Slashdot Mirror
Finnish Mail System Abandons Tuesday Delivery
Reader jones_supa writes: In a world moving to electronic communications, the snail mail traffic has seen a huge drop. Because of this, Posti, the mail delivery organization of Finland will not be delivering letters and magazines on Tuesdays anymore. Tuesday was selected because it generally has the lowest volume of mail. For example, magazines and advertisements are targeted to the end of the week, so that people have more time for shopping dreams in the weekend. Another reason is that Posti recently launched a lawn mowing service which operates on Tuesdays.
The USPS would be willing to make similar reforms, but is prevented from doing so by a congress that wants to cripple it with unreasonable pension obligations that not one single company would have to meet, and all manner of restrictions that prevent it from actually competing with private couriers.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
>> snail mail traffic has seen a huge drop. Because of this...mail delivery organization...will not be delivering letters and magazines on [day] anymore
Seems reasonable: it you have less volume, reduce your costs by dropping your capacity. Coming soon to USPS I hope? (Even every other day might be worth it - the USPS's "no Saturdays" plan actually leaves a three-day gap in most weeks.)
Really? Delivering newspapers and mowing lawns? Do they only hire teenagers?
some reindeer then.
Another reason is that Posti recently launched a lawn mowing service which operates on Tuesdays.
http://www.theatlantic.com/int...
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
This all sounded reasonable until the last line. What!? Did I read that right? A lawn mowing service? Talk about a non sequitur. Does anyone have any insights into this? I've never been to Finland, but I imagine they only need to mow their lawns for a few months a year. What do they do on Tuesdays during the rest of the year? Are these the postal workers who are mowing the lawns?
The mail carriers trade in their mailbag for a lawnmower every Tuesday? I guess that's one way to torment the neighborhood dogs.
Seems reasonable? Really? How do poor people get mail, then? In the US, poor people used to have guaranteed mail delivery 6 days a week. Now, if, they can afford to live in the right place, and can afford to get Internet service, and the Internet service happens to work correctly, and they can afford a working computer, THEN they can pay their bills? That doesn't seem reasonable to me at all.
I don't respond to AC's.
Heh. Dog store named after me. Cool.
welcome our Finnish, mail delivering, and lawn-mowing overlords.
good grief, they couldn't manage to come up with even "Finnish Tuesday Mail Delivery Finished"?!!! Is that really asking that much?!!
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
" How do poor people get mail, then?"
The same way they do now, by going to their mail box and picking it up? This is about frequency, not coverage. So rather than mail being delivered daily, it's delivered every other day. Seriously, how many people do you know who check their mail every day? Now out of that embarrassingly small number, how many actually get anything important every day? Now out of that even smaller number, how many of them get things they needed that day and couldn't wait a day? I check my mail once a week at best, never miss anything. I tend to think most people get important things in the mail about as frequently as I do.
What's so "unreasonable" about keeping a government monopoly to a higher standard?
Please name one Fortune 500 company that Congress has required to fund 75 years of pension obligations NOW rather than over time?
*crickets*
That's what I thought.
USPS was (barely) self-supporting, before its government's monopoly on First Class Mail was obsoleted by e-mail.
I wonder, if Finland will now similarly make it illegal for private competitors to mow lawns...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Please name one Fortune 500 company that Congress has required to fund 75 years of pension obligations NOW rather than over time?
*crickets*
That's what I thought.
Fortune 500 companies almost all use 401(k) programs, not pensions. 401(k) funds are deposited now, not at some distant point in the future.
Pensions are stupid Ponzi schemes, to benefit the current generation at the expense of the next (or even the unborn) generation. Governments and unions are the last main holdouts for pension systems. Everybody else can understand the economics.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
And don't forget that they can no longer raise the prices of stamps....the guys that saddled the Post Office with that giant instant Pension Obligation also made it so they couldn't raise their prices to cover extra cost at the same time. Almost as if they wanted to insure they would fail. I'm sure the UPS / Fedex lobbyists loved it...
Seems reasonable? Really? How do poor people get mail, then? In the US, poor people used to have guaranteed mail delivery 6 days a week. Now, if, they can afford to live in the right place, and can afford to get Internet service, and the Internet service happens to work correctly, and they can afford a working computer, THEN they can pay their bills? That doesn't seem reasonable to me at all.
If they are receiving bills that are due without even two days for turnaround time, then that's the unreasonable thing. Fortunately that rarely if ever happens.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
>> How do poor people get mail, then? ...pay their bills?
1) Centralized and postbox mail pickup would still be daily.
2) If you're waiting until the last possible day to pay your bill, that's dumb for another reason: mail isn't guaranteed to be delivered by a certain time even it it's received.
3) The mail would still arrive every OTHER day, and we know that's no problem already because (wait for it) sometimes we already SKIP TWO DAYS in a row (e.g., Sunday + a federal holiday on a Monday) and nothing bad happens.
Seems reasonable? Really? How do poor people get mail, then?
How does alternate-day snail-mail substantially and disproportionately impact the poor?
Put down the Kool-Ade. Not every "basic" service needs to operate a firehose so your mythical underserved poor can take a sip of water on occasion.
But-but-but, those are evil KKKorporations, so of course they get away with shitting on their workers. My question was — and remains:
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Except that there is no significant cost reduction. You've got a certain amount of mail to deliver. That doesn't change. Reducing the number of delivery days simply means you have to deliver 6 days worth of mail in 5 days, so your overtime costs go up.
