E-Commerce's Biggest Obstacle May Be Slow Postal Services (thestreet.com)

Long-time Slashdot reader rudy_wayne writes: J.C. Penney CEO Marvin Ellison recently said that e-commerce companies' biggest challenge is that they are all expanding their businesses and pushing for faster delivery, but UPS, Fedex and especially the United States Postal Service aren't able to keep up, at least not at same cost that exists today, because they're not increasing their delivery capacity at the same rate e-commerce is growing, He said this will cause a supply and demand issue "that's going to be apparent here pretty soon."

Comments

Capacity or Cost?

[Drethon]

For a long time the US postal service has been losing money, they posted a 5.6 billion loss in 2016. I think they would be more than happy to grow their service but can they grow in a way that is profitable for the USPS that doesn't cost more than e-commerce is willing to pay?

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Nidi62]

For a long time the US postal service has been losing money, they posted a 5.6 billion loss in 2016. I think they would be more than happy to grow their service but can they grow in a way that is profitable for the USPS that doesn't cost more than e-commerce is willing to pay?

Well, once they have their pension fully funded for the next 3 generations as legally mandated by Congress they will probably have enough money to expand capacity. Of course, growth=more workers=more pension, so they would probably have to fund that as well which would slow their growth.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

Show me on the mail truck where the bad man touched you.

For less than the price of every firstborn male child in Egypt, you can mail a package via USPS. Unlike using UPS, it'll actually get there. More importantly, it'll get there without having been literally kicked through a warehouse by the purported "dumbest people on the planet" you claim the USPS employs.

And ultimately, fuck you, because media mail.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[MightyYar]

The 3-generation pension thing is a myth. They are simply required to fund the benefits that they promise existing workers given standard actuarial tables which estimate lifetime. I would like this rule extended to the entire government, as we are sitting on a liability time bomb. My beef with the treatment of the USPS is I don't think congress phased in the new rules slowly enough for the business to adjust - but no matter what it was going to be traumatic.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[zenasprime]

They are incompetent dickbags who do their best to only hire the dumbest people on the planet. Their autorouting system is so pathetic that it creates routing loops that can only be broken by deliberate human intervention. Their hours are garbage that robs the nation of productivity by expecting people to run their errands at the same time that their employer expects them to work. They suffer no penalties for failure, and there is no accountability. Every single package is scanned and the data handed to the government as part of the spying-on-citizens program.

It's like you've never actually had a package delivery attempt by FedEx or UPS. lol

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

The USPS depends on a certain percentage of spam to exist.

That's the fallacy that is killing the Post Office. Every day they deliver billions of pieces of junk mail at a loss. It's like the old joke, "we lose money on every sale but we make it up with volume". Except the Post Office doesn't get the joke.

A truck full of junk mail, at 13 cents a piece, uses the same amount of fuel, and the driver gets paid the same wages, as a truck full of first class mail at 49 cents a piece. End the subsidy for junk mail. The volume of mail will go way down, the Postal Service would need fewer people, trucks, etc., and there would be an enormous savings of time and money because the Postal Service would be in the business of delivering only the mail that people actually want, rather than truck loads of crap that nobody asked for.

They most likely still wouldn't be profitable, but, they would be much better and more efficient than they are today.

They also wouldn't exist without the deal to take small packages from UPS and FedEx. Without a federally-granted monopoly on delivering to your mailbox, the USPS would have gone away already,

Private companies want nothing to do with mail delivery. Delivering mail to *EVERY* address, from the biggest cities to the most remote rural areas, is very difficult, maybe impossible, to do profitably *AND* at a reasonable cost.

But that's OK. Your local police and fire departments don't generate any profit either and nobody is clamoring to shut them down. They just need to be run reasonably with a minimum of waste and inefficiency.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Dorianny]

The economy has benefited hugely from a reliable flat-fee mail delivery system. Like many taken-for-granted benefits we enjoy I didn't realize that until I did some consulting work for a company operating in a part of the world with a unreliable postal system

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[drinkypoo]

It's like you've never actually had a package delivery attempt by FedEx or UPS. lol

Oddly, they manage to get my packages to me rapidly, and when something comes in from out of the country they don't sit on it for five days (literally) like the USPS does with many if not most of my trivial packets out of China.

To be fair, I did one time have a UPS guy lose his truck off my driveway by turning around where I told him not to turn around... lucky he didn't roll it. But I've also had a USPS guy almost go off my driveway in a Jeep... where my '82 Mercedes 300SD has no trouble. I've been on worse driveways in Santa Cruz, but this is in Kelseyville which definitely qualifies as The Sticks, and if you can't handle a dirt and gravel driveway then you need to not be delivering the mail.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Drethon]

Every time UPS gets a new driver, they stop delivering packages to my house. I'm ... lucky, in that I have an even numbered house on the odd side of the street and about an eighth of a mile off relative to the rest of the numbering system. Google maps has the right location and FedEx never has a problem, but each and every time UPS gets a new driver, I have to call them and tell them to have their driver look up my address on Google maps. Then the package arrives the next day.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

I would like this rule extended to the entire government, as we are sitting on a liability time bomb

I would like this rule extended to private corporations.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Ambassador Kosh]

If this is a good rule then it should be expanded society wide since otherwise it would mean that workers could lose pensions with private companies also.

There are enough private companies that offer benefits but don't fund them and declare bankruptcy if something bad happens. That should also be illegal.

However, what this says is maybe benefits should not be part of your job at all so that companies don't have to deal with this stuff and we can deal with it at a societal level where that is cheaper and more effective.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Wycliffe]

I would like this rule extended to the entire government, as we are sitting on a liability time bomb

I would like this rule extended to private corporations.

I agree completely. Unfunded pensions are a ponzi scheme that should have never been allowed. Whether it is Social Security, police officers, a car manufacturer, etc... promising to pay retirement out of future revenue is a disaster waiting to happen. Places like Detroit show what happens when your population shrinks and you no longer have the tax base to support your future obligations. Same with private corporations. They can go out of business, downsize, etc... and if their profit or workforce shrinks, there is no way they can fund those future obligations. At the very least, future obligations need to be on the book as debt owed so that if they go bankrupt, the retirees have equal footing to other creditors. I live in Missouri, and our public school teachers have a fully funded pension. My grandma actually gets raises when they have too much money in their pension fund. If school teachers can do it then other government and private businesses should be able to do it too.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Wycliffe]

The economy has benefited hugely from a reliable flat-fee mail delivery system. Like many taken-for-granted benefits we enjoy I didn't realize that until I did some consulting work for a company operating in a part of the world with a unreliable postal system

I agree but I doubt the volume would go down significantly if they raised the rate to $1 per envelope and got rid of bulk rate pricing. You would lose some junk mail but could make it up with the added revenue. If volume did go down significantly, switch to MWF delivery and charge extra for Tues/Thurs/Sat/Sun delivery. On a somewhat related note, I was gone for Father's Day weekend and I had to postpone buying something I wanted on Thursday until Saturday just so amazon would delivery it on Monday instead of Sat/Sun. Not everything needs to arrive in 2 days. I would have gladly ordered it on Thursday for a Monday delivery if that would have been an option.

Re: Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

What is making it illegal going to do? When a private company runs out of money, the shows over. At most you could drastically increase the risk/cost of hiring.

Governments are different and can't run out of money because we put them in charge and they have all the guns.

Please don't think you get to have opinions about economics like you do with food or books you like. Do you get to have opinions about, say, addition.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's like you don't know the USPS only gets like $1 to deliver your cheap chinkshit from pingpong land.

"ablooblooboo being a cheapskate doesn't entitle me to the fastest and bestest service abloobloobloo"

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Geoffrey.landis]

In short, no. The USPS depends on a certain percentage of spam to exist. They also wouldn't exist without the deal to take small packages from UPS and FedEx. Without a federally-granted monopoly on delivering to your mailbox, the USPS would have gone away already, and good riddance.

You just told me that the USPS delivers to people to whom UPS and FedEx don't deliver.

I think that's a valuable service, actually.

Basically, your post says that UPS and FedEx take their profit by delivering to the easy customers, and they use the post office to deliver to the hard ones.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[tlambert]

For a long time the US postal service has been losing money, they posted a 5.6 billion loss in 2016.

There are three main reasons for them posting a loss:

1. They are the only division of the federal government required to fully fund their pension plan, rather than switching to a "cash balance" plan.

2. They are the only division of the federal government required to fully fund their medical plan, called "Mail Handler's Benefits Program". This is because they have to accept all federal employees who want to enroll in it (rather than private insurance offered in their own division). This is also the medical plan for all members of congress and their dependents.

3. Their bulk mail delivery operates at a negotiated loss. Which wouldn't be a problem, had the Direct Marketing Association not turned around, and turned all the flyers that used to be sent separately into one "coupon brochure" by making an outside "wrapper" page that folds in half, and the other pieces go inside it. Including things like the Trader Joe's Catalog that comes once a month or so.

So yes, they are posting a loss, because the DMA intermediated between them and the flyer senders to take all the profit, while leaving the post office to do the deliver ... on one piece.

The fix is to raise their bulk rates -- which they are prohibited from doing.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Hardhead_7]

The main problem with the USPS is that Congress has them operating as a semi-business, semi-public service. That is to say, Congress has told them "act like a business, and turn a profit." But they won't let the Post Office do the most basic of business-like things: set prices.

They can't raise stamp prices, they have draconian rules imposed on them about pension funding, etc. Now, I'm not against Congress artificially keeping stamp prices low - we can view that as a public service similar to roads (we don't expect the Highway Department to turn a profit). But we need to pick one or the other - either is a "government business" and needs to run like one or a public service where we expect a loss for public good. Asking for both gets us dysfunction. It's amazing the USPS is as good as it is, all things considered.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Hardhead_7]

> Unfunded pensions are a ponzi scheme that should have never been allowed. I think there's a middle ground between fully funded and unfunded. Or maybe companies should be forced to buy "pension insurance." :) Or maybe it's just something we should have the government do (ie, Social Security).

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

Buddy, you messed with the wrong guy. LOL. What's your address? Me and my '82 Mercedes 300SD are coming to get you! No dirt and gravel driveway will stop me, I'm a professional driver! Imma get ya'.

You'll know I'm near when ya' hear:

Feel like a hard-to-get starlet when I'm driving
Turning every head, hell, I ain't even trying
Got them Ray-Ban shades, pretty in pink
Call me old school, but hey
I'm a 90s baby in my 80s Mercedes
I'm a 90s baby in my 80s Mercedes

I'm going to get you, Sucka!

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

Employees of private corporations don't have independent pension funds in the US?

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[andyring]

Simple fix - get rid of defined benefit plans and switch to defined contribution plans. Defined benefit plans can only function when the source of revenue is both 1) unlimited or nearly so and 2) easily modifiable without regard to profits. In other words, soaking the taxpayer more and more for significantly above-average pension promises.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're kinda right. It's not that the Post Office doesn't get it. Congress doesn't. The USPS has offered different ways to lose less money or approach profitability. Skipping Wednesday service. Adjusting workforce. Closing some offices. Raise certain rate classes. But, they can't do any of those things without Congressional approval. The USPS has no independent ability to adjust to the market since Congress dictates what it can and can't do.

It's the same problem we have with other, supposedly, independent agencies. Congress likes to tell them what to do then act like they have no idea why the agency did what it did. I remember a case in law school where the EPA had regulated a certain pollutant and companies sued over the limit. The EPA's response to the lawsuit was that Congress passed a law telling them they would regulate the pollutant to X amount. The EPA had no choice as to the limit and couldn't explain it, because they didn't choose it. But Congress wouldn't support the EPA and acted like the EPA was running roughshod.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Oswald McWeany]

We live in an average neighbourhood in an average city in the US with an average numbered house.

UPS is the only sevice that regulary delivers my packages to the wrong place or tells me that my house doesn't exist.

USPS and FedEx have no problem but UPS seem to be staffed by idiots.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[MightyYar]

That should also be illegal.

Actually, the postal rules now closely mirror private rules. This is all about bringing government into line with what we demand from private companies.

what this says is maybe benefits should not be part of your job at all

Benefits are fine. What isn't fine is empty promises in lieu of compensation. It is an immoral practice to make someone work for a promise that you have no way to ensure is kept. It is an immoral practice to burden your children with debts just to fund your recurring expenses. There is nothing OK about unfunded benefits.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Lord Kano]

I think that most of that is about pension liability.

If postal workers had regular a retirement account, like a 401k, the postal service wouldn't be in the red.

LK

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Lord Kano]

I would like this rule extended to the entire government, as we are sitting on a liability time bomb

I would like this rule extended to private corporations.

This is why private (and public) corporations have been phasing out pensions and going to 401k.

LK

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[drinkypoo]

The economy has benefited hugely from a reliable flat-fee mail delivery system.

That system retards progress, you know what the economy would benefit from even more? If we replaced all the trivial bullshit mail from the USPS with a government-backed crypto key that you use specifically for government-official communications. Anything that really needs to be handled in snail mail can be done for more than forty cents, through the profitable package carriers, if you simply allow them to deliver to mailboxes.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

USPS is not a for-profit business, it is a government service to ensure that all citizens of the US can receive and send mail.

Conservatives have this very bizarre notion that government finances, business finances, and personal finances, are some how all the same. It makes no sense at all

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[drinkypoo]

In short, no. The USPS depends on a certain percentage of spam to exist. They also wouldn't exist without the deal to take small packages from UPS and FedEx. Without a federally-granted monopoly on delivering to your mailbox, the USPS would have gone away already, and good riddance.

You just told me that the USPS delivers to people to whom UPS and FedEx don't deliver.

What? No, no I did not, and your lack of reading comprehension is appalling. UPS and FedEx did deliver to those addresses, and they still do, but they are now required to hand the majority of their small packages off to the USPS. This handoff typically adds a day on to delivery times, so it harms the customer directly even in cases where the package is subsequently delivered competently.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Wycliffe]

> Unfunded pensions are a ponzi scheme that should have never been allowed.
I think there's a middle ground between fully funded and unfunded. Or maybe companies should be forced to buy "pension insurance." :)
Or maybe it's just something we should have the government do (ie, Social Security).

Social Security is no better. It's also unfunded. It pays out benefits using current revenue. I see no benefits of an unfunded pension. What are the benefits of an unfunded pensions? It's an unlisted IOU (aka liability) for whoever is promising it. It's a way to promise to pay someone more without actually paying them. A fulled funded pension also has the advantage that a person would have the option of taking the extra cash instead of the pension. The only advantage an unfunded pension has is the hope that future revenue is greater than current revenue. This is a horrible assumption that likely only holds true 50% of the time at best.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Wycliffe]

Simple fix - get rid of defined benefit plans and switch to defined contribution plans. Defined benefit plans can only function when the source of revenue is both 1) unlimited or nearly so and 2) easily modifiable without regard to profits. In other words, soaking the taxpayer more and more for significantly above-average pension promises.

I'm ok with defined benefit plans. For a sufficiently large company, they should be able to fully fund a defined benefit plan using actuary tables and adjust appropriately. A defined benefit plan has the advantage that you can pay out slightly higher pension amounts because the people who live longer are subsidized by the people who die early. A defined benefit plan is basically a pooled retirement fund if fully funded.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

> They also wouldn't exist without the deal

Actually, they would exist without the deal. The post office is in the constitution in Article I, Section 8, Clause 7.

Many people think the post office is some sort of patronage system or power center (and it might well be in many ways) but it's in the constitution that it exist and it need not generate a profit any more than say, the military. Now what form it takes is a different issue but it's existence is an obligation.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Yes, there is a Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. Companies must buy the policy for defined benefit plans. It maxes out at some 45K a year. Some airline pilots pensions are in the range of 145K.

The problem is, use the rosy projections on good years to show their pension obligations are "overfunded" and withdraw the cash, distribute it as bonus among the top executives. Then on the next year when the returns are lower, they feign ignorance, "omg, it is underfunded, so you pensioners are dragging the company down. we cant fund it. We will go bankrupt and you lose it all. So accept these lower terms". They have been raiding pension funds, built up over 40 years. From 1950 to 1990. They raided them all through the 90s. And converted all the defined benefit plans to defined contribution plans. Except government, there are very few defined benefit plans exist in usa today.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Hognoxious]

A truck full of junk mail, at 13 cents a piece, uses the same amount of fuel, and the driver gets paid the same wages, as a truck full of first class mail at 49 cents a piece.

Unless they're refusing the first class mail in order to take the junk that's largely irrelevant. And what if the truck is only half full?

There's a name for it: overhead contribution.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[drinkypoo]

It's like you don't know the USPS only gets like $1 to deliver your cheap chinkshit from pingpong land.

It's like I don't give a shit, actually. If they can't make it work then they need to demand more money from the pingpongers. And actually, all I really want them to do is put stuff in my mailbox, and if it doesn't fit, faithfully generate a delivery exception by scanning barcodes which results in my receiving an email, like UPS and FedEx can manage. I had that turned on for USPS like I do for the competent carriers, but they apparently turned it off for me. These days I just keep the chain up because it saves delivery drivers from having to make decisions about whether to come up my driveway.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Dorianny]

All the major private carriers UPS / FEDEX/ DHL operated in the country in question, but they did so only in a few major cities and even in those cities their fees were too high for doing things like simple billing. The USPS could very easily become "profitable" if it moved to geographic area, variable pricing to cut back on service to high cost routes, of course that will put yet another roadblock towards the development of underdeveloped areas of the country and hurt GDP growth

Re: Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

A ruling several decades ago states that SS is not a contract between you and the government so collecting any is not guaranteed.

Re: Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're kidding right? That's too similar to a union, or too similar to how the government would regulate it. No, instead we have corporations putting pension money in an "account", which gets raided when the company needs money.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Eyezen]

It's amazing the USPS is as good as it is, all things considered.

Absolutely, everyone like to pick on the USPS but if you were to say to someone who didn't know what the USPS was that one could stick a piece of paper in a envelope and legibly (or not) write an address on it and stick it in a nondescript looking box outside your home with only a little red flag to alert someone of your intentions and have it picked up and delivered anywhere in the U.S. usually within a couple of days and at the most a week to another nondescript box which may (or may not) have said legible address on it for all of $.50 they would call you crazy.

Re: Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

Where I work, only the deadwood fucks have pensions coming. People who have worked the same job for 20-30 years. We can only hope that inflation will fuck them over. Or sudden early death after retirement.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[drinkypoo]

The USPS could very easily become "profitable" if it moved to geographic area, variable pricing to cut back on service to high cost routes, of course that will put yet another roadblock towards the development of underdeveloped areas of the country and hurt GDP growth

How's about we actually push the internet out to people who live in the sticks and let them communicate that way, instead of by sending pieces of paper around by truck? If they're truly difficult to deliver to, they can suffer a reduced delivery schedule, come in to a central location to pick up packages, etc.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

"....at least not at same cost that exists today, ...."

do, we want faster service, but it should cost less??

The USPS is subsidized government program in order to make sure that rural Alaskans get delivery for the same price as urbanites

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[oh_my_080980980]

It's not a myth when NO ONE else is required to do this. Certainly not one corporation. So yeah, fuck off.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[oh_my_080980980]

Hello douche bag. It's funded. That's how it works. You and you're employer pay into Social Security.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Opportunist]

What's your alternative? Savings? Private pension funds? Those depend on the insurance and bank not suddenly going poof and taking all your money with it.

A government backed pension paid by current tax generation has one advantage. It may be much, it may be little, depending on the current economic situation and whether tax revenue can fund it. But it cannot be GONE as long as government exists.

And, well, if you consider government gone poof... ain't that worth losing your pension over?

Re: Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

Please don't think you get to have opinions about economics like you do with food or books you like. Do you get to have opinions about, say, addition.

In general, I've noticed that the opinions posted by Anonymous Cowards, like you, seem to show an amazing superficiality in their knowledge of economics. There seems to be something about economics in particular that makes anonymous cowards eager to post extremely ignorant but vocal opinions.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

MightyYar says "They are simply required to fund the benefits that they promise existing workers given standard actuarial tables which estimate lifetime."

Yes. But this is overly burdensome and no private companies do anything like this.

Furthermore the USPS was forced to do this by legislators who are trying to drive the U.S. Post Office out of business and privatize all delivery of mail and packages.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

If the volume goes down enough they can do with less trucks and drivers.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[psycho12345]

You willing to pay for such a thing? Most people who would benefit from it out in the sticks don't want to pay the cost (either in taxes or to a private company directly), and often private ISP's have no interested because the ROI timeframe for such people would be on the order of decades, possibