks represent the biggest HR expense, not the ones with the worst performance. This is a game corporations both large and small have been playing for a long time.

    4. Re:Entrenched tenured incompetence by macraig · · Score: 1

      Read my reply to the AC who made the same observation.

    5. Re:Entrenched tenured incompetence by haruchai · · Score: 1

      Those practices clearly need to be changed - I expect my mail to arrive intact.And I expect proper service from any corporation, public or private, monopoly or not and those that don't measure up will hear from me or will lose my business. But what does that have to do with fully funding 75 yrs of pensions in advance?

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    6. Re:Entrenched tenured incompetence by macraig · · Score: 1

      That wasn't the context of what I replied to, at least not the part that I replied to. I can't form an opinion about the pensions because I don't have enough background in that kind of finance.

    7. Re:Entrenched tenured incompetence by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      We should not force the USPS to fund their pensions fund, but neither should we give them tax free status on land purchases, sales tax, traffic ticket exemptions and so forth. If they want to be independent, make them independent.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  26. I guess I'm naive. by drunkennewfiemidget · · Score: 1

    I always thought that the post offices would be OK because with the Internet, sure we're sending way less letter mail, but package deliveries must be through the roof compared to what they were before. Most people do shittonnes of ordering on the Internet now.

    1. Re:I guess I'm naive. by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      The USPS would be operating in the black right now, no changes necessary - they've already done a LOT of streamlining and cost cutting - if they weren't being forced by the government to prefund 75 years of pension benefits in 10 years - something NO OTHER agencies seem to be saddled with. It's as if the federal government is going out of their way to crush the USPS. It's almost as if lobbyists from private shipping companies managed to get their bought and paid for politicians to create legislation that favors them. But that couldn't happen... not here in the U.S.! Right? Right?!?!?

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
  27. wrong way by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    yeah, they need to cut costs, but this isn't the way to go about it.

    closing a bunch of offices in Podunk might be necessary, though.

    of course, not gonna touch "administrative expenses" :(

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  28. Re:E-mail + UPS/FedEx USPS by lakeland · · Score: 1

    The thing is that DM is way more expensive than eDM. Say you get lift over control of oh, I don't know, 1% with eDM and 5% with DM. That means 4% extra sales with DM but you've had to spend roughly 100 times as much on delivery. Plug in some typical numbers for profit margins and well, DM still has a place but more often than not eDM has a much better ROI.

    In practice it's more complicated than that - DM tends to cut through to a different group than eDM cuts through to, and in some contexts that matters. Also both have creative costs so for small targeted mailouts the delivery cost is unsubstantial which puts DM in the lead, and then there's printhouse costs.

  29. Losing USPS by Windows+Breaker+G4 · · Score: 1

    The impact of losing USPS would be fair greater than most people here seem to think. Think of all the "junk mail" you get, ever thought about how many people are employed printing and mailing that stuff? Or magazines? Or coupons? Or Newsletters? Or how many jobs are kept around because of direct mail advertising? I'd bet you the cost of keeping USPS alive is less than the tax revenue it enables businesses to bring in.

    --
    brickspeed.net for your old Volvo performance addiction
    1. Re:Losing USPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I guess anyone who makes a living printing and sending junk mail fits in the same group as telemarketers. Yep, they make money, they got families, and I don't care. If that is all they can do in life, get rid of them. Anything else they might do is almost sure to be better. And that includes doing nothing as it will improve quality of life for everyone else who doesn't have to deal with the undesired results of their labor.

    2. Re:Losing USPS by Windows+Breaker+G4 · · Score: 1

      Its more than just them though, it's the businesses they generate business for. By your logic half the country would be out of work

      --
      brickspeed.net for your old Volvo performance addiction
    3. Re:Losing USPS by jmcvetta · · Score: 1

      Ah, the good old "omg jobz!!1!!" argument. It's ever so useful - problem is, it fails to distinguish between jobs that are useful to society, and those that are harmful. Or maybe you think spam is good for society? Anyways, see below how your argument can be applied to another fine industry:

      The impact of preventing toxic sludge from being dumped in the river would be fair greater than most people here seem to think. Think of all the "toxic sludge" that gets dumped, ever thought about how many people are employed concocting and dumping that stuff? Or airborne arsenic? Or radiological waste? Or untreated sewage?

      Or how many jobs are kept around because of toxic sludge dumping?

      I'd bet you the cost of letting that factory keep on dumping it's sludge is less than the tax revenue it enables businesses to bring in.

  30. Taxpayers money is Not used to fund the USPS!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    It is a common misconception that the Postal Service uses tax money. They are funded entirely by the money they make from postage.

  31. Re:and nothing of value... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait, private enterprise doing something the government should be doing? It's simply not the democratic way.

    What about the Health Care Law? We all know what happens when the government runs things...

    I'm rethinking how I feel about government run health care; have been for a while, but this simply re enforces the obvious.

  32. Re:What? by 427_ci_505 · · Score: 0

    Technically there's nothing preventing me from slitting an envelope and reading it, no?

  33. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not without the recipient knowing and without comitting a crime.

    Other than that, your nerdy little ass is right.

  34. Re:What? by Greyfox · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Would that stop the FBI or CIA if they were really interested in what you were communicating? I'd almost take it for granted that they'd have the infrastructure in place down at the central post office to intercept letters. They probably have some fancy-fangled-ass-shit to pop open and reseal an envelope without showing signs of tampering, too.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  35. Re:What? by SeaFox · · Score: 2

    That's assuming the recipient actually gets the mangled letter afterwards. Mail still gets lost in today's day and age, and without a tampered envelope, a charge of mail tampering is nothing more than a crackpot's rantings.

  36. Re:What? by exomondo · · Score: 2

    TV didn't kill the radio, Internet didn't kill the radio; why do you think that email will kill paper letters ?

    Because two out of three ain't bad.

  37. Re:What? by Virtual_Raider · · Score: 5, Funny

    They probably have some fancy-fangled-ass-shit to pop open and reseal an envelope without showing signs of tampering, too.

    The word you are looking for is "equipment" ;)

    --
    +Raider of the lost BBS
  38. When a service is in trouble by kawabago · · Score: 1

    Kill it faster!

  39. And this by Anon8---) · · Score: 1

    from what's supposed to be the greatest country in the world

    1. Re:And this by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      ... the greatest country in the world, with some of the most corrupt politicians who are bought and paid for by lobbyists from private industry.

      I'll repeat, the USPS would be operating entirely in the black (yes, making a PROFIT) if the federal government didn't mandate they prefund their pension plan for 75 years in only a 10 year span.... something no other agencies seem to be saddled with.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
  40. Re:What? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unless you use a fairly paranoid design(eg. an envelope chemically treated so that it will freak out in some obvious way if the adhesive is tampered with, or a residue-free volatile fluid is used to render the paper temporarily transparent) opening a letter isn't rocket surgery. If the feds are on your back, you probably have a problem. If somebody sends you cash, that particular envelope may just 'get shredded in a mechanical malfunction' and never arrive.

    However, tampering with letters would be a pretty ugly process to scale up(machines would be unlikely to be able to do it delicately enough, and 20,000 human tamperers are going to talk...) Tampering with packets requires actual geek skills; but once you have the capability, doing it to 100 million people differs from doing it to 100 only in how large a check you need to cut your vendor...

  41. Don't know what you'll miss... by rueger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Coming from Canada a few year ago I was amazed by the USPS.

    Overnight delivery? We're used to four to seven days, even in town.

    Saturday delivery? We lost that in the seventies.

    Mail pickup at your rural mailbox? I'm assuming we don't have that either.

    Most amazing to us though was that people used USPS to send important things, and assumed that they'd arrive, and on time. No way do you do that with Canada Post.

    1. Re:Don't know what you'll miss... by drunkennewfiemidget · · Score: 1

      I find your post humourous.

      In my experiences, Canada Post has been far more reliable than USPS has ever been. And I've shipped hundreds (perhaps thousands) of things using both systems.

      Except the Saturday delivery thing. That's pretty sweet.

    2. Re:Don't know what you'll miss... by David+Jao · · Score: 1
      The GP is correct. USPS is a lot more reliable than Canada Post.

      I live in Canada right now, but I've lived in the US for most of my life. Here in Canada, I routinely receive misdelivered mail in my mailbox. For example, I'll get mail addressed to someone with a different street number but same street name, or same street number and different street name, or some combination of both. Empirically I estimate that about 1% of the mail I receive is intended for someone else. As there is nothing particularly special about my address or mail volume, one can extrapolate (at least locally where I live) to conclude that Canada Post misdelivers about 1% of all mail. By contrast, I have never seen this kind of error in US mail.

    3. Re:Don't know what you'll miss... by Bobtree · · Score: 1

      I suspect that some post offices are sloppier than others. I've received my share of misdelivered mail in the US, but by far the worst incident was when my brother moved out of town and set up a forwarding address with the USPS, to which they then they proceeded to send him portions of MY mail in addition to his, including new videogames I'd ordered. That really drove me bananas.

    4. Re:Don't know what you'll miss... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I mailed a money order off for something in the US. I explained they may have to wait 2 weeks to get it. They were shocked it would take so long. :(

      2 weeks is generally EXPECTED as the long-end of the delivery spectrum up here.

    5. Re:Don't know what you'll miss... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canada Post does pick up from rural mailboxes. I agree that Americans have no idea how great their postal service is.

      Saturday service, cheap and fast, mostly to your residential door. These gradually disappeared in Canada by the late 80s. USPS slightly subsidizes packages, but that has enabled a boom in Internet shopping (with shipping often free) that had paid for that subsidy many, many times over. In Canada, shipping is expensive and it has greatly slowed the spread of Internet retail and Internet startups.

      I order things from the US... if they ship by USPS.

      The silver lining is that Canada Post generates profits which go to general revenues and helps lower taxes a tiny bit.

      Of course, mail looks good compared to wireless. It's usually cheaper to call my home in Canada with a US phone (from the US) than it is to call home from my driveway with a phone from most Canadian providers.

  42. USPS is Doomed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I run a business that sends a few thousand invoices each month via first class mail. We process about the same amount in checks inbound using first class mail. My customers are regional and the lion's share of them are in the same 3-digit zip code processing center so delivery has been overnight. The USPS has just stated that they are adding what amounts to 4-6 business days to my accounts receivable cycle. This has prompted us to reevaluate implementing some needed changes in electronic billing.

    The postal service is so inept, they cannot even manage to put a machine in the post office to sell coils of stamps. I have to stand in line and use the time of a union, pensioned government employee just to buy stamps.

    Such is the corrupt government contracting business where contracts go to the Honorable Senator's nephew instead of the company who can do it better for less.

    A private company like Redbox seems to have figured it out.

    1. Re:USPS is Doomed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's the thing, there's probably some accountant who says "The number of people who buy coils of stamps is X" but putting in a machine to sell then those coils will cost "Y more than X" so...they don't do it.

      That's the problem of bean counters, they stop a lot of things from being done.

  43. Re:What? by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ok... so Fancy-frangled-ass-shit-equipment then?

    Was wondering what the proper name for it was :)

  44. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Encryption.

  45. Re:What? by izomiac · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Good old fashoined paper letters are PRIVATE. e-mail is not private, and good luck getting your contacts to use pgp or s-mime.

    43% of identity theft occurs from physical paperwork. 11% from online. Personally, I don't trust any security mechanism that can be defeated by someone walking by, opening your unlocked mailbox, and holding the envelope to the sun. E-mail can be quite private, but you're correct that most people don't require that level of privacy and subsequently don't bother. Let's see you convince your contacts to use PGP on snail mail...

    e-mail is best effort, paper mail on the other hand is guaranteed delivery (and for registered mail it leaves a paper trail).

    USPS loses about 3-5% of mail, per an unofficial source. They collect but do not publish these statistics themselves. E-mail seems more reliable that that, albeit there are tons of factors that go into it. At least you're much more likely to get a "message undeliverable" reply with e-mail.

    e-mail is so impersonal, hand written letters on the other hand are much more personal. Congresspeople don't give a fuck about e-mail petitions, they hear on the other hand the power of hand written letters.

    It's a social convention, there's no real difference between the two, beyond the cost of the stamp and slower transit. As for congressmen, I find your assertion that they take either seriously to be quite amusing.

  46. Re:What? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

    Almost everyone accepts electronic bill payment these days.

    True. I (manually) pay almost all my bills electronically via my bank (which apparently routes through CheckFree) except the water and sewer bills. They come every other month and can only be paid electronically through Bank Of America for a $3 fee and they don't offer any payment guarantee/protection (like my bank does), so fuck 'em, they get a paper check. I still get paper statements because (a) I don't get any discount for getting an electronic bill and (b) I like to have a statement to file and don't see why I should have to print my own and pay for the paper/toner, etc.

    Also, for those who route their electronic statements through their Gmail account, remember that Google scans *everything* that goes through your account...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  47. Convergence probably is the ticket by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm an early adopter as well as an impulse shopper. I set things up in my house and it generally isn't longer before my neighbors are knocking on my door asking to see what their kids are talking about. Then before you know it, they're asking me how to get it in their houses and before you know it, they're asking if it would be suitable for their 80 year old mothers.

    For the past 9 years, my kids have had media center PCs in their rooms... no TV signal as it isn't important. From collecting seasons of TV shows, they have an assortment of roughly 1500 cartoons on their PCs which they can watch by clicking a few buttons. My daughter has a 22" TV as a screen which was handed down by mamma when she bullied me to give her a bigger TV in the bedroom. My son has a 24" BenQ screen with some Logitech speakers. Their computers are their TVs, video game consoles and web browsers etc... I can safely say that with the exception of maybe on show a night before bed... lasting about 20 minutes, they never really watched TV... well except when visiting houses with technonoobs.

    On the top floor, I have a laser/led projector that gives me a 110" screen and a sound system able to do the room it is in justice. It's connected to a media center PC where we often play games we buy from Steam or movies we buy from iTunes and I often find myself web browsing from the couch there.

    On the bottom floor we have a 46" Sony LCD with the cable box which my wife watches reality TV on.

    All of us have iPhones, we have two iPads and I have a Windows 8 Tablet (Samsung Series 7 Slate) which I use as a PC for Windows, Mac and Linux development as well as watching films, playing games and pretty much everything else. These are our books. I am entirely unable to throw away a paper book on principal. So, I have a full room in my house with the walls covered with books and books stacked in boxes and a chair... I call it the library. I find it doubtful my children will buy paper books later in life. They're inconvenient, wasteful, and they suck up space.

    I have received a single piece of mail in the past 13 years which was addressed to me other than a bill. I haven't received a bill in the mail in about 6 years as they come through email. The one piece of mail I received was actually a paper based Nigerian 419 scam presenting itself as a letter from a law firm.

    We get out mail on any of the screens in the house. We get our movies entirely electronically. We get our games and music also electronically. If we want to watch broadcast TV, we do it through a streaming web site. If we want to listen to the radio, we do it through a streaming site. Of course, we have a sling box setup just in case someone calls and says "You have to turn on channel 9!" But, it's collecting dust.

    I just opened a new bank account inside the U.S. (I'm an American abroad) and I was in utter shock how ridiculously paper based the U.S. still is. I had to open a "Checking account"... I mean really? A checking account. That would imply the use of paper checks... WTF!!! are you still in the dark ages? They insisted I provide a paper form of payment other than cash to open the account and insisted it was sent through the mail. I was mortified. I don't even know how to do that. In the end, they agreed to let my dad send them a bank check or money order for $1 to get it open. They also required a color photocopy of my passport picture page and social security card. It wasn't good enough to e-mail them. They had to have genuine photocopies. So, I scanned them, sent them to my dad and he mailed them to the bank.

    I didn't have a social security card anymore and although I provided them with my number, they needed proof it was mine... so I asked the american embassy for a letter saying so... it was printed out and signed. After all... somehow a piece of linen stationary from 1975 which was printed in blue ink by a cheap press and then put into an IBM electric type writer is obviously more proof that the number is mine than me saying so.. DUH!!!!

    1. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TA;DR

      (Too Autistic;Didn't Read)

    2. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by xaxa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have received a single piece of mail in the past 13 years which was addressed to me other than a bill.

      That's incredible, though I doubt it's true. What about a new credit/debit card? The first bank statement, before you ask for electronic statements? The annual statement for an account you can't be bothered to enable electronic banking for? A letter from the local government? Junk mail? An annual newsletter from a society, university or political pressure group you belong to?

      And no personal mail? No birthday cards from a relative, postcards from your parents or friends who are on holiday? No thank-you letters from anyone, or wedding (or funeral) invitations?

    3. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by SenseiLeNoir · · Score: 2

      And how much time do YOU as a parent actually spend with your children? How often do you bond with them? Are they really "Happy"?

      --
      Have a nice day!
    4. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what I was thinking too. The kids' attention span will be measured not in seconds, but milliseconds. At 60Hz they'll be able to analyze every frame of the media they're drowning in.

    5. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Open a checking account? No, that doesn't mean they require paper checks, it means the form of financial operations they intend to allow you to conduct from that account.

      And the reason for sending things through the mail, not in the form of cash is...because of criminals who engage in cash heavy operations. Bank policies have reasons, and while it's usually to cover their own ass more than to protect the consumer (hello mortgage fraud!), if you don't take the time to think about them, that's your problem. Heck you probably don't realize exactly how many attempts banks get to open fraudulent accounts. Putting you through that hassle is an unfortunate result of what to do with criminals, nothing more.

      And before you say "But I don't have to do that in Norway" well, things are different in different places. In one city I had no trouble getting a permit to do something, in another, they were far more concerned with aspects that the other city didn't care about.

      BTW, you can bet the USPS has a reason for not opening an office in your country, and that may range from legal barriers to diplomatic, to lack of business. Sorry, but 5 million Norwegians may not be that important to them.

    6. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I am not the GP, but I would like to answer your questions.

      I have to pick up new credit and debit cards at the closest bank office by myself. I can not imagine how bad it would be if they sent the new card with the new PIN through mail. I guess the mailing of a new card would work if the new PIN was sent by secure electronic means, not with the card itself.

      The first bank statement was electronic, as this is the default option (unless you refuse to give them a working e-mail address). I do not need to jump through hoops to enable electronic banking. When I create a new account, I may choose that wire transfers are not allowed, but I can still log in to manage account settings. And to log in, I don't even need credentials from the bank, I can just use my national ID card to identify myself.

      The government contacts me through e-mail. They have created e-mail accounts for every citizen in the form of socialsecuritynumber@thenameofthecountry.tld, and I forwarded it to my gmail account. The SSN is not a secret, and is not used for security. Instead, it is for resolving name conflicts. An SSN is as public piece of information as the person's name. The letters are encrypted using public key cryptography. The chip on my national ID card stores my public and private key pair. Actually, not all letters are encrypted. While letters from the court were encrypted, the invitation to elections was not. Also, 90-day ticket expiry reminders from the municipal bus company are also in plain text.

      I receive all my newsletters on e-mail.

      Nobody sends me personal mail. Birthday cards are given with the presents when guests arrive to my party. Those who can't come or are not invited, but still want to wish me happy birthday, call me on the phone. And some people use facebook for congratulations. I have only received one travel-postcard in my life, and no wedding or funeral invitations addessed personally to me. This is because I am only 24 years old, none of my friends are married and I have only been at funerals of old relatives, and we don't send written funeral invitations between family members. I think I will receive a written invitation to a wedding some day, but less people get married nowadays and I might still have to wait for my first wedding invite for a few years.

      Almost all paper mail I get is junk mail. I live in an apartment building where everyone's mailboxes are together in the lobby, so it is very easy for spammers to slip their advertisements into all boxes. But right next to the mailboxes is a cardboard box where everyone immediately throws their junk mail and the cleaner empties this box into paper recycling bin regularly.

      The only regular mail I still receive is, ironically, my internet bill. And by the time it arrives, I have already paid the bill, as I receive it on e-mail as well. I just haven't bothered to cancel the paper bill. It is funny, because the same company provides me cable TV and I get the cable bill in electronic format only.

      I used to get notices from delivery services in my mailbox, saying that the delivery guy was at my door but nobody answered. Even when I was at home waiting for the delivery. But now I order all my stuff to my workplace, so that someone can sign it and I don't have to go to the courier's office to receive my things.

      Also, the mailbox is very useful for in-house communication, as I am on the board of our condominium and some people prefer to write their complaints on paper, not talk to me over phone or e-mail.

    7. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All my junk mail is labeled "Current Resident" or "Valued Neighbor".

      I agree though, GP should have at least gotten personal mail, happy holiday cards, or notification of an important event

    8. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by Pope · · Score: 1

      These are our books. I am entirely unable to throw away a paper book on principal. So, I have a full room in my house with the walls covered with books and books stacked in boxes and a chair... I call it the library. I find it doubtful my children will buy paper books later in life. They're inconvenient, wasteful, and they suck up space.

      So sell them or give them away, dumbass.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    9. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by Xacid · · Score: 1

      I'm going on a hunch that his/her advantage is "(I'm an American abroad)".

      Despite constantly requesting to be off mailing lists I still get the local advertisements and BS mail from previous residents. However, the trick to getting yourself off the bulk of the mailings is via: http://www.directmail.com/directory/mail_preference/Default.aspx

    10. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by xaxa · · Score: 1

      I have to pick up new credit and debit cards at the closest bank office by myself. I can not imagine how bad it would be if they sent the new card with the new PIN through mail. I guess the mailing of a new card would work if the new PIN was sent by secure electronic means, not with the card itself.

      In the UK: if no new PIN is required (e.g. the card expired or broke) there's no problem. The card won't work until it's activated, which requires going through the authentication of internet (or telephone) banking.

      If a new PIN is required it's usually sent a few days earlier in a tamper-evident envelope on tamper-evident paper.

      You may have to collect it from the bank if they decide your address isn't secure (e.g. student residence, hotel, previous problem), or you ask.

      The government contacts me through e-mail. They have created e-mail accounts for every citizen in the form of socialsecuritynumber@thenameofthecountry.tld, and I forwarded it to my gmail account.

      Which country? You're posting anonymously, what have you possibly got to hide ;-)
      Estonia? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estonian_ID_card It's a nice system, but most countries don't have something like this yet. Until they do, there are more uses for letters.

    11. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "And no personal mail? No birthday cards from a relative, postcards from your parents or friends who are on holiday? No thank-you letters from anyone, or wedding (or funeral) invitations?"

      He will get off your lawn pronto.

    12. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by Mullen · · Score: 1

      The parent is correct. My postal life can be summed up in:

      DMV Notices (2 a year)
      Parking Tickets (about 1 a year)
      Wedding Invitation (1 every 2 years)
      Credit Card reissue (They manage to get stolen from some place every year)
      Burning Man tickets (Once a year)
      Burning Man paper notices (Twice a year)
      Opera tickets (about 3 a year)

      My IRA/Retirement people KEEP SENDING ME notices, even though I request they don't. Other than the above, they could do away with the postal system and I would not really notice. Everything can be done in email.

      The wife handles Christmas/Birthday cards.

      --
      Linux O Muerte!
    13. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      My bank charges me an extra $5 a month for electronic banking.You would think it would be cheaper than hiring people and sending out statements, but apparently not.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    14. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by ffflala · · Score: 1
      I think what you're suggesting is that you don't consider paper and ink to be a technology, or at least an advanced one. If this is an accurate description of your position, I'd have to disagree with you. Paper and ink is of the most mature technologies known to human kind. It has been through countless generations and revisions. Even crude earlier versions have demonstrated the ability to preserve information in an accessible format for thousands of years.

      I have a full room in my house with the walls covered with books and books stacked in boxes and a chair... I call it the library. I find it doubtful my children will buy paper books later in life. They're inconvenient, wasteful, and they suck up space.

      I have something I call the "library" also: it is the public library. It has plenty of shelf space to stack the books, and does so in an accessible order. Using this library saves me the inconvenience and space of maintaining my own collection of paper books. It's also much cheaper. Most books don't get reread anyway, and buying a one-time-use item like that seems like a waste.

      I had to open a "Checking account"... I mean really? A checking account. That would imply the use of paper checks... WTF!!! are you still in the dark ages?

      Bank accounts are a possible vector for fraud. It would be a fraudster's ideal situation if they were to establish a US bank account without having to provide any paper trail. I believe that it is much easier to detect fraudulent transactions when there is a paper trail. We do already have a few centuries' worth of work completed on authenticating paper documents.

      Setting a high standard for an initial transaction until sufficient trust is established to allow more convenient (and less secure) transactions seems like a reasonable approach.

      They insisted I provide a paper form of payment other than cash to open the account and insisted it was sent through the mail. I was mortified. I don't even know how to do that.

      I don't understand why you believe that getting a money order, cashier's check, counter check, or personal check is mortifyingly inconvenient. The first three require going into a bank. 7-11 stores can exchange your cash for a money order, for a fee. Mailing a personal check simply requires having a checkbook, and envelope, and a stamp. Checks, stamps, and envelopes can be purchased online, not to mention at many stores. Stamps and envelopes are even available at most large grocery stores.

    15. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Disclaimer: late adopter and spendthrift.

      50% of my mail is probably spam. Most generated from having a mortgage. A significant percentage from comcast for some reason.
      34% are charities, with my name, not spam because I do give to many of these. Even if you give to charities online you'll get mail unless you give them a fake address.
      5% are routine bills. I don't do online bill pay though my credit card pays for a chunk. I need some just to keep connected (I will actually look at them, as opposed to "you can now view your bill online" reminders in email).
      Then misc. stuff.

      Also count tax stuff. These are not sent over email. Property tax bills, W2 forms, etc. If you own property then you're going to get mail.

      Then there's misc. stuff. Birthday cards, invitations, postcards, stuff like that. Unless you're one of those rabid techies who scream at your friends who send you mail ("you idiot I don't even have a letter opener, go back to your luddite cave mom!") someone's going to send you something in mail. The replacement credit card shows up in mail.

      Here's an important thing: if a mail is sent to your address the sender is pretty sure it's you or your family who will get it. Not guaranteed but it's reasonable assumption. So your bank will know how to send you a statement by default. To not get a statement you must first sign up with the bank, but they aren't really sure it's you who signed up or not (I just signed up to see my visa bill online and they had an amazingly small and unsecure set of questions to verify it was me). And then you still get the normal mail to confirm whenever changes are made, just for basic security. Unless you're one of those naively thinking that paypal is a real bank then you'll get mail from a bank sometimes.

    16. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They only charge you more because they can. Electronic banking is cheaper. In fact, last time I went to a bank office, the bank teller told me that I could raise my monthly spending limits online and sent me to one of the PC-s they have in the office for customers. So, instead of doing the small work of changing my limits by herself, she made me use online banking to get the queue (of 2 people) moving faster.

    17. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are correct about me being from Estonia. Even the Estonian laws still require me to have an up-to-date home address in their database, in case they want to send me something. When I was still a student, I used my parents' address for this, because I had not settled down yet and was moving apartments every once in a while.

      I just got back from a work trip to London. I sent a post card to my parents. It will probably take about a week or two to arrive and I don't need first-class letter service for this. This was the second time in my life to send an actual paper letter.

      The downside of using paper mail is that it is hard to change addresses. There will always be someone you failed to notify about the new address, who will send you a letter five years after you moved. With e-mail, it is easier. I have gmail collecting all the mail from all the personal e-mail addresses I have ever used, so if someone I lost touch with wants to contact me, they can. Because I have never used corporate and school mail for personal letters, I don't miss the deactivated accounts. In fact, I am glad I am not receiving any newsletters that were useful to me at my previous job.

      I am posting this anonymously because, despite regularly reading /. since 2005, I don't have an account and I don't feel the need for one.

    18. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because everyone calls it a checking account doesn't actually mean you have use, or even order, checks. The last time I opened one, ordering checks was an optional extra. Probably most people order checks so they have them should the need arise, but there are plenty of people in the US who never use them.

    19. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by xaxa · · Score: 1

      I'm only 25! I'll probably get one or two birthday cards next year, maybe one postcard, possibly one personal letter, at most one wedding/funeral invite. But that's more than "1 in 13 years", which I thought was very unusual.

      Last week my flatmate, who is 21, received a handwritten letter from his girlfriend, who is away for a month. He'd spent half the day playing games and chatting to her on Skype, but he seemed to appreciate that she'd taken the time to write it.

      So far this year, I sent a birthday card to my mum (while on holiday in Austria -- I thought it'd be interesting to receive a card in German, she apparently didn't...), one to my grandma, one to my dad.

      I sent postcards from six places (other countries, while on holiday). According to my mum, it makes my grandma very happy to receive these. Maybe she'd like an email with a photo, or an MMS, I'm not sure. I prefer the postcard: I feel less connected, which is good as I don't want to end up giving Facebook-status-like updates to relatives.

    20. Re:Convergence probably is the ticket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And let's not overlook the fact that early-adopter or not, it's going to be a while before there's enough penetration of high-speed internet in rural areas to make this sort of convergence possible.

      I mean, my folks live withing 5 miles of a reasonably sized tourist town, albeit one that's not hugely populous, but not strictly-speaking, "rural", and yet their local phone provider (VZ) has said, and I'm not paraphrasing, that it's just not profitable enough to run high-speed internet to their area. Their only option for high-speed is either through their satellite TV provider (which is only marginally faster than dialup and several times the cost), or through a wireless provider that requires them to purchase a 50-foot antenna in order to receive signal (by dint of local geography).

      Their primary option for any sort of internet access is dialup, or drive into town and use the public library (which has had severe budget cuts), or I suppose go to McDonald's and use their wifi. While these are all do-able, this is not the kind of thing that's going to be feasible for a technological convergence that will eliminate the need for paper mail and television.

  48. Rather they drop Saturday Delivery by jtnix · · Score: 1

    overnight, same 'sector' delivery has been touch and go for 5+ years here in new england. Used to be that we could send a birthday card the day before a normal delivery day and it would arrive on time. Not so much the past few years, and it's never really annoyed me either.

    Would rather they drop Satyrnday delivery in favor of keeping up with regional deliveries, even if they are 1-2 days.

    --
    She blinded me with science, she tricked me with technology. ~ Thomas Dolby
  49. Re:What? by millsey · · Score: 1

    Would it be any easier to replace the envelope? Still will be tricky to automate because if you have some paranoid envelope, need to replace that one with another paranoid looking envelope and a printed recipient address, and maybe a stickon return address. Still there could be those envelopes that self-destructs the message in 5 seconds...

  50. Half right by immaterial · · Score: 3, Informative

    They have to fully fund the benefits of every postal employee; that's actual employees, not any potential employee they might hire in the next 75 years. Meaning that for any new (young) employee they get, they must fully fund his retirement/benefits that wouldn't normally have to be paid until his retirement 40 or 50 years from now. The cost you cited is correct, and the requirement is justifiably called absurd and not a thing any private company is burdened with, but getting hyperbolic with the requirements of the law itself simply give your opponents a way to wave off your entire argument by pointing out this one innacuracy. I know it isn't you that started that little misinformational bit of hyperbole, but I've heard it a bunch and I've seen plenty of conservatives shrug off the entire argument by pointing this out and claiming the whole thing is "union lies" or some such. Whoever started the 75 years thing did their cause a terrible disservice.

    That said, another restriction Congress has put on USPS is the requirement not to raise rates faster than inflation (based on CPI or something like that). Fuel costs go up 30% this year? Well, suck it up, because you're not raising rates more than 1.67%!

    Conservatives like to point at the apparent failure of the USPS as an indicator that the government is simply wasteful in everything it does (instead we should privatize things so our corporate friends can take the profitable areas and leave everyone else to rot!), but that is a ludicrous assertion given that USPS is under restrictions such as the above which no private business would have to work under. Add to that the requirement that they serve every American, no matter where, with the same rates (a good and proper one, IMO) and it's amazing they're even close to profitable.

    1. Re:Half right by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      The cost you cited is correct, and the requirement is justifiably called absurd and not a thing any private company is burdened with,
      Well, to be truthful, it is hard to find a private company that will offer you a pension at all. But if there are any, they SHOULD be burdened with actually setting aside the funds to pay for it. Too many companies got away with not paying their employees as much and saying "But see, we are going to take care of you when you are old!". Then, they fire the people before retirement, or if they make it to retirement, then the company says "Oh, I'm sorry. We didn't put any money into the pension fund, so we have to reduce your retirement. Sucker!". If they are going to offer pension, then they should have the funds to cover it, or at least enough funds in maturing investments at an acceptable risk level that will meet the pension. If they aim high, well bully for them in the future. They have more money to reinvest in the business.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  51. Raise the price on junk mail, too. by Animats · · Score: 4, Interesting

    95% of what the USPS delivers to my mailbox goes directly into the recycling bin. This is no great loss.

    1. Re:Raise the price on junk mail, too. by geekmux · · Score: 2

      95% of what the USPS delivers to my mailbox goes directly into the recycling bin. This is no great loss.

      Junk mail too? Given this statistic(that comes pretty close to my own), how about raising the price of junk mail period...seems they're the primary contributors of burden on the entire system. Perhaps of we raise it high enough, they'll stop sending so damn much recycling bin fodder.

    2. Re:Raise the price on junk mail, too. by 9jack9 · · Score: 1

      Hear, hear. I burn mine though. I like to get those complex poly-carbons back into the environment as soon as possible.

    3. Re:Raise the price on junk mail, too. by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      Junk mail actually subsidizes the USPS. When Congress considered banning junk mail, the USPS and the Direct Mailers Association opposed the move. Without junk mail, the USPS would lose a huge source of funding.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    4. Re:Raise the price on junk mail, too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, junk mail is actually profitable to the USPS.

    5. Re:Raise the price on junk mail, too. by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Junk mail actually subsidizes the USPS. When Congress considered banning junk mail, the USPS and the Direct Mailers Association opposed the move. Without junk mail, the USPS would lose a huge source of funding.

      Yes, that is true, but at what cost, to both people and the planet? Without junk mail, landfills would lose a huge source of "funding" too.

    6. Re:Raise the price on junk mail, too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      95% of what the USPS delivers to my mailbox goes directly into the recycling bin.

      That is not the fault of the USPS.

      This is no great loss.

      To you, it might not be...

  52. Hall of Fame nomination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Can we vote for Slashdot Hall of Fame entries? If there is a "tl;dr" category or an "Overt Asperger Perseveration/Rumination", I would like to nominate the parent.

    Thank you.

  53. USPS isn't unprofitable, it's just dirty politics. by spd_rcr · · Score: 5, Informative

    USPS isn't on the verge of collapse due to any shortfall in business, it's recent changes in politics that have thrown a set of concrete slippers on a historically great swimmer.

    H.R. 1351 would allow the Postal Service to apply billions of dollars in pension overpayments to the congressional mandate that requires the USPS to pre-fund the healthcare benefits of future retirees. No other government agency or private company bears this burden, which forces the Postal Service to fund a 75-year liability in 10 years — at a cost of more than $5 billion annually. Without the mandate, the USPS would have shown a surplus of $611 million over the past four fiscal years.

    from http://postalemployeenetwork.com/news/2011/09/h-r-1351-gains-momentum-on-capitol-hill/

    There's a lot more to the Post Office than just delivering junk-mail. The Post Office has been the glue that allowed the US to exist almost right from the start. The difference between a 1st class nation and a 3rd world country is the Post Office. Can you imagine if your bills didn't arrive in a timely fashion or you weren't able to put a check in the mail. Sure there's a lot of movement towards electronic payments for everything, but there are still plenty of areas without broadband and getting on the modern web with a modem is painful. Odds are if you're older, the Post Office also delivers your medications safely and quickly regardless of where you live. Rain or shine, you can always count on the Post Office to deliver, Fed-up and OoPS, half the time when the package is in town, on the truck and out for delivery, it still won't show up for another day or two as they skip stops.

    If I was a politician, I'd really think twice about screwing with retirees prescriptions or the people handling the ballots.

    --
    - tensions in our lives that are attacking our minds, unite themselves together to make our consciousness blind - op'ivy
  54. Re:and nothing of value... by dryeo · · Score: 1

    For me, where the post office is only a half dozen miles away, it is quicker to drive there and find out the price of postage then to load a page online. I'd guess there are a lot of people in this situation nowadays when most web sites seem to think you have a fiber connection.
    Paying bills online is the same, quicker to drive to the post office and mail a check then to load a page and discover it's not working anyways right now.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  55. Re:What? by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 5, Funny

    You can get deb and rpm files in the mail now?!?

  56. Re:What? by Sique · · Score: 1

    Yes, they have. It's called a bowl with hot water. Hold the envelope in the steam and wait until the glue comes off.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*
  57. Re:What? by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

    The word he was looking for was "pot with boiling water"

    --
    bickerdyke
  58. Re:What? by TheEyes · · Score: 1

    Never underestimate the bandwidth of a mail truck full of CDs (or DVDs, or flash/hard drives, etc)... although it's just been cut in half now.

  59. Re:What? by rhyder128k · · Score: 1

    Ass-fangler.

    --
    Michael Reed, freelance tech writer.
  60. So if you wondered why Netflix was shooting itself by melted · · Score: 1

    So if you wondered why Netflix was shooting itself in the feet repeatedly a few months back, now you know why. Folks are not going to be as satisfied with their by-mail service if DVDs take three days to show up, and three days to get back.

  61. Re:What? by cvtan · · Score: 1

    Speaking of cursive... Have you older people noticed that modern teens no longer write in cursive at all? I heard that some schools were no longer teaching cursive writing. There's something sad about this in a Sherlock Holmes kind of way.

    --
    Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
  62. Re:What? by gmack · · Score: 1

    Good old fashioned paper letters are NOT private. I have had my credit card number stolen exactly 3 times in my life and NONE of them were electronic.
    1 Domino's Pizza employee
    2.Pickpocket (out of my front pocket no less)
    3.Postal Service.

    Of the three the only one that actually succeeded in making charges was the one taken from the postal service. Safe? Not even close.

  63. Re:What? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Funny

    Unless you use a fairly paranoid design(eg. an envelope chemically treated so that it will freak out in some obvious way if the adhesive is tampered with, or a residue-free volatile fluid is used to render the paper temporarily transparent) opening a letter isn't rocket surgery. If the feds are on your back, you probably have a problem. If somebody sends you cash, that particular envelope may just 'get shredded in a mechanical malfunction' and never arrive.

    That's why, after sealing the envelope, I drip hot wax over the seam and make an imprint using my signet ring.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  64. History proves you wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    However, tampering with letters would be a pretty ugly process to scale up(machines would be unlikely to be able to do it delicately enough, and 20,000 human tamperers are going to talk...)

    History proves you wrong: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MfS_Abt_M_Brief1.jpg - Automatic letter re-sealer, in use by East-German Staatssicherheit (Stasi) until the fall of the wall.

    1. Re:History proves you wrong by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      The amount of delicacy required goes down substantially when you don't operate under any pesky theory that the rule of law requires that you not be tampering with envelopes...

      Your point is valid, in that machinery can be used to speed up letter processing; but covert letter processing, in a legal climate where you theoretically aren't supposed to be doing that, is a harder problem, and requires more subtlety, than in an environment where somebody would be insane to question you about what may or may not have been done to the letter in transit.

  65. Re:and nothing of value... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You might want to look to countries other than the US for examples of how government-run health care can be 'good' (or at least far better than in the US). It has its disadvantages, yes, but I think that its advantages outweigh those (assuming that your government isn't terrible).

  66. David Brin's The Postman by Warwick+Allison · · Score: 1

    Read it.

    1. Re:David Brin's The Postman by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Um why? Do you mean that the postal service is critical to civilization? Why? If there are better ways to move information around then we should use them.

  67. Re:So if you wondered why Netflix was shooting its by jmottram08 · · Score: 1

    If you bothered to do -any- research, you would know that the price increase by netflix has everything to do with SKYROCKETING content costs, not delivery costs.

  68. COMMUNIST by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, while firex726 is hauled away for daring to think in a free country (try typing that with a straight face) I, as a communist living in a communist country (IE everywhere NOT America) can confirm this.

    There are plenty of essential services that our society depends on but that don't always make economic sense. A starbucks is a easy. it should only continue to exist where it makes economic sense. It is not going to have enough business to sustain itself in a one horse town. (Horses don't drink coffee for the agriculturally challenged) But since nobody actually NEEDS a coffee shop (no, you really don't no matter how much you need caffeine to function) this is alright. You can live your entire life quiet happily without a starbucks or a McD near you.

    But try the same thing without say, water and sewage services. Electricity or gas. Or even more basic, a road system. Roads to most people just seem to be there but they are costly to put down and maintain and often of no direct economic value. It is a rare farm that can afford to pay for a road a system to deliver its produce to all its customers. Without the road it cannot deliver but it would be a very costly bit of lettuce if the farm itself had to pay for it. Me? The customer pay for it? I don't NEED that farm road or even the countless kilometers (remember, communist) of highway. I live in a small area and pay for goods to be delivered to me. They can pay the transport costs from that.

    This is why private roads are rare AND deliver ON private roads is NOT a sure thing. If you own a farm and don't keep your private road in a satisfactory state of repair you might be highly surprised to learn that deliveries are to the edge of your land, not the door. I am not going to risk MY truck on YOUR pot filled hole. To some people, getting the mail is a bit a more then firing up Gmail.

    Essential services are a part of the infrastructure that an entire society is build upon. This is nothing new. It doesn't even have to be costly. Once the USPS was a big source of income for the US government. But decades of mis management in order to reduce government by republicans have made a profitable service that everyone needs a byword for money loosing inefficiency. And the result? We have been steadily going back on the quality of a service once known for its reliability.

    But who still sends mail? Bill collectors? In a country in debt, that is the only remaining growth industry. The idea that you can send a letter and have it delivered anywhere in the country the next day is so ingrained that we don't think of it anymore. Electricity and water are the same and when they are turned off for a short time we suddenly notice how depended we are on it (quick for how many flushes of your shit do you have water stored). But they are only cut for short times or during unplanned outages where everyone is working as fast as possible to get it back up. NOBODY could seriously suggest that electricity will only be delivered part time (except in the glorious free market of California, high tech area of the world, think about that if you can).

    Once the mail service has been gutted (and it is already way to late) turning it back on is impossible. The infrastructure is gone and no matter how much it is needed, the finances just won't be there to restart it. Oh, the people will adjust but it will be one more slide into 2nd world status for the US. Roads broken up, bridges falling apart, electricity unreliable as in 2nd world nations. Pretty soon, this will be used as an excuse for entire companies to relocate to areas with better infrastructure. Oh wait, the companies already did move since lack of social services and high living costs put the pressure of paying for it on individual wages and made the US worker far to expensive. Here is a hint, if the only way for a worker to come to your factory is by car, then his salary must be able to pay for said car. A cyclist can afford to demand a lower wage. Simple economics no republican will ever understand. Same with health

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:COMMUNIST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a clever and insightful rebuttal of his well thought out argument. Well Done sir! If you never read an argument then you always win? amiright?

  69. Eh, that is the ULTIMATE example of socialism by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You are aware that volunteer fire services are a perfect example of socialism? They may not pay a wage but the equipment is payed for by the people FOR the people. And it is fairly typical that everyone in the area gives the volunteers leeway to do their service. Or do you think non-volunteers can suddenly drop their job and rush out to put out a fire? No? Can't think of any employment contract that has this in it. Yet volunteer fire fighters do it all the time and are NOT fired (get it , fired, fire-fighter, that pun is smoking hot!, Get it, smoking hot? Fire? I am on FIRE today! What do you mean, good?)

    So what is your argument? Things that the whole society needs even if an individual might never need it, need to supported by the whole off society?

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Eh, that is the ULTIMATE example of socialism by xaxa · · Score: 2

      And it is fairly typical that everyone in the area gives the volunteers leeway to do their service. Or do you think non-volunteers can suddenly drop their job and rush out to put out a fire?

      There's something wrong with a society if an employer is unwilling to volunteer his employees' time in an emergency. Within reason, most employees would probably try and make up the time anyway.

      There's clearly a difference between being an official volunteer -- who might be telephoned and need to travel somewhere -- and a bystander. But if, for example, a speeding car crashes into the children's playground my office window overlooks, I'll have no hesitation in dropping what I'm doing to try and help.

      A bystander in the right place at the right time becomes a volunteer.

    2. Re:Eh, that is the ULTIMATE example of socialism by nahdude812 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And as long as the volunteer does a reasonable job of balancing their volunteering and their work commitments, you're probably right that most small companies don't have much problem with it. The problem arises when the volunteer always prioritizes each fire call over their work duties. There are many fire calls which are non-emergency calls. Nobody is in imminent peril. If you drop your extremely urgent work to put up traffic cones because there's a tree down on some back road, you're doing a terrible job of balancing this.

      We had a press operator who was like that. Any time his fire radio squawked he was out the door. Because he was a press operator this meant several things: 1) the people downstream from him in the work cycle ended up with nothing to do - the paper cutter can't cut unprinted paper, the binders / gluers / folders can't fold uncut paper, the packagers can't box up and ship unfinished product. 2) when he started the print back up again, the press often was not shut down very well, it wasn't properly cleaned, sometimes paper or ink was still in the press, etc. 3) even when 1 and 2 were not factors, interrupting a print run and starting it up again causes a lot of wasted materials; it takes a while on presses of that era to get the colors right, you might spend as long as an hour getting the ink evenly distributed, registration aligned properly, and the right amount of ink being put down (this was affected by many factors such as the kind of paper, but also, including temperature, humidity, and the viscosity of the particular can of ink you opened, so you couldn't just use yesterday's settings, or even always settings from a few hours ago). A lot of material gets thrown out while you're walking those settings in, never mind the time it takes.

      They had to set limits with the guy, only calls of a certain severity, only after a certain number of calls, etc. It wasn't that they wanted someone whose house was on fire to have to wait 10 more minutes while his possessions were destroyed, it was just that this press operator did a terrible job of balancing work / volunteer obligations. He fought them over the limits (eg, claiming he was being singled out) and eventually forced a corporate policy such that those other volunteers in the company who were doing a good job of balancing their commitments now lost that control over which fire calls they could respond to. And whereas the company used to quietly forgive the time on their timecard (basically paying them to be at a fire call), now that they had an official policy, that policy was very strict about pay practices during a call (for liability reasons, if they're paying you and you get injured, that may end up being worker's comp).

    3. Re:Eh, that is the ULTIMATE example of socialism by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 0

      No, they are not an example of socialism, because everyone involved voluntarily makes whatever sacrifice they make. As far as I am aware, there are no laws requiring employers to allow firefighters to leave the job to go fight fires. This is the mistake that progressives make all the time, they think that being forced to do something is interchangeable with doing so voluntarily.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    4. Re:Eh, that is the ULTIMATE example of socialism by geminidomino · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      There's something wrong with a society if an employer is unwilling to volunteer his employees' time in an emergency

      Allow me to introduce you the American Businessman.

    5. Re:Eh, that is the ULTIMATE example of socialism by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      Not really, most VFDs can be seen as a form of insurance, with the added benefit of minimal down time compared to waiting for the entire property to burn down and then having to rebuild everything. Still perfectly fits within the capitalist system.

    6. Re:Eh, that is the ULTIMATE example of socialism by Nithin+Philips · · Score: 1

      No, they are not an example of socialism, because everyone involved voluntarily makes whatever sacrifice they make. As far as I am aware, there are no laws requiring employers to allow firefighters to leave the job to go fight fires. This is the mistake that progressives make all the time, they think that being forced to do something is interchangeable with doing so voluntarily.

      You're confusing socialism with something else. from Wikipedia:

      Socialism play /solzm/ is an economic system characterized by social ownership of the means of production and cooperative management of the economy; or a political philosophy advocating such a system. "Social ownership" may refer to any one of, or a combination of, the following: cooperative enterprises, common ownership, autonomous public ownership or state ownership. As a form of social organization, socialism is based on co-operative social relations and self-management; relatively equal power-relations and the reduction or elimination of hierarchy in the management of economic and political affairs.

      --
      Einmal ist Keinmal. What happens but once might as well not have happened at all.
    7. Re:Eh, that is the ULTIMATE example of socialism by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      Except that the example given is of people who privately own a company making a choice to allow their employees to take time off to serve a community function (firefighting). None of the things in the definition you gave apply: "cooperatve enterprises, common ownership, autonomous public ownership or state ownership". Nope, the companies are privately owned and the owner chooses to give the volunteer firefighters time off to fight fires.
      "relatively equal power-relations and the reduction or elimination of hierarchy in the management of economic...affairs" Nope, the guy who owns the company is very clearly the boss and if you do not do what he says, you're fired.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    8. Re:Eh, that is the ULTIMATE example of socialism by Nithin+Philips · · Score: 1

      Except that the example given is of people who privately own a company making a choice to allow their employees to take time off to serve a community function (firefighting). None of the things in the definition you gave apply: "cooperatve enterprises, common ownership, autonomous public ownership or state ownership". Nope, the companies are privately owned and the owner chooses to give the volunteer firefighters time off to fight fires. "relatively equal power-relations and the reduction or elimination of hierarchy in the management of economic...affairs" Nope, the guy who owns the company is very clearly the boss and if you do not do what he says, you're fired.

      Except the volunteer fire department is still a socialist enterprise, regardless whether a firm allows their employees to participate (there are indeed benefits to the employers in this arrangement) or not. Anyone (or any firm) who participates need not be coerced for it to be socialism. There is even a branch of socialism called Liberterian Socialism, which is based on free association. For purposes here a volunteer fire department and its volunteers are sufficiently socialist, even if they otherwise work for wages in a capitalist firm.

      --
      Einmal ist Keinmal. What happens but once might as well not have happened at all.
    9. Re:Eh, that is the ULTIMATE example of socialism by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      I know very few people who oppose voluntary socialism. Of course, I know very few proponents of socialism who are willing to settle for voluntary socialism. As soon as the government gets involved, it is no longer voluntary. As I pointed out in my original post, progressives try to distort the picture of people voluntarily of their own free will cooperating for the common good to provide support for some government funtionary coercing people to work for what that funtionary claims to be the common good (but which usually only serves the interests of that functionary or his cronys).

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  70. Forget is, no Republican can get that by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1, Troll

    A Republican so someone who cuts of his own legs because they are to large and unwieldy for their minimal usefullness. All that meat and bone (lets face it, muscles on a rep are in the neck) for what? Cut it off. And that brain? 25% of energy of the body? Who does it think it is?

    For a postal service to work, it has to be inefficient. The same with public transport. Unless it reaches everywhere, it isn't usable. That is why early electricity producers PAID big bucks to get everyone hooked up. But they would only do that where it made sense. Getting a line out to the farms often didn't. And so they didn't.

    Society NEEDS infrastructure even in areas YOU as a person never use. That road to nowhere DOES go somewhere and those people at the end need it.

    Don't believe it? Go live in areas of the world where only individual interests are catered for. Somalia is nice for that. No functional government, no services. No taxes. Just protection money to the guy with the bigger gun. And the payment might be your kids. Gosh, wished you payed a tiny percent for a national police service now eh?

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Forget is, no Republican can get that by HellYeahAutomaton · · Score: 1

      The same with public transport. Unless it reaches everywhere, it isn't usable. That is why early electricity producers PAID big bucks to get everyone hooked up. But they would only do that where it made sense. Getting a line out to the farms often didn't. And so they didn't.

      Society NEEDS infrastructure even in areas YOU as a person never use. That road to nowhere DOES go somewhere and those people at the end need it.

      And if the need is so great, they will find a way to fill it. Take our resourceful residents of Kauai for example:
      Island DIY: Kauai residents don't wait for state to repair road

      And if left on their own, without forcing everyone to pay for it, one of two things would happen:
      1) The people leaving themselves out in the middle of nowhere will pay a premium among (hopefully) several competing delivery firms.
      2) They would move to a location more amenable to service. (Location,location, location)

      Don't believe it? Go live in areas of the world where only individual interests are catered for. Somalia is nice for that.

      Ah yes, the half-assed "go move to Somalia" argument. The mess Somalia was left in is the result of post WW2 intervention and the damning effects of the previous socialism that existed there and its gun toting neighbors of Ethiopia and Kenya.

      "From a U.S.-backed Ethiopian invasion and brutal military occupation that left more than 16,000 civilians dead and forced hundreds of thousands to flee their homes, destroying the first semblance of normalcy the country had experienced in nearly two decades, to an ongoing U.S. war involving CIA torture chambers and drone strikes, Somalia has been ravaged by powerful nation-states, not anarchy.

      But hey, let's put that all aside and just concede for a moment that Somalia is in fact some anarchist's wet dream, "a libertarian's paradise." Let's just ignore the fact Somalia was ruled by a military dictator for decades and not make the cheap point that the period preceding its current "anarchist" stage therefore indicts anyone who believes in the justness and necessity of centralized power."

      See : false dichotomy of Somalia

    2. Re:Forget is, no Republican can get that by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      But hey, let's put that all aside and just concede for a moment that Somalia is in fact some anarchist's wet dream, "a libertarian's paradise." Let's just ignore the fact Somalia was ruled by a military dictator for decades

      Isn't that the libertarians wet dream? The government would be so weak that the guy with the biggest gun would rule. That's the logical conclusion to libertarianism.

    3. Re:Forget is, no Republican can get that by DocHoncho · · Score: 1

      Somalia is nice for that. No functional government, no services. No taxes. Just protection money to the guy with the bigger gun.

      I'm John Galt, and I approve this message.

      --
      Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
  71. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    USPS loses about 3-5% of mail, per an unofficial source. They collect but do not publish these statistics themselves.

    That's about standard for the industry I'd bet. While working for a major package delivery company, a letter went out congratulating the employees of that state for only losing 40,000 packages that year, which was about 4% IIRC.

  72. Re:What? by reboot246 · · Score: 2

    Because my boss is still living in the 20th Century, my paycheck still comes by mail. We've been hounding him for years to get direct deposit, but he's old-fashioned and hard-headed.

    I told him one time that I banked online and shopped online, and he asked if that was safe. I told him it was as safe as my paycheck sitting in an unlocked metal box in front of my house for up to a day. I don't think he got it even then.

  73. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The word you're looking for is "kettle".

  74. Re:What? by hellop2 · · Score: 3, Funny

    In forensic circles it's known as a "Ferric Semi-sealed Dihydrogenmonoxide Phase Change Apparatus".

    --
    How many more years will slashdot have an off-by-one error on your Score in your profile?
  75. Two problems, one is their employees by Shivetya · · Score: 1

    Two relatives, mother and daughter on my dad's side, both ran large Post Offices in the Midwest. Both can tell you the same things about what is wrong with the Post Office. First is a the unionized work force who doesn't care. As in, you tell them something, they tell you take a hike. My cousin used to refer to her work as "Debby's Day Care" except all those in her charge were adults. Had an emergency, too bad their going home, you do it or get that new guy to do it, the one with the shitty route. People paid more simply because they were there longer who didn't feel they had to work because she was powerless to do anything. You could write someone up for being drunk and it went no where because it couldn't go anywhere. Fortunately no one was ever hurt but she always wryly remarked, it probably would not have mattered.

    The second problem was the incredible waste. Like the convention in Chicago where they stayed at 4 and 5 star hotels (depending on size and importance) where mother and daughter offered to share a room and were told that "they don't do that". Where they were flown in for the convention business class. My Aunt used to scream about the waste of that convention when she needed a new delivery truck and instead had to watch the money poured down the drain so upper PO officials could celebrate themselves.

    Then comes the trucks, or should I say the infamous left hand drive Windstars. Which no one on a route wanted because, well they were too large to reach across and such made mail delivery a non-starter. So they became shuttles to smaller post offices or those road side lock box places.

    Still the largest controllable costs except it ain't because of union negotiating is the costs of the employees. The actual rules state that negotiations cannot take into account costs when it comes to setting rates for employment.

    Go search CATO.ORG to see all the stories on the USPS. I tend to ignore the calls to privatize it, it is a requirement of the US Government to do this. However nothing requires them to do it wrong or inefficiently, that happens because of the unions and Congress. One which protects the pay of the workers and more importantly the union bosses and the second because they want to stay in office.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  76. Fedex isn't any better by Aereus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I worked at a Fedex sorting facility for 2 days through a temp service. I can assure you the same type of manhandling occurred there as well. Guys were heaving boxes out of the trucks sometimes up to 5ft through the air before they hit the belt and tumbled over several times.

    Ironically enough, 35% of what we unloaded that day were PCs and monitors from the vendor I had worked for that past summer. We wondered why we kept getting customer complaints of unseated video cards, HDDs, etc. I went back the next summer and told them about what happened at Fedex, and was told there was nothing they could expect to change except extra securing for the innards of the PCs...

    1. Re:Fedex isn't any better by ISoldat53 · · Score: 1

      Dell used to ship fake boxes that looked and weighed the same as a computer but had accelerometers in them. But that was back in the day when Dell used Airborne Express. It would be interesting to know the results.

  77. Re:What? by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

    I think, it should be:

    "Never underestimate the bandwidth of mail truck full of micro-SD cards of maximum available size (currently 32G, I believe)."

    No, I did not calculate the actual bandwidth as it's late, and I don't have exact measurements of cards or space available for packages in a truck, or thought what would be optimal packaging that can be loaded into the truck, unloaded and connected to something that can read and write them (time for those operations should be counted along with the truck trip itself). But others are welcome to try. Take into account that gigabytes used for storage devices are decimal while bandwidth units are binary.

    --
    Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  78. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's called a "kettle".

  79. Re:What? by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

    What kind of messed up networking do you have where units are expressed in binary?

  80. Re:Netflix...USPS does NOT stop every day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just a point of clarification. The USPS is NOT required to stop at your door if you have mailbox that is not at the roadside. Outgoing mail can sit in my mailbox for days and days if they don't have any spam ...err... incoming mail to deliver. This is according to my local post office.

  81. Re:What? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

    Forsooth, man, cans't not your trusty vassal deliver a simple epistle without knavish tampering?

  82. Re:What? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

    (All joking aside, sealing wax is one of those things that I suspect, unless yours is impregnated with a dispersion of certified-unique-per-instance coded microdots or something[incidentally, given the demand for supply-chain verification in pharmaceutics and the like, you could probably actually add those to sealing wax pretty cheaply...] a professional could get past surprisingly quickly and quietly; but is sufficiently rare and idiosyncratic that it would drive up the human labor requirements of widespread mail-tapping. That's the tricky thing with physical mail: almost anybody who cares to can invent a (probably weak; but has to be broken manually) ad-hoc sealing scheme comparatively easily. If there were thousands of homebrew crypto systems(mostly bad; but sufficiently weird that you'd need to call an analyst over for 10 minutes to think about them a bit) floating around in common use, cracking packets open would be similarly annoying...)

  83. Chicago by qualityassurancedept · · Score: 1

    I live in Chicago and honestly I wouldn't even bother trying to mail a letter. It's basically a jobs program.

    --
    if your life is such a big joke then why should I care?
  84. Re:What? by jeremyp · · Score: 1, Interesting

    What's to stop me from making an identical copy of your signet ring (the seal on the envelope provides a convenient mould) melting the wax off, opening, copying and resealing the letter and then resealing it with my signet ring copy?

    --
    All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  85. Dial-up is enough for Netflix by tepples · · Score: 1

    True, they use the Internet, but even dial-up is enough to manage one's Netflix DVD queue.

  86. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm... that's an interesting thought. So we should first encrypt our data with a known good encryption scheme, then use a home brew version on top of that? What would be the benifit beyound just using the generally thought uncrackable version?

  87. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a social convention, there's no real difference between the two, beyond the cost of the stamp and slower transit.

    It's not the cost of the stamp. It's the cost of the time. I can send an email in 20 seconds. Writing, printing, addressing and stamping an envelope takes 20 minutes, plus the time taken to walk to the mailbox and back. I'm not going to bother doing that unless it's about something that really matters to me - and hence is likely to affect my vote.

  88. Re:What? by justsayin · · Score: 1

    Or Radar off of MASH.

  89. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I had to send papers of a restraining order to another state, I could care less if the FBI or CIA wanted to read them as long as my mail makes it. I fail to see how your argument applies to nearly every real world situation.

  90. Re:and nothing of value... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only real reason they can't do the mandated be profitable was stated publicly- they have to fund their pension funds for all their employees to 75 years into the future, as mandated by Congress (So they can raid THAT like they did Social Security...).

  91. Re:What? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

    Do you have any idea how hard it is to duplicate individual handwriting?

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  92. The Wal-Mart model by anyaristow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A private service comes in and competes only for the simple jobs- they refuse service to anywhere tricky. As all their deliveries are simple, they can massively undercut the national service on these jobs, depriving the service of it's main revenue stream.

    You just described the Wal-Mart business model. They don't really compete with flower shops, pharmacies, craft stores, toy stores, etc. They don't offer the same depth of choice or quality or service. But they siphon off enough of their customers--the ones buying the common, cheap, bulk basics, and requiring little service--to turn them unprofitable.

  93. Level of service to private residence? by Walter+White · · Score: 2

    One thing I never hear mentioned is the level of service to private residences. When I grew up (ca 1950-60) we had a mail box on our front porch and many had slots in their door. The mailman walked up to each door to deliver. At present we have a mail box across the street that a mail delivery person (no longer a man...) can drive up to and deposit mail. In even newer neighborhoods there are centralized stations where mail can be delivered to a bunch of addresses in one stop. One thing I've never heard is that the USPS is going to reduce the service level to the older neighborhoods to match the level provided in newer areas. Surely it must be more labor intensive to walk door to door than to drive down a street and deliver to boxes that are all on one side of the street.

    I'm sure that would cost jobs, but that's the primary way to save money, isn't it?

    1. Re:Level of service to private residence? by ledow · · Score: 1

      The UK Post Office delivers to every mainland UK address every single day, and post is delivered "to the door" (i.e. nobody has a "mailbox" at the end of the drive - you have to walk up every drive and physically put it through each front door and then walk back to the street).

      A first-class item will get anywhere (if you post it before the closing of whatever post box you choose, usually 5pm) next day, guaranteed, and they will deliver over 600 miles away on a first-class stamp (currently 46p). Franked mail is even cheaper/quicker.

      The delivery of the item is the cheap part, it's the handling, speed and mass-transit in the middle that's expensive (petrol / aviation fuel). By comparison hiring a guy to pedal a bike (literally, they give our posties rusty old push-bikes) and deliver to a couple of hundred addresses is nothing.

  94. Re:USPS isn't unprofitable, it's just dirty politi by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

    Oh, I'm aware of those. All I was doing (albeit, rather more curtly than I typically would) was pointing out the factual inaccuracies in the OP's statement with regards to the USPS being tax-funded.

  95. TFA Hilarity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The changes would provide short-term relief, but ultimately could prove counterproductive, pushing more of America's business onto the Internet."

    In the future, please link to news, not editorials.

  96. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. But your subsequent sabbatical to Federal Pound-me-in-the-ass Prison may make you regret it.

  97. This is absolute nonsense by gelfling · · Score: 1

    I am over 50 and I can safely say I HAVE NEVER SEEN, IN MY ENTIRE LIFE, EVER, seen a letter delivered overnight anywhere for anything under any and all circumstances by the USPS. They even tell you that overnight delivery is 'maybe 2-3 days'. And the last several years, here in zipcode 27615 Not only do we NEVER get mail before 6pm, we're lucky if they show up all scheduled days. 5 out 6 is considered pretty good. And that's just for pick up. We stopped dropping our letters in our own mailbox for pickup YEARS ago because if we were lucky they wouldn't disappear to never be delivered half the time. Today it takes about TWO WEEKS to send a letter from one zipcode in Raleigh NC to another zipcode in Raleigh NC. And when ordering anything online with shipment via USPS, on average 3-5 business days is approximately one MONTH. Netflix? I dropped the disk in the mail Wed. It's Monday and the next disk will come today if we're super fortunate but probably tomorrow. In my local PO when you trudge there to do something like send your tax return registered mail receipt requested, while you're waiting on the next employee to keel over from obesity and diabetes, you get to watch on not 3, not 4, not 5, but SIX 50" flat screens overhead extolling the wonders of stamps depicting silent film stars, state flowers, and Christmas.

    I say napalm the lot of them.

    1. Re:This is absolute nonsense by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      In our town we get next-day delivery for almost any piece of mail sent within town. We also get next-day delivery for most mail sent to the nearest major distribution center, which appropriately contains a Netflix distribution center.

    2. Re:This is absolute nonsense by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      That's ridiculous. I routinely get next day first class mail, including my Netflix disks.

  98. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd like to add, as an aside, that FedEx Home loses roughly .025%-.05% of any given truck, Sam's Club loses about 1%, and Wal-mart does the same to roughly ~5-10% of any given truckload (they overstuff their trucks). These statistics are informal, mind you, and may vary.

  99. Re:What? by Artifakt · · Score: 1

    Like the parent poster said, individual handling. Anything that can't simply be dealt with once, but requires a human to enter the loop, drives up the cost of implementing your algorithms, AND creates a potential for the snoopers to betray themselves. Why do we put locks on houses? A professional can get through the typical lock quickly. There are a few lock systems thought to be generally uncrackable (within certain limits, like no fair bringing along a wrecking ball and crane), but not everyone buys such an 'uncrackable' lock. Why bother with any of the others at all?
              Here, it's a case of inflicting costs on the snooper. It's very cheap to harvest lots of unencrypted e-mail. It's equally cheap to throw out all the items that have standard, reliable encryptions and let those people keep their privacy. For some nefarious purposes, reading just the rest is enough. But it gets very expensive in human resource terms to determine what's hard encryption and what's a simple but unique code that could be worth breaking if the effort was put forth, but only if a human spends some time on the task.
              Try this example (Warning, non car example follows): The US government has machines that can recognize an individual voice in a phone call by voice-print analysis. They can record all calls featuring one of those voices and it's very cheap. They could probably catch absolutely every call by a particular suspect once they were in the system. But what happens when they want to figure out what region of what country someone on a voice call was raised in? Could they possibly afford to filter for all calls made featuring a voice with some particular geographic or ethnic traits?

    --
    Who is John Cabal?
  100. Re:What? by tgd · · Score: 1

    Not without the recipient knowing and without comitting a crime.

    Other than that, your nerdy little ass is right.

    That's just plain moronic. Its just as illegal to access someone's e-mail, and at least it has a password. My mailbox doesn't.

  101. Republican attempt to privatize USPS on track by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Sure mail traffic has gone down in an internet age.
    But the manufactured crisis that put them in their current state was caused by Republicans requiring that they prefund their pension plan to a degree that no other group has ever been required to.
    It follows the current repugnicon playbook: Create a crisis and use it to justify changes which profit their cronies.
    We need to stop handing the keys back the dishonest Republicans who have no interest in governing for the benefit of the many, only in profit for the few.

  102. Not the way the USPS should be moving forward... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We need quick deliveries. If the problem is money, raise the rates. In 1850, the price of a stamp was around 5 cents. Lets move the cost of a letter to a buck. I can pay that.

  103. Re:What? by edremy · · Score: 2
    Bandwidth is unaffected- you can stuff just as many physical objects in the box as you did before. (In fact, it's going up constantly-think about what a 1' cube box of microSD cards could hold over the years) Just keep sending boxes out at the same rate and you get the same bandwidth

    Latency is your issue here- you've gone from a 86,400,000 ms ping to 172,800,000 ms ping.

    --
    "Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
  104. Net equipment is not as reliable by bigtrike · · Score: 1

    The networking equipment at the CO is less reliable than the phone equipment, probably due to the fact that the phone network hardware is far more mature.

    You do have a valid point though, using POTS lines for both puts the parent at non-zero risk for having simultaneous failures. We use both cable internet and T1s at our office. That didn't help us one day when one of the 4 telephone poles carrying both wires caught on fire, leaving us without internet for about 36 hours.

  105. Jiffy express by fropenn · · Score: 1

    "If it has to be there tomorrow, call the other guys. If it had to be there two weeks ago, call us."

    http://www.hulu.com/watch/285313/saturday-night-live-jiffy-express

  106. Re:What? by SirGarlon · · Score: 2

    USPS loses about 3-5% of mail, per an unofficial source.

    How much first class mail do they lose though? A hell of a lot less than 3% of my outgoing mail has been lost. More like, one letter so far in the 25 years I've been using postal mail.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  107. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think, it should be:

    "Never underestimate the bandwidth of mail truck full of micro-SD cards of maximum available size (currently 32G, I believe)."

    What would that be in Libraries of Congress?

  108. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "why do you think that email will kill paper letters ?"

    It killed half of the USPS right now, no small feat.
    The rest will follow.
    Good that Cliff Clavin didn't have to see that.

  109. Re:What? by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    "A hell of a lot less than 3% of my outgoing mail has been lost. "

    Try to send some expensive shit. Nobody is going to 'lose' congratulations to aunt Mable.

  110. Makes Sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This plan makes perfect sense. "Woe be" to those instant gratification people who demand at least what they've gotten used to or BETTER. (shrug)

  111. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "the seal on the envelope provides a convenient mould"

    Actually, it doesn't. Try it sometime. The wax is too easy to melt and deform. You COULD use some sort of laser-scanning device to build a 3d model. But at that point you're out several million dollars.

  112. re: UPS and package damage by King_TJ · · Score: 4, Informative

    I have to agree, although I've long since switched to FedEx for most of my package shipping needs.

    UPS uses union labor and FedEx doesn't (at least, last I checked -- because I realize there have been some fights to unionize there in the last few years).

    I'm not necessarily a believer in the idea that union labor is always worse in some way, but I think that tends to be the case when you're talking about relatively unskilled labor. Basically, you've got a scenario where the people doing basic, manual labor (loading and unloading of boxes at sorting facilities, etc.) are protected against punishment for wrongdoing in the workplace by layers of bureaucracy. (EG. Shop foreman can't just fire some guy on the spot if he witnesses him flying into a rage and stomping his boot through a customer's "FRAGILE: HANDLE WITH CARE!" box on the shop floor. He has to go through some union-mandated disciplinary procedure that probably means, at the very least, the employee just receives some kind of verbal warning for the first offense.)

    Plus, I'm not impressed with UPS based on personal stories told to me by former UPS employees themselves. For example, one of my buddies used to work at a UPS facility where he said boxes were regularly stacked up into 6 foot high walls, regardless of any warnings printed on them. When a truck would come in, someone would yell "Tear 'em down!" and they'd knock over the walls, letting boxes fall all over the concrete floor, for people to sort through and load up.

    FedEx isn't perfect.... I once had them absolutely destroy a music synthesizer I was shipping to Canada, and then fight me for weeks about paying the insurance claim on it. But overall, I think they have a better track record of getting boxes to destinations on time and in one piece. Additionally, they have a better arrangement for receivers of packages if they're not available to sign for the delivery. Unlike UPS, it's easy to go to a FedEx facility in person, in the evening, and sign for and pick up your delivery.

  113. Court Problems by Khyber · · Score: 1

    Given the time-sensitive nature of small claims court filings (many of which get served via USPS) this is going to pose a large burden on the right to due process.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  114. Then there's something wrong with the Government by alispguru · · Score: 1

    Yes, there's a funded-through-2038 trust fund. However, the US Government as a whole collected that money, borrowed it, and spent it on other things. Remember those "surpluses" in the 1990s? They were counting baby boomer social security taxes as current revenue in that "surplus" computation - we were still going into long-term debt.

    The US Government as a whole is in deep fiscal trouble. The social security surplus helped cover up the problem, and it is going to have to be part of the solution.

    --

    To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
  115. Re:What? by Inthewire · · Score: 1
    --


    Writers imply. Readers infer.
  116. Re:What? by markhb · · Score: 1

    That's what Registered Mail is for... it not only generates a paper trail, it also gets special-security handling (as in, they lock it in a safe for the interval between you handing it in at the desk and it needing to be sorted, etc.) Plus, Registered Mail is an international standard so the benefits are supposed to apply when sending to any UPU member state (although I'm not going to venture a guess as to what might have happened to the wad of cash you may have sent to that nice man in Nigeria). If it was good enough to carry the Hope Diamond, it's probably going to get your negotiable bearer bonds there in one piece.

    --
    Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
  117. Re:What? by markhb · · Score: 1

    Damn... why did it strip my link? Hope Diamond ref: http://postalmuseum.si.edu/museum/1d_Hope_Diamond.html .

    --
    Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
  118. re: FedEx Ground by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    This is interesting, because your experience with FedEx Ground sounds completely different than mine! I'm starting to think this stuff varies a lot by region, and there's no way to make a blanket statement about any of these carriers.

    I know here (St. Louis, Missouri area), FedEx has their sorting facility open until at least 8PM for people to drop by and pick up packages from missed deliveries. I've done that many times, if I see while at work via email or the web site that my delivery was attempted. I just run by there on the way home and get my box. UPS refuses to let me do such a thing, at least on the first delivery attempt. I'm *forced* to wait a second day for them to attempt the delivery again and pick up a signed tag I leave out for them on my door, stating I'd like to pick it up in person.

    Also, I don't think I've ever had an issue with FedEx Ground skipping my delivery, just because a signature was required. I've *often* had issues like that with UPS though, including times they ring my doorbell and I hurry to the door, only to open it and see the guy sprinting back into his truck and a note already stuck to my door saying I wasn't home to sign for the package. Other times, I've had UPS simply leave my box in random, strange places, with no delivery notice on my door whatsoever. Once, I waited days for a box I was expecting, only to discover the driver had gone around to the back of my house and placed it inside my BBQ grill. Why in the world would I check my grill for a package delivery if there was no note telling me to look there??

  119. Re:So if you wondered why Netflix was shooting its by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's still no alternative if you want to rent rare or unusual movies. Where else can you rent The Red Green Show, Mary Tyler Moore, and new releases that aren't mass market crap (Redbox movies).

  120. re: cost of mailing a letter by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    The problem is, the service may be cheap for what's involved to perform it, but people don't find enough value in the service to pay more without complaint!

    Most of the 1st. class letters I've mailed in the last year or two were for things like receiving a $2 - $5 "mail-in rebate" on something I bought, or forms the government itself required I mail back to them. If I'm already losing 50 cents of that $2 I was trying to get back by filling out a bunch of other pain in the ass paperwork to send in, yep -- I'm not going to be real happy about it.

  121. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A few years ago, I got an entire OS distribution in the mail that consisted of deb files.

  122. 71% of Firefighters are volunteer by witherstaff · · Score: 1

    The latest stat from Wikipedia is 71% of firefighters are volunteers. Having just done some community activities with our local volunteer FD I heard a similar number from the chief. Our FDs in my part of Michigan are all tax funded through township or city taxes. If new equipment need is given then they can get very attractive loans but they are still loans. The only grants I know our local ones have received were post 9/11 for chemical and nuclear equipment (Due to being near 2 plants within 50 miles).

    I live in a rural area. Local taxes also pay for the local police via a police millage (around 100K for 40 hour police protection a week, plus supplemental emergency coverage from the county dispatch), ambulance (109K for township coverage) and a road millage and a school millage. The local school district built a new middle school a few years ago and a millage had to be passed to pay for it. Schools are also ran off of property taxes. I personally am in favor of removing the Dep of Education since it doesn't make sense to send local taxes to the state, then feds, only for the feds to send the money back to the local school. Cut the bureaucracy! My area is partly on sewer - if you live near one of the lakes - but that was all paid for by hookup fees and monthly fees. Water is supplied all by personal wells. Clean water that tastes good out of the tap is a wonderful thing.

    Not surprisingly my rural area is consistently republican. Don't even think of running for the township as a Dem (Not that I think national parties matter on the local level). Realistically most everyone is more libertarian than anything - my land, my right to do anything I damn well please on it if it doesn't hurt you.

  123. Re:and nothing of value... by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    Not sure I believe that. Back in the early nineties when dialup was all there (reasonably) was, I was paying bills online. Not many, because back then most businesses didn't have the option. It was slow compared to fiber, but us old fogies still managed to get stuff done.

    I've seen this a lot lately "we don't have broadband so we can't get anything done on the internet" and I think that works with people who have had broadband all their lives and can't imagine what dialup must have been like. But for those of us who were there, it rings false.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  124. Defense in depth: 7 steps to detect mail tampering by tomhudson · · Score: 2

    Defense 1 - Use glitter. Sprinkle it inside any envelope you want to protect. Anyone opening the envelope is going to positively HATE you for the next week - that stuff gets everywhere!

    Defense 2 - Encode a message as tiny colored dots on the paper - anyone seeing the dots will assume it's just more glitter that didn't get cleaned off;

    Defense 3 - Make it easy to detect the envelope has been switched or opened by ... you guessed it ... MORE glitter, on the envelope sealing strip (use envelopes with a self-adhesive strip). Sprinkle at random, shake off what you can, photograph the resulting pattern. Send the photograph via email. (Note: This method is used to detect tampering with nuclear warheads under international agreements - if it's good enough to be verifiable by both Uncle Sam and Uncle Joe, it's good enough for you);

    Defense 4 - SWAK at the bottom of the letter, or the reverse side - and photograph that as well. It's very hard to match - they have to get the lip pattern, position, and the lipstick color just right. If they try to just "print it", that's easily detected, since it won't smudge when rubbed;

    Defense 5 - "This doesn't smell like it's from her" - use a (very VERY) small amount of your usual perfume (guys, substitute your after-shave or cologne - remember - very VERY small amount);

    Defense 6 - Coffee ring. A light, broken ring of coffee or tea, off in a corner - with a different mug each time. Don't slop the mug - just dab a bit of coffee in several areas on the bottom rim, and "stamp" your letter. Again. hard to duplicate, send photo of same. Bonus points if you use lemon juice instead (only shows up when heated).

    Defense 7 - Put the REAL message buried in the photos, not the letter.

  125. Re:What? by KingMotley · · Score: 2

    The bandwidth is nearly unchanged, it's the latency that's gotten worse.

  126. Re:What? by tomhudson · · Score: 1

    Maybe he's used several colors of wax in layers, and when you "melt the wax off", the resulting lump won't be the same color. It's how I would do it.

  127. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next thing you know, "nigger" will be a polite word that refers to white people. I think that's more likely.

    Whatever the color, count yourself in.

  128. Re:What? by tomhudson · · Score: 1

    Speaking of cursive... Have you older people noticed that modern teens no longer write in cursive at all? I heard that some schools were no longer teaching cursive writing. There's something sad about this in a Sherlock Holmes kind of way.

    Studies showed that a bit of practice is all it takes to write non-cursive just as fast, and FAR more legibly. Look at doctors' prescriptions for an example of how the use of cursive can harm or even kill.

  129. Re:What? by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

    Walk to the mailbox? Just put it in your mailbox and the carrier will take it. It always goes out that day too.

  130. Re:and nothing of value... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Letters are what I have to use to pay my association fees and garage rental because they won't do any type of electronic transfer and my bank wants to charge about ten times what a stamp costs for their service. Not to mention holiday and birthday cards - and please, don't talk about e-cards. I once asked a friend of mine whether he actually knew when his friends' birthdays were or just set it up with a service. He said he used a service because he really didn't want to be bothered with keeping track of birthdays. It's not "it's the thought that counts" when there's no thought behind the act...

  131. Re:So if you wondered why Netflix was shooting its by SirWhoopass · · Score: 1

    He referred to Netflix "shooting itself in the foot" and did not mention only the price increase. There was also the spin-off of mail delivery to Qwikster, leaving Netflix as a streaming-only operation. The net effect, combined with their public statements about the future, showed that Netflix management considers DVD-by-mail to be a dead model and was willing to abandon it immediately.

    Also, it has been reported that Netflix mail costs are 20-times more expensive than their streaming costs. The reported change in their studio contracts is about 10x.

  132. Re:What? by b0bby · · Score: 1

    I've actually mailed things sealed this way; the wax doesn't really survive the mechanized sorting process very well.

  133. 574,001 by oDDmON+oUT · · Score: 1

    That's the number of career USPS employees.

    Let's say that 25% of those work in sorting centers.

    That's 143,500.

    42% of sorting centers closing puts 60,270 people out of work.

    All that human misery, because the Legislative Branch would rather buy 2,443 aircraft for an estimated US$323 billion [Joint Strike Force Fighter], than fund the US Post Office [running at a $5.1B loss this year].

    There's something terribly wrong with this picture.

    --
    Some days it's just not worth
    chewing through my restraints.
  134. Misleading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The summary reads as if this is a definitive occurance. It's not. They haven't decided yet...

  135. Re:What? by AJH16 · · Score: 1

    While I am pretty sure you were joking, he said the unit of measure is binary, not that the count is represented as binary. In case anyone got confused by it, he is referring to the fact that 1GB on an SD card is 1000000000 bytes where as over a network, 1GB is 1024MB or 1073741824 bytes.

    --
    AJ Henderson
  136. Re:What? by AJH16 · · Score: 1

    Is it black?

    --
    AJ Henderson
  137. Re:What? by AJH16 · · Score: 1

    Or you could take an e-mail, pgp it, print the file, put it in an envelope, mail it, the recipient could then open it, scan and OCR it and then decrypt it... or I could just send a plain text e-mail with a link to go to an SSL protected website with the actual message and require authentication to get at it. (Granted the authentication mechanism would still have to be preconfigured, likely by mail.

    --
    AJ Henderson
  138. Re:What? by s73v3r · · Score: 1

    Certified mail.

  139. Re:What? by s73v3r · · Score: 1

    Not everyone has one right by their door. I live in an apartment complex, where my mailbox and the outgoing one are somewhat far from my door.

  140. Re:What? by MarcoAtWork · · Score: 1

    why not put your wax-sealed letter inside another "normal" letter? if your "outside" letter is one of those bubble-wrap ones it should work pretty well...

    --
    -- the cake is a lie
  141. Re:So if you wondered why Netflix was shooting its by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

    Netflix has decided that it ISN'T splitting off Qwikster.

    And while their streaming costs for a title may be lower, the content they offer that way is about 10% of their total catalog. Per title streaming costs a lot more.

  142. Re:What? by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    Wow, what's it like in your world?

    Good old fashoined [SIC] letters are trivial to intercept, and unless you're Francis Bacon, trivial to read.

    e-mail is as private as you want it to be. If it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter. If it does, it borders on trivial to make it darned near impossible to read.

    Who hand writes letters anymore? I'm in my fifties and never learned to write cursive (typewriters having become common in my grandfather's time). How old are you?

    Email is best effort, but average delivery is in seconds, whereas fastest delivery by physical mail is 24 hours.

    You've never heard of delivery flags on email, I'm guessing.

    Congresspeople are scared as hell of the internet, for several reason.

    And I'm guessing, the people who get paid out of postal service funds are scared to death of the alternatives that are making them redundant.

    But you know, it doesn't matter. If there are enough people still hand writing correspondence on parchment and sealing them with wax, there will exist a service to hand-carry it on horseback to its destination. But at some point it starts to not make sense to pay for a service out of tax dollars that does not clearly benefit the public at large. (Man, if I had a nickel for every time I heard that...)

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  143. Re:What? by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    So if I'm reading someone else's physical mail for illicit purposes, what's going to stop me, is that opening the letter is committing a crime? You seriously believe this?

    Keeping the recipient from knowing could be as easy as steaming open the envelope and resealing, you know, like we did as kids for those letters sent home from school.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  144. Re:What? by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    Public schools... Sigh.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  145. Re:What? by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    Paging Dan Brown...

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  146. Re:What? by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    I think it's telling that a group of geeks like us could come up with a dozen fairly technical ways to tamper with mail, and another dozen countermeasures, in a matter of minutes. Non-geeks don't stand a chance. :-)

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

    I take my mail to the Post Office. I've had times where the mailman didn't bother to pick up my outgoing mail. Plus crooks are more likely to steal outgoing mail because it is more likely to have checks in it. They don't want your bills.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  148. Re:What? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

    USPS loses about 3-5% of mail, per an unofficial source.
    In my experience, it is an order of magnitude less than that. Our business sends out and receives about 30 items per month. I know that is not a huge volume, but in about 3000 items, we have never lost one. I don't think the statistical variance could be that extreme. yes, these are all normal first class items.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  149. Re:Netflix...USPS does NOT stop every day by Shatrat · · Score: 1

    This is why there are big blue mailboxes all over town. Drop it off on the way to work/school whatever.

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  150. Re: UPS and package damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, you gave me flashbacks. Fedex somehow destroyed an expensive synthesizer had been professionally double-packed and sent across the country. After weeks of struggling with their insurance department I gave up. Never given them business since.

  151. Re:What? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

    I've looked into direct deposit, and one reason he may be avoiding it is due to the expense. Judging from some other things you have said, maybe he just hasn't looked into it at all, but it is definitely a lot more expensive than just handing out checks.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  152. Re:What? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

    There are still far, far too many people charging "convenience fees" for electronic transactions. This is why most of my stuff is still paid by check. Unfortunately, the banks are still charging far too much for electronic transactions and the extra costs get passed on to the consumer. bank's seem to be fine with eating the cost of dealing with a physical check, but they want to pass on the significantly smaller cost of electronic transactions to the customer.
    Of course, if we went all electronic, about 3/4 of a bank's staff would be on the breadlines, so maybe we should ease into it.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  153. Re:What? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    I would cast a geas spell on the envelope.

  154. Re:Defense in depth: 7 steps to detect mail tamper by torkus · · Score: 1

    That's great and all but you'd have to step it up on the envelope itself. It's child's play to 'see through' even security envelopes for someone with the time and interest (and some money) - far easier than steaming open envelopes once you get beyond small quantities.

    If we now have devices that can (literally) see through walls in proof-of-concept about I'm pretty sure a lowly envelope doesn't stand a chance. If for no other reason than you by definition lose control of your letter once the carrier takes it.

    --
    You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
  155. USPS is NOT losing money! by bussdriver · · Score: 2

    USPS has been SELF funding by law for a long while. It is not losing money.

    The USPS has been doing record 'business' but their losses are due to the GOP forcing them by law to pay for their pensions IN ADVANCE many decades (I think it was 45 years) in advance! This added an instant MASSIVE cost which makes their operating expenses be negative for years.

    The mail is a public service; if it can't effectively be run non-profit then it has to be run AT A LOSS; just as it was when the FOUNDERS created it-- it was heavily subsidized back then (and for over a century.) The mailman used to be thought of as another public servant, like the fireman or policeman-- but unlike those, there was a fee for use (can you imagine the taxpayer cost and amount of junk if postage was free?? or how crazy it would be to pay a police of fire bill?? don't pay up, let the house burn...) We put money into police and fire after 9/11. With rising gas costs instead of investing in electric mail trucks we stick like 50 years of future pensions on their tab causing them to lower service, lay off people and raise rates during a depression.

    2010 was the biggest year they ever had; they are not losing demand (ebay, netflix, mortgage issues etc.) Postage prices have RISEN to cover costs in gas etc.

    FedEx costs like $5 to do anything; and the volume is far far lower (not physical volume.) maybe 1 time a week I see that truck on my street. I get 6+ items EVERY DAY on average and I'm as paperless as possible.

    The Republicans being ignorant and ideological have been purposely attacking this well run institution with baseless attacks. Just watch the ignorance displayed in the sadly entertaining reality show "GOP Presidential debates." A few do know better and are just trying to ruin it so a for-profit contributor to create another wonderful monopoly power like AT&T or Comcast because we love them... Instead of arguing we should make internet more like the post office (equal fair packet delivery) we are trying to prevent it from becoming a hostage to private mega corps (whose 'product' is in extremely high demand with no real competition making it a poor market for pop economics.)

    I'm in no way connected to the USPS.

  156. RFD by ISoldat53 · · Score: 1

    Stop Rural Free Delivery and see how loud remote people squeal. There are many places UPS/FEDEX won't go. The post office ends up delivering the last leg to the mailbox.

    1. Re:RFD by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      I have never heard of any place with a mailbox that UPS/FEDEX will not deliver to. That being said, I am not a proponent of eliminating the Post Office (considering that it is one of the functions of the federal government specified in the Constitution).

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  157. Re:and nothing of value... by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    And this is different from having your personal assistant send out cards in your name, in what way? That's been going on since at least the fifties.

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

    Encrypt it, print the file to paper tape, mail the paper tape.

  159. Re:What? by treeves · · Score: 1

    Karnak the Magnificent FTW.

    --
    ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
  160. Re:What? by raehl · · Score: 1

    USPS loses about 3-5% of mail, per an unofficial source.

    I find this unlikely. I send a lot of mail. It all gets there.

  161. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I haven't written a letter in fifteen years. I probably wouldn't have even then, but that was when the military got email for deployed troops. Why would you anyone write a personal letter when you can call someone and talk to them now? Or text message them and have them get it almost this minute?
    Mail is private? Do you have any idea of the volume of mail lost or stolen from the USPS? Well in actual fact no one does, because the problem is so bad that the USPS won't release the figure. You might get security through obscurity for your mail, but you're just as likely to get a card (which might contain money) stolen as delivered. In any case if the government wants to intercept your mail it's no harder to get a court order to do than it is to get one to see your email. In the post 911 world it probably doesn't even require a court order.

  162. Re:What? by b0bby · · Score: 1

    That would work; I haven't done it since I was a kid though.

  163. Re:What? by izomiac · · Score: 1

    It varies by mail carrier I'm sure. Personally, I receive more mail meant for other people than for myself. Of course, the problem is beyond the carrier because I occasionally get mail for people in other zip codes.

    For registered mail it's even more annoying. My mail carrier would knock, then be gone by the time it took me to walk to the backdoor of my one bedroom apartment. After several days of this (I thought it was some neighborhood kids playing pranks), he left a note to go pick it up at X post office... which referred me to Y, which referred me to Z. I felt like I was playing Super Mario Brothers!

  164. Re:Junk mail by tompaulco · · Score: 1

    The USPS plan to fund their crazy generous pension plan is to increase the volume of junk mail.
    Being that we are entering into winter and the cost of natural gas and firewood is increasing, their ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to their newsletter.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  165. Re:and nothing of value... by tompaulco · · Score: 1

    Anybody with a smartphone believes that. Webpages are chock full of cruft these days. Mostly advertisements, with all kinds of flash and images. And of course they are loaded first. Sometimes the advertisements take so long to load that they are refreshing before you have even got to the content of the page. I wonder if browsers will still allow you to turn off images like they used to do back in the dialup days.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  166. Re: UPS and package damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For example, one of my buddies used to work at a UPS facility where he said boxes were regularly stacked up into 6 foot high walls, regardless of any warnings printed on them. When a truck would come in, someone would yell "Tear 'em down!" and they'd knock over the walls, letting boxes fall all over the concrete floor, for people to sort through and load up.

    I've heard exactly the same thing from a friend of mine and given how much damage I've seen on my own shipments, it seems likely this attitude is everywhere at UPS.

  167. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work at payment processing center, Last year we processed over 5 million payments made by check and several hundred made by cash, all delivered by the USPS.

    Checks aren't going away anytime soon people.

  168. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    0.003125

  169. Re:What? by AsmCoder8088 · · Score: 1

    Right, but you should be sure to use the proper units.

    1GB equals exactly 1,000,000,000 bytes by definition.

    1GiB (notice the 'i') is the one that equals 1,073,741,824 bytes.

  170. 1U Servers? Who still makes those? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's nothing. I just got a delivery through UPS of my DEC Alpha Personal Workstation 533a.

    'tis'n't even 1999 anymore and it's just getting to me because the UPS manager said they "FOUND" this parcel with my name on it in a back room being used as a shelf stool because THE FUCKING LABEL GOT PUT ON UPSIDE DOWN and they finally just now 10 years later looked underneath to see my name and address and phone number and delivery codes but at-least my name is still the same so they looked me up in a phone book hoping I was the same John Doe in that ZIP code.

    CAN"T FUCKING BELIEVE THIS SHIT!! Digital Equipment Corporation was bought-up by Compaq, then Compaq absorbed into HP, then HP stripped naked and pimped and under-payed by Carly Fiorina, and then my DEC Alpha finally arrived with an expired support contract for VMS. Thanks UPS. Thanks 'murika.

    >>I got three new 1U servers sent to me via UPS last year. One of the cartons had a TIRE TRACK across the top of it.

  171. Re:and nothing of value... by dryeo · · Score: 1

    Back in the '90's web sites were optimized for dialup, shit in the early '90's there was no java-script, no ads and images were generally small though I can remember that some JPEGs took as long to decode as to download on my 386/33 with no math coprocessor..
    The phone lines here are pretty crappy which translates to a 26.4 connection so it takes as long to get to the post office as to download 3 to 3.5 MBs and the web sites I've tried for paying bills are bigger. I'm just thankful I've got privoxy, no-script and no Flash.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  172. Spam by jmcvetta · · Score: 1

    Probably 90% by weight of the mail I receive through USPS is straight-to-the-recycle spam. It's a really phenomenal waste of trees, oil, and labor. I suspect the USPS would have a lot more public support if they didn't enable such wanton and annoying waste of resources.

    1. Re:Spam by neminem · · Score: 1

      Mark this up, a lot.

      (I'd say in my case more like 99.99%, by weight. Maybe only 99% by count. I'm just glad my complex has paper recycling, or there were would a buttload of paper going straight from my mailbox into the trash. Daily.)

  173. Public service by Atmchicago · · Score: 1

    Oh, then we should make sending mail free, as a public service. Wait, that's not what you meant? Of course it's a public service, but that doesn't mean we can't use a more rational means to support it.

    --

    You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it dissolve.

  174. 2-3 day Delivery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Chicago its that on a great week. Any further forget it its at least a week.
    Most of the mail boxes are once a day pickup and you never know for sure when that is (even though its posted don't believe it). While the PO is going down hill UPS is doing better. I have given up mailing boxes (or larger than envelope) via the PO and only use UPS.
    1. Waiting time is essentially zero at UPS
    2. More dependable that PO
    3. Clerks are actually pleasant (as opposed to the PO where they are surly and work at a snails pace).
    4. Prices are higher at UPS but (see above).

    Drivers are a hit and miss group. UPS uses those big brown vans and block the street when they deliver a MAJOR minus.

  175. Re:and nothing of value... by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    But even in the nineties there were bill pay services that were set-and-forget. My credit union had it, and they didn't impress me as being cutting edge. You tell them what bill to pay, how much, what account to take it out of, and then you got email when it happened. You only had to hit the website to set it up.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  176. Re:and nothing of value... by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    Sorry to say this, but you are probably in the low 20 percent of the 80/20 rule. It probably doesn't make a lot of fiscal sense to keep a rather expensive national service going for the few people in the Ozarks who are still using acoustic modems.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  177. Re:and nothing of value... by dryeo · · Score: 1

    That was probably true with my credit union as well. Back then it loaded pretty fast and supported most browsers unlike so many sites that became IE only.
    At the time I was starting my own business and to be honest finances were tight and I was usually slightly behind on my bills, never enough that it was a problem but enough that a set and forget payment would have been risky. I had the odd check bounce due to receiving bouncy checks as my accounts were never very full back then.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  178. Re:and nothing of value... by dryeo · · Score: 1

    I'm not American, my countries postal service serves the biggest area of any postal service in the world (Russia doesn't have post service to most of Siberia) and our countries population is 1/10 of the States and it still makes money. Stamps are only a couple of cents more then the US post and certain letters like the millions sent to Santa (address North Pole, postal code H0H 0H0) don't even need stamps (they get replied to as well as well as letters addressed to the Easter bunny and even God)
    If Canada Post can make money then the US post should be able to as well. It just needs to be let free to offer more services, have more choice in post offices (many of ours are contracted out and just a section of eg a drug store) and diversify.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  179. Re:What? by AJH16 · · Score: 1

    Interesting, I found wikipedia to be a better link. It appears that the IEEE changed over to using Gigabyte to refer to the metric definition in 2000 though JEDEC still considers a Gigabyte in terms of memory to be the binary version. I was unfamiliar with the Gigibyte terminology since I work mostly in software and deal with memory addressing much more than anything else. It is also worth noting that while IEC came up with and NIST, CIPM and IEEE have endorced the GiB symbol, it is mentioned as having seen limited acceptance in the broad market. I never even heard of the term while going to one of the top 20 ranked comp sci schools in the US from 2002 to 2006.

    That all said, I was still apparently wrong as the telecom and networking industry has apparently traditionally used the SI interpretation for bandwidth, so it would still be 1,000,000,000 bytes on a network as well, just not in memory or disk space when you take in to consideration the working definition rather than the standard definition.

    --
    AJ Henderson
  180. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, a teapot!

  181. Re:Then there's something wrong with the Governmen by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    Yes, there's a funded-through-2038 trust fund. However, the US Government as a whole collected that money, borrowed it, and spent it on other things.

    Borrowed via Treasury Bonds. Funny how that part always gets left out of the IOU storyline. And the government has never, ever defaulted on a single Treasury Bond, nor will it - our creditors in China and Saudi Arabia would never allow such an event to occur.

    The social security surplus helped cover up the problem, and it is going to have to be part of the solution.

    But not cuts to defense spending or tax increases on the rich? Some priorities you have there.