Meanwhile, the USPS continues to ignore the biggest thing that is killing them: low priced junk mail.
There is an old joke: "We lose money on every sale, but we make up for it with volume". Unfortunately, the USPS doesn't get the joke and continues to deliver billions of pieces of junk mail at a loss, under the delusion that the high volume somehow magically offsets the money they lose.
A truck full of junk mail, at 13 cents (or less) per piece uses just as much fuel as a truck full of first class mail at 47 cents a piece. A mail carrier gets paid the same wages whether he's delivering 13 cent junk mail or 47 cent first class mail.
Eliminating "bulk rate" pricing, except for non-advertising related mail (i.e., "bills") would result in significant savings. Your mailbox would no longer be crammed full of shit you don't want and didn't ask for (sort of like adblocking for snail mail), mail volume would drop significantly, requiring fewer people and less equipment at every stage.
Any company with a trajectory similar to the Postal service should also fund its pensions.
Shrinking businesses can't fund pensions out of cash flow and need to set aside reserves. Duh.
Actuaries work this stuff out all the time. Insurance boards are all over this in the private sector, with varying degrees of success.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
There's plenty of people in the world, mostly outside of the USoA, that don't need instructions included on punny headlines.
Me, I'm simply being nostalgic to well-before-I-was-born, as back in the 1800s mail was often delivered two or three times a day, so you could send a letter and get a reply by the next day. Typically hand-written and a lot more cogent than today's emails.
Fortune 500 companies almost all use 401(k) programs, not pensions. 401(k) funds are deposited now, not at some distant point in the future.
What if Congress pass a law that requires Fortune 500 companies to pre-fund employee matches for the next 75 years now?
Governments and unions are the last main holdouts for pension systems. Everybody else can understand the economics.
You missed my point. Congress UNDER THE LAW requires the USPS to fund 75 years of pension obligations NOW. It's the only federal agency that is obligated to pre-fund pension obligations. Because the USPS can't meet the pension obligations, their fiscal year ends in the red every year. Remove the draconian pension obligations, the USPS can turn a profit every year.
As a US Mailman of 27 years, we abandoned Tuesday delivery years ago.
Posti has developed new home-delivered services to add more work to mail delivery operations,” the statement said. “Traditional mail volumes are falling, but mail routes nevertheless reach some 2.8 households on every weekday.
If I only delivered to 2.8 households each week day, I'd have a lot of spare time on my hands too.
But-but-but, those are evil KKKorporations, so of course they get away with shitting on their workers. My question was — and remains:
Don't you mean an impossible standard, you amusingly stupid mucksavage?
Drill baby drill - on Mars
I don' t know, I'd consider disallowing them from cutting costs while disallowing them to increase revenue when they're already losing money seems somewhat unreasonable to me. If you don't see why that's unreasonable this argument is sort of a lost cause as from my side it'd be kind of like yelling at a brick wall.
In fact, I'll turn it around and ask you to explain why you think it's reasonable to disallow a company that's losing money from cutting costs or increasing revenue. (The disallowed to increase revenue is due to that congress disallows them to raise prices at will.)
Any company with a trajectory similar to the Postal service should also fund its pensions.
But companies aren't required BY LAW to fund 75 years of pension obligations upfront. Not over time, but RIGHT NOW.
This 75-year requirement is not being applied to military and civil federal pensions, state pensions or municipal pensions. All those pension shortfalls are coming due in the next 20 years as baby boomers retire.
>> Except that there is no significant cost reduction. You've got a certain amount of mail to deliver. That doesn't change. Reducing the number of delivery days simply means you have to deliver 6 days worth of mail in 5 days, so your overtime costs go up.
Actually I'd expect a significant cost reduction in letter carrier costs, which, as you pointed out, is mostly time spent walking or gas burned driving from box to box. If you cut the delivery days in half, your delivery cost should drop nearly as much since you have to make half the trips (and employ only about half the people for about half the wages).
Except that there is no significant cost reduction. You've got a certain amount of mail to deliver. That doesn't change. Reducing the number of delivery days simply means you have to deliver 6 days worth of mail in 5 days, so your overtime costs go up.
Are you sure about that? Are you sure that it's not "you have a certain amount of houses that need delivery to". If delivery trucks are operating at capacity then yes, reducing the number of days wouldn't help but the point is that the volume is down so by moving to every other day delivery, the volume on the remaining days increases while the same number of houses are served. The amount of time it takes to drive to each house is the same regardless if it is one letter or 10 letters but the revenue per house is 10 times if there are 10 letters per house instead of one with approximately the same gas and payroll expenses.
Seriously, how many people do you know who check their mail every day?
Uh, everyone? Are you seriously telling me that you don't check your mail every day?
Now out of that huge number, how many actually get anything important every day?
FTFY. Now here, you might have a point. Because yes, how often do you get something in the mail that absolutely positively could not wait one extra day to arrive?
I check my mail once a week at best, never miss anything.
The mail thieves in your neighborhood are glad that you believe that. Alternatively, I'm sure the mail carrier really appreciates having to shove stuff into an already-full mailbox.
For the .8 (th?) house do they cut 20% of the letter off and deliver it the next day?
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
USPS was self-supporting, and still would be, were it not for conservatives in congress sabotaging it at the behest of their corporate paymasters.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
There are plenty of other issues at play here, but to address this one:
"Pensions are stupid Ponzi schemes, to benefit the current generation at the expense of the next (or even the unborn) generation. Governments and unions are the last main holdouts for pension systems. Everybody else can understand the economics."
Pensions and the way Social Security are funded is actually a smart thing. Having current dollars pay a portion of it helps to even out the effects of inflation. The $4 an hour you received as a 15 year old kid, versus the average hourly wage when you are 65 is huge. Years of savings based on that $4 an hour would be used up in weeks when you are 65. Investment returns can play a part but are too risky when you are dealing with the elderly with health issues.
See:
http://www.postnl.nl/klantenservice/veelgestelde-vragen/bezorging-en-ontvangst/postbezorging/bezorgt-postnl-ook-post-op-maandag.html
(in Dutch so use your favorite translator if you need to)
The former Dutch monopoly postal service stopped delivering letters/mail on mondays some time ago. Packages are still delivered (which is different process within the company).
The standard you are defending is excessively high given that approximately zero people live 75 years after retirement. (If I understand FERS, https://www.opm.gov/retirement... it looks like if you start working at 18 the earliest you can possibly retire with pension is after 25 years of work at age 43, assuming a "major reorganization")
Additionally you are forgetting to include the federal government's price controls against the USPS as part of the "higher" standard you are insisting they follow. If they did not have to beg Congress to allow them to raise rates (or even keep the rates they have, since Congress required them to drop 2 cents from first class this year), they would be in a better position to meet this higher standard.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Everything looks like a reason to privatize to anti-government yahoos.
It's unreasonable because it's a move by Republican hacks to undermine a valuable government service. You're someone who consistently tries to promote Conservative dysfunction, rather than pushing back against it like a responsible person, so it may be hard for you to understand.
And don't forget that they can no longer raise the prices of stamps....the guys that saddled the Post Office with that giant instant Pension Obligation also made it so they couldn't raise their prices to cover extra cost at the same time. Almost as if they wanted to insure they would fail. I'm sure the UPS / Fedex lobbyists loved it...
Of course they did. The wrote the text of the legislation.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
All the more reasons to privatize it, uhm?
What's so "unreasonable" about keeping a government monopoly to a higher standard?
Define higher standard.
The postal service is
1) not allowed to make a profit
2) anything above costs must be put in the Gov't general fund for Congress to spend
3) not allowed to maintain and emergency or contingency fund
4) has to pay the full corporate income tax with no deductions
I don't check my mail every day. Most of us have locked mailboxes which are large enough that they don't fill up that fast. You don't have to pay bills the second they land in your mailbox, waiting a day won't hurt.
This space intentionally left blank
Baby boomers are retiring everywhere, but the postal service's core business is going away.
Companies are required by law to maintain actuarially sound funding levels for their pensions. When their investments tank, they often have to make pension contributions that materially affect earnings. GM is now effectively owned by the union pension fund, stock and bond holders got fucked.
Most government and military pensions and Social security are being run as ponzi schemes. But that's not a reason to not fund the postal service pensions.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Most of us have locked mailboxes
What weird subculture does "us" refer to? Most Americans certainly don't.
if the mail carrier doesn't like shoving stuff in an a full mailbox, stop bringing 99% junk mail that I didn't request. I often go a day sometimes two between checking my mail, and depending on the junk mail may have a mailbox so full it is hard to pull out.
What if Congress pass a law that requires Fortune 500 companies to pre-fund employee matches for the next 75 years now?
Those corporations create valuable products and services, that I can chose to buy to not buy. The USPS delivers a pile of crap to my house everyday that is 99% garbage. The sooner Congress gets rid of them the better. Bills should be sent by email. Packages should be delivered by UPS, Fedex, etc. The only thing left is all the second class advertising garbage, and that should disappear, leaving forests standing, and freeing up space in my trash can.
The 75 year rule means that the USPS must not only fully fund the pension obligations of it's current retirees (good), current employees (good), future employees (wait a minute) and future employees that haven't even been born yet (ridiculous).
No, the residents in the address are sorted using some method (likely age) and if the recipient is in the top 80%, the mail gets delivered; else the next day.
Well, the USPS are still there 10 years later, so it must be possible. I, for one, expect nothing but the very best from our benevolent and omniscient government. If they can decide, how I should pay my doctors and what medicine is good for me, if they can know, what foods are healthy, how children should be reared, Internet-service provided, and retirement financed, they can certainly figure out, how to pay for their own workers' retirement. Especially, since they are exempt from some of the local laws (like parking regulations) — NYC alone gets over $100 mln in fines from FedEx and other private companies every year, but not from USPS.
And make it a model too — for the knuckle-dragging KKKapitalists to follow!
Seriously though, the required prefunding , which you Statists like to talk about so much, protects taxpayers, who'd be on the hook to pay for these government workers otherwise. Hasn't Detroit taught you anything? We do not owe employees of private companies, but postal workers work for us. This is why USPS is — and ought to be — treated differently from the "Fortune 500" companies.
And here come insults and name-calling. I think, I'll retire from this thread before you escalate to throwing of feces and banana-peels. Remember to logout.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
You may be missing the point. Congress' requirements for the USPS pensions require that the pensions are supposed to be funded for employees who haven't even been hired yet.
I believe the longest employment length requirement to get a pension from the USPS (not the only one, just the longest) is 30 years. That means that someone who won't be hired by the USPS until the year 2061, in theory, already has their pension funded.
Yes, from a certain point of view, it is admirable in forethought. But to look at it another way, it's an asinine requirement that is designed to break the USPS.
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
And lets talk turkey. Bills? I went paperless ages ago. I get an alert on my phone and then I pay the bill, also on my phone.
About the only thing that I expect to get in the mail are election ballots and replacement credit cards, and maybe a monthly update on my health insurance or my retirement plan. The USPS is delivering all of that to me essentially as a free service (because I no longer even buy stamps). For Christmas packages etc., I generally use UPS.
So most of the time, the only thing I can expect to find in my mailbox is a huge pile of coupons, most of which goes straight into the recycling bin without so much as being unfolded. As a result, I check my mail maybe three times a week. Sometimes I'll go a few days without thinking about it.
Breakfast served all day!
Yeah, but the Finnish aren't yet advanced enough to come up with the value-added innovation of shoving the mail down the storm drain.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Except that there is no significant cost reduction. You've got a certain amount of mail to deliver. That doesn't change. Reducing the number of delivery days simply means you have to deliver 6 days worth of mail in 5 days, so your overtime costs go up.
Is sorting mail really the most costly function of the USPS in 2016? I would have thought it was physically having a carrier walk to each address on his or her route and stuff the pile of mail into each mailbox. If you have the carrier walk the route half as many times per week and simply stuff a slightly thicker pile into each box, it seems to me you would slash your delivery costs by almost half.
Breakfast served all day!
Wow.
You don't like the USPS because of what other companies which "create valuable products and services, that you can choose to buy or not to buy" send to you, using the postal service?
Are you poor? If you have a cell phone and credit to pay bills on your phone, then you're not poor. So, unfortunately, the fact that you pay your bills via your phone (super dumb, IMHO), is really irrelevant to this discussion.
My concern is that the USPS was designed to be a catch-all for ALL Americans, rich or poor. Anybody living anywhere in the US could have anything picked up or delivered for a reasonable price. By taking that away (even gradually), we're making the US a less democratic place.
I don't respond to AC's.
Citation, please...
USPS are part of the Federal Government. Arguments like yours simply underline the said Government's incompetence — and serve nothing but advancing the idea of privatizing USPS — the idea I support, but you do not...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Packages should be delivered by UPS, Fedex, etc.
I would never get a package at my apartment because the package will walk away the moment the delivery person drops it off. I have a post office box for package deliveries, which is closer and more convenient than the nearest UPS Store or FedEx facility.
Like you did, just there?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I would never get a package at my apartment because the package will walk away the moment the delivery person drops it off. I have a post office box for package deliveries, which is closer and more convenient than the nearest UPS Store or FedEx facility.
I have a lock box next to my front door. UPS and FedEx packages are placed in the box, and then the courier closes the lid, which locks the box. USPS deliveries are placed in my unsecured mailbox. If the USPS was downsized and privatized, you would still have your PO box, only it would be better because you could receive UPS and FedEx packages there also (privately deliveries to PO boxes is banned under current law).
Well, the USPS are still there 10 years later, so it must be possible.
Congress yells at the post master general every year for an artificial crisis that Congress created in the first place.
I, for one, expect nothing but the very best from our benevolent and omniscient government.
The post office near my home went from being a 30,000-sqft facility to a 3,000-sqft storefront. Other post offices, large and small, got closed in recent years. Each distribution center now handles mail for four or five zip codes with fewer workers. If my package gets lost at the distribution center, it takes two weeks to find it. Service have gotten worse to meet the impossible demands that Congress puts on it.
We do not owe employees of private companies, but postal workers work for us.
That will change in 2030 when all the baby boomers are retired, retirees will outnumber workers (shrinking tax base), and Medicare/Social Security will consume two-thirds of the federal budget. Taxes will have to go way up to pay for everything else. Baby boomers will expect to get back every dime they put into the system and more beyond that for that comfortable retirement they expect. As for the next generation, the baby boomers spent their inheritances and they don't own them a dime.
Of course they did. The wrote the text of the legislation.
[citation needed]
Pension costs are crippling most state and local governments these days. I don't know what's behind the USPS deal, but I know the solution: outlaw pensions. 401Ks are good enough for all of us peasants that work in the private sector, and they're good enough for our ruling class (and their servants) too.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Are you demanding a citation for "approximately zero people live to 118"? There is exactly one American known to have lived past 118: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... She was a manager for an insurance company, and did not work for the government.
If you're demanding a citation for my calculation of a minimum age to retire with benefits, I put a link to a FERS retirement guide right in the next sentence.
Sure. Fortunately it's an issue that could be fixed, for instance by requiring the USPS to follow the same rules as everyone else or removing the price controls.
If the federal government screwing up advances the idea that instead of fixing the problem it must be privatized, then when private corporations screw up, what idea do you believe that advances?
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
[...] it would be better because you could receive UPS and FedEx packages there also (privately deliveries to PO boxes is banned under current law).
Wrong! I get FedEx and UPS deliveries to my PO box all the time. DHL will drop ship to the post office street address and POB number.
https://www.ups.com/content/us/en/resources/track/sp_definition.html
http://www.fedex.com/us/smart-post/outbound.html
http://www.dhl-usa.com/en/ecommerce/businesscustomers/domestic_products.html#parcel_plus
When was the last time you walked into a post office — the 20th-century?
When was the last time you walked into a post office — the 20th-century?
It was the last time I needed to mail something, so yes, probably last century.
The USPS provides the service of delivering that crap to the companies that produced it... In this instance case you're not the customer.
And yes i hate all that crap too, i refuse to buy anything advertised to me through unsolicited channels like that - if i want a particular type of product, i will go and search for it in the usual places. All of the junk that arrives here gets thrown straight back out.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Pension costs are crippling most state and local governments these days.
That's because the politicians made too many sweet deals with the unions during GOOD TIMES without considering the consequences of BAD TIMES happening in the future.
I don't know what's behind the USPS deal, but I know the solution: outlaw pensions.
It's a deliberate attempt to sabotage a profitable federal agency by forcing it to run into the red each year with unreasonable pension obligations with the expectation to shut it down in the future.
401Ks are good enough for all of us peasants that work in the private sector, and they're good enough for our ruling class (and their servants) too.
Never mind that most Americans used to have pensions. The tax law got changed in the early 1970's got changed so the corporations could move away from pensions and Wall Street would get more customers (suckers). If the stock crashes just before you were supposed to retire and the value of your 401K is cut in half, as it did for many people during the Great Recession, tough shit. You should've saved more. And Social Security is going bust in 2030 or thereafter. Maybe your kids will take you in, put you in a nursing home or dump you on the streets. After all, you're a peasant.
There are still quite a few places in the US that don't have cable service for TV's let alone decent email. So what do we do, just decide that they don't require/deserve mail service ? Granted Finland is very proactive in having connectivity everywhere but it is a relatively small country as well.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
The USPS provides the service of delivering that crap to the companies that produced it... In this instance case you're not the customer.
But why should the government be providing a service that is the physical equivalent of spam? Is that really an appropriate role of government? I understand why the USPS was established back in 1775, but those reasons are no longer valid today. Personal correspondence is a negligible amount of the mail.
Why does the USPS have to be "self-supporting"? What sense does that make?
I don't respond to AC's.
USPS delivers a pile of crap to my house everyday
And UPS/Fedex wouldn't deliver those if USPS wasn't around?
Bills should be sent by email
email is a cluster fsck as it is. I get waaaay more spam email than I do in my mailbox. I don't want to have to find my bills in that pile of shite.
The sooner Congress gets rid of them the better.
I don't think it will work that way. See Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution, known as the Postal Clause or the Postal Power.
file:
Fortune 500 companies almost all use 401(k) programs, not pensions.
They do now. Back when employment was "for life", pension plans were the norm, not the exception.
The USPS delivers a pile of crap to my house everyday that is 99% garbage.
You really (*really*?) believe that the corporations that pay USPS to send you this pile of crap will not find another service provider to do so once USPS is gone?
Let's even make it a private corporation for the sake of the argument. There is profit to be made there, so yes, they will deliver you the crap because the corporation sending you the crap would be their customer, not you.
Remember, "if it's free, you're the product" also applies in real life.
Most of the US has sufficient view of the magical sky beasts we call satellites which can deliver perfectly acceptable* TV and email services.
*By acceptable, I'm referring to the level of discourse of cable TV stations - whether that meets your personal standard is an entirely different issue.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
The USPS is the only government entity that makes a profit, so naturally the free-market priests demand that it be destroyed lest mere citizens be fooled into thinking that something good can happen in government.
You mean make it fail as a pretext to privatize it?
We make you pay your Pensions years in advance.
We tell you what you can charge.
We tell you you must deliver 6 days a week.
We say you can not close unprofitable locations.
We get free mail delivery.
You think private industry will play by those rules?
That will change in 2030 when all the baby boomers are retired, retirees will outnumber workers (shrinking tax base), and Medicare/Social Security will consume two-thirds of the federal budget.
Dream on. It's beginning to look like the crowd of people laid off due to automation and demanding welfare payments may outnumber both long before then,
This is what Canada should have done rather than phasing out home delivery of mail in favour of not-so-super "super mailboxes".
For those not in the know "super mailboxes" are basically community mailboxes located somewhere in your neighbourhood. The not-so-super aspects of this is that they are subject to vandalism, theft, and arson (yes, arson). Additionally, some people feel it acceptable to drop their junk mail straight on the ground, rather than take it home for recycling. And, finally, for some folks (elderly, disabled) fetching mail by trekking out to a super-mailbox in the middle of a Canadian winter is a less than pleasant experience.
One can only assume that the sensible approach of cutting mail delivery from 5 to, say, 3 days a week was not taken so as not to upset the postal union (CUPW).
The USPS makes a PROFIT if you discount the congressional restrictions, which means that plenty of customers do want this service. If you don't like this then you can put a permanent "return to sender" sign on your mailbox. Just don't screw it up for everyone else because you get bills by email.
Fee.org? Lets just say they have their own axe to grind and are not unbiased source.
But then again, you knew that which is why you intentionally cite libertarian/conservative/randroid sources.
But why should the government be providing a service that is the physical equivalent of spam?
Because corporations are still paying for the privilege to have spam delivered to your mailbox. A typical advertising campaign require a 1% response rate to make it profitable. While 99% will toss out the junk mail, 1% will respond to it and make the corporation some money.
I understand why the USPS was established back in 1775, but those reasons are no longer valid today.
Let's abolish the USPS. Does that stop paid spam being stuffed into your mailbox? Oh, hell no. It might get worse.
ONLY the USPS has this extraordinary pension requirement. No other government body has to do this. In their holy fight to prove that government is wasteful the ultralibertarians have taken the fight to the one government body that makes a profit and is not being wasteful. The USPS can fund it's pensions, it just can't do 75 years worth of it in advance.
Basically these idiots felt that if they voted to eliminate the postal service that they'd be pilloried by the public (rightfully so). So instead they use this pension scheme which gets the unions on their side and confuses the public whose eyes glaze over when trying to figure out fiscal details.
And UPS/Fedex wouldn't deliver those if USPS wasn't around?
If one Nigerian spammer was removed another would take his place. That doesn't make spamming a legitimate function of government. The government of the United States should not engage in sleazy practices just because "someone else would do it if they weren't".
I don't want to have to find my bills in that pile of shite.
Solution: Use a spam filter with a whitelist. I get 90% of my bills by email, and have never missed one.
It's religion. You can't fight that. The core dogma is that government of any size or shape is bad, and that any corporation is good and holy. If the government is wasteful then it's proof of how bad it is; if the government is efficient then it's clearly preventing private services from competing (and any one who thinks that FedEx is an example of a company being prevented from succeeding because of government competition is a moron).
Let's even make it a private corporation for the sake of the argument.
Yes, let's do that. If it is a private corporation, then I can remove my mailbox, and they will have to walk to my front porch, increasing the cost and reducing the volume. I can also sue them through a class action lawsuit if they leave litter on my property. I have no such recourse against the government.
I just don't buy the argument that it is okay for the government to engage in scummy practices just because some corporation is just as scummy. The government should be held to a higher standard, and should be expected to represent to the collective interests of the people. I doubt if many people consider junk advertising to be in our interests.
If you don't like this then you can put a permanent "return to sender" sign on your mailbox.
No, you can't. There is no way to block 3rd class junk mail.
Seems reasonable? Really? How do poor people get mail, then? In the US, poor people used to have guaranteed mail delivery 6 days a week.
Who do you think end-up paying for that mail delivered 6 days a week? How does that improve the situation of the poor?
[citation needed]
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/dont-let-business-lobbyists-kill-the-post-office-20120423
You missed the point. Pensions are scams. "I can't pay you now, but I pinky-promise to pay you later, forever, after you retire and stuff" is extremely immature to offer as a business. Responsible, reasonable businesses have 401k plans. Governments (that figure "it's not like they can just bankrupt me!") go with pensions. 40% of the LA city budget is pensions -- and it's constantly ballooning. It's the single highest expense of the city that has more paved roads than any other city on the planet. Think about that.
70% of the city budget goes to Fire/Police
70% of the Fire/Police budget goes to Pension
You *KNOW* your system is out of control when more of your budget is paid toward pensions than it is toward wages.
That's just a problem with how 401Ks are structured, not with the concept. The concept: you become wealthy by accumulating stocks and bods in your own name over your lifetime. That's better, far better than being dependent on an employer or government for life-or-death checks in the mail.
However, to be a safety net, it needs to follow widely accepted retirement planing advice, which makes the stock market crashing the year before you retire a non-issue.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
This excellent explanation was a pleasure to read. Thank you for making it.
.. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R
Once Congress kills it and hands it over to FREE ENTERPRISE, they won't dare to ask any of these things of a private corporation because it might impinge on their profits which they use to bribe Congress.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
You missed the point. Pensions are scams.
My late father had a private pension from being a union construction worker. He retired at 59.5-years-old because his older brothers kicked the bucket at 60-years-old. He lived until he was 75-years-old. For those 15 years, he had the same consistent income from his pension and Social Security. He spent his pension and banked his Social Security. The money he saved from Social Security paid for six weeks of medical bills, funeral expenses and settling his estate. His death had zero impact on the rest of the family. If he had a 401K, half his income would have disappeared with the stock market crash during the Great Recession and the family would have gotten stuck with the bills.
While your statements may be true, they don't address the fact that the USPS uses a pension, and they were forced to fund it for 75 years into the future. With the involved parties being the US government, and the USPS union, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the pension to get replaced with a 401k (or whatever the govt employee version is called).
file:
You're making an excellent point, here. Thank you for doing so.
.. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R
I usually don't reply to AC posts, but something here needs to be cleared up. Bulk-rate "junk mail" is exactly what is keeping the postal service in the black, given that the number of letters has fallen off dramatically with the advent of electronic communications. Incidentally, bills go via bulk rate postage, too.
If you don't want junk mail in your box, you can contact the people that send it and get taken off their mailing lists. I do this every five years or so. It's a bit time consuming, but it does work.
.. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R
This actually happens in state government too - politicians or talk show hosts say the pension isn't viable (ie - they take in less than they have to pay out). You look at the data and its like yeah if every single employee retires right now this very second - no they cannot pay it all out, but the data overwhelmingly shows they can keep up with the rate of retirement.
I have no clue, but I'd guess that if everyone collecting a 401k (or a 403b if you are a gov employee) - retired today - it probably couldn't pay 100% of it out either. But that's not going to happen - you have to be 65 to even start collecting it.
I honestly think its just a way to screw over the rest of us still collecting a pension. So they can't just dissolve it with a pen, so what they do is start changing parameters on it enough until it screws over the entire organization and the people who paid into it (by law!).
Strange, I quoted the part I'd like substantiated. Here it is again for you:
Sure! For that to happen USPS just has to become private — as everyone else .
A private corporation screwing up goes bankrupt and/or taken over by competitors. Think of user-space vs. kernel code — a user-space process crashing is unpleasant, but a kernel crash is outright devastating. This is why whatever can be private, should be.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Why not pass a law inverting the rate scale so that it reflects appropriately the cost of sending the mail. Right now first class stamps cost around 50 cents bulk mail around 16 cents per mailing. The bulk mailer should pay at least 50 cents with regular stamps closer to 25 cents.
That should result in more revenue, less spam or both.
I didn't cite it for their opinion, which may, indeed, be biased. I cited them for their facts: the figure collected by NYC in parking fines from delivery-companies. Unless you are accusing them of bona-fide lying, your rebuttal is without merit.
But then again, you knew that already — and just had to say something, didn't you?..
No, that's because reality has a Libertarian bias.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Khm, at least, you aren't questioning "the sense" of a nation's postal service mowing lawns... Now that would have been a tough one...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
If the stock crashes just before you were supposed to retire and the value of your 401K is cut in half
Why would my portfolio, which should be mostly bonds when I am close to retirement age, lose 1/2 if its value because stocks went down? If anything, I should see a small increase in value as the "flight to safety" happens.
Enigma
This is why whatever can be private, should be.
The problem with market fundamentalists like you is you think everything that can't be private should be abolished, which is exactly what your corrupt buddies in Congress are trying to do to the USPS..
Drill baby drill - on Mars
All that because they have to wait until Wednesday for their mail?
I'm not comfortable with a reduction in mail service but if there has to be a compromise this doesn't sound bad.
You're still assuming that the government won't just seize the retirement funds. It's happened in plenty of countries before, but don't take an AC's word for it, look it up.
That will change in 2030 when all the baby boomers are retired, retirees will outnumber workers (shrinking tax base), and Medicare/Social Security will consume two-thirds of the federal budget.
That's why they're building the death camps.
Did I say death camps? I meant happy camps.
This will get buried under all the stupid arguing about the USPS, but if anyone is interested New Zealand Post went to 3 times a week deliveries last year. Seems to work OK, it just means some of the bills that still get mailed to me might arrive a couple of days later.
You're still assuming that the government won't just seize the retirement funds. It's happened in plenty of countries before, but don't take an AC's word for it, look it up.
Meh, there are enough armed Americans with 401Ks to dissuade that approach (and it would come to that).
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Have you tried putting a hungry mongoose in the mailbox so that when it's opened the letter carrier backs away quickly?
So you are asking for a citation proving that asking the government to predict how many employees they will have 49 years from today so that they can contribute an appropriate amount to their retirement today in the event that they have a reorganization 74 years from now and need to pay their retirement in year 75 is excessive?
Your answer to this question must be in iambic pentameter and performed in period costume on the stage of Shakespeare's Globe. If you find this demand excessive, then [citation needed].
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
The government is required to provide essential services because a minimum uniform standard needs to be applied country wide to ensure, citizens are not discriminated against by being regionally insufficiently profitable at any particular time. Those regions would suffer further economic loss, which makes them more unprofitable and produces further economic loss and this of course spirals into collapse. So essential services are far more effectively provided by governments, than corporations because corporations routinely collapse maintenance, service and support to pump up short term quarterly profits, regardless of long term consequences including total collapse (think blowing up oil platforms, bankrupt corrupt energy companies et al). Banking and finance should be considered an essential part of economic infrastructure and should be nationalised and simplified to stabilise the economy.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Personally, I would be quite happy with Snail Mail delivery every other day. The US Population could be devided up into two groups. One gets their mail every M, W, F and the other would get their mail T, Th, Sat. Given that, you only need 1/2 the mail carriers. Priority mail would still get delivered as normal. Thus if it has to be there on a certain day then it will be if it was sent via Priority Mail. However, for bills, coupons, promotional offers and the occasional birthday/Christmas/Easter card, an extra days wait is no big deal.
The government is required to provide essential services
Mail delivery was an "essential service" in 1775. It is not essential today, and since 99% of what they deliver is unwanted garbage, I wouldn't even call it a "service".
Banking and finance should be considered an essential part of economic infrastructure and should be nationalised and simplified to stabilise the economy.
You should try looking at reality. Many countries have nationalized their banks, including Venezuela, Argentina, and Zimbabwe. Putting everyone's life savings into a political piggy bank did not lead to stability.
And when was the last time a bunch of armed Americans defied their government? There was the Whiskey Rebellion where the problem of a standing army was first shown. There was Athens Georgia where a bunch of vets broke into the armory and armed themselves and that's about it unless you want to count a few times when labour almost started shooting back in the 19th century, and they would have lost as the private police vastly outnumbered them (and out numbered the American Army).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
The USPS's pension funding requirement is 50 years, not 75 - see here (where an actual link to the legislation is provided, so you can check for yourself). The exaggeration originated with the postal unions, probably the NALC. Of course, you could say "So what?" if you don't think it's disturbing that they would abuse your blind trust like that, considering you believe they deserve to have monopoly powers.
You can opt out of USPS, too. Just remove your mailbox and they'll stop delivering. If it bugs you so much, why do you still accept mail?
Just because mail delivery isn't an essential service to *you* doesn't mean it isn't to other people. Good luck getting my grandma to switch to email, even if she could get a decent connection.
Will Congress simultaneously abolish late filing penalties and fines for taxes, after the USPO is gone and there is no reliable mail delivery service in the US? Yeah, I didn't think so.
That doesn't make spamming a legitimate function of government.
The US govt is mandated by the constitution to manage a set of post offices and local mail delivery. There is a way to change that setup, it's called "pass an amendment to the constitution". I'm not advocating for spam, I'm just trying to point out how the system works. The way the system is setup, anyone who wants to pay, can send any legal item to whoever they want.
Solution:
So, I should manage my personal affairs the way you say? How about, I'll do it my way, you do it your way.
file:
Why would my portfolio, which should be mostly bonds when I am close to retirement age, lose 1/2 if its value because stocks went down?
Most people don't have enough money saved in their 401ks and IRAs to be safely in bonds at retirement, and need the extra juice of being in the stock market. Dividend-paying stocks also took a wallop during the Great Recession as share prices — and sometimes dividend payments — sunk to historic lows.
The exaggeration originated with the postal unions, probably the NALC.
From what I read elsewhere, the Republicans co-opted the postal unions into supporting their bill to cripple the postal service. Like most unions, the postal unions went along with it because it was a short-term win and didn't consider the long-term consequences. Of course, the postal service is enshrined in the US Constitution and isn't going anywhere.
But that's not going to happen - you have to be 65 to even start collecting it.
All the baby boomers will be retired in 2030, drawing down their retirement funds and Social Security benefits. That massive sucking sound you hear in the background is all the cash leaving the stock market and Wall Street brokers weeping over their ever smaller annual bonuses. With retirees outnumbering workers, a smaller tax base will have support more people. No one knows how the economy will respond then.
They seem to have lost something in translation here... The Finnish version states 2.8 million households, which I think is all of the households.
Civil War. Before that the War of Independence was rather more successful. These things are more than "a bunch of guys with rifles", they're "a core of armed ex-military who seize armories early".
It takes a lot for people to move beyond voting - heck, few enough issues will move people to actually vote - but outright theft of the life savings of about half of America (the half that have life savings) might do it.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
You missed the point. Pensions are scams. "I can't pay you now, but I pinky-promise to pay you later, forever, after you retire and stuff" is extremely immature to offer as a business.
All of banking is a scam by that logic.
Responsible, reasonable businesses have 401k plans.
The value of 401ks can go down as well as up.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
Is spamming a legitimate function of an ISP? If someone emails you something spammy, your ISP delivers it to you (unless it gets filtered out first). If someone mails you something spammy, the USPS delivers it to you. The differences are of detail. I find it easier to sort my snail mail than my email. Companies pay the USPS to distribute their snail mail spam, so it isn't a burden on the system (I believe the USPS makes money on it), and it doesn't arrive in the same quantity.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Bulk mail is a lot cheaper for the USPS to handle. If I were to send you a letter, it would go through several sorting operations before reaching you. Bulk mail is pre-sorted according to strict rules.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
If I point out that the governments of North Korea, Myanmar, ISIS, and Iran all allow their people to breathe air, will you suffocate and stop making stupid arguments on Slashdot?
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Not everyone is going to become wealthy, particularly in a country where medical costs can be crippling. Defined-benefit pensions, whether from public or private sources, are much more effective at keeping people off the streets.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
All but the wealthiest americans have had their mailboxes centralized into a community one in the last few decades. People with personal mailboxes in front of their houses -- the only kind that don't have locks -- have become quite rare.
This space intentionally left blank
Formerly on the NALC website (and saved by the Wayback Machine:
Although the NALC objected strenuously to one provision—requiring injured postal employees to wait three days before beginning Continuation of Pay benefits—the union played a crucial role in developing many of its most important provisions.
(Note that that one provision is something no one remembers or cares about today.)
The Constitution had to explicitly allow the government to deliver mail since otherwise the monopoly would have been illegal. However, there is no requirement for it either (unlike the original Articles of Confederation which explicitly gave the government a monopoly on mail delivery) so the government is free to get out of the mail delivery business if it chooses to, without amending the Constitution. Hence the fact that no privatization attempt has ever included a proposal to amend the Constitution, since it's unnecessary. If there actually was such a requirement, postal unions wouldn't waste time opposing privatization attempts - they'd simply ignore them, knowing they'd be struck down.
New Zealand moved to a 3 day delivery cycle a few months ago. Priority mail and parcel mail is still 6d though.
And yet, I get Sunday afternoon Amazon deliveries from a USPS truck. I'd be perfectly willing to wait an extra day. Hopefully I'm not the only house they're driving to!
For example, magazines and advertisements are targeted to the end of the week, so that people have more time for shopping dreams in the weekend.
Huh? Wouldn't delivery at the beginning of the week give people more time?
And what is this "shopping dreams in the weekend"? Is that a Finnish thing?
(Note that that one provision is something no one remembers or cares about today.)
Like that Supreme Court ruling in the 1950's that determined that Social Security was a government program, can be cancelled at any time by Congress, and the government can keep the money without refunding it?
Yeah, no one cares about that ruling today. Especially by the folks who "paid into the system," expect to get every dime back and then some.
Actually the Civil War and the War of Independence were more wars of government vs (parent) government rather then citizen vs government. Governments do often reflect the will of the people, but are usually much better at organizing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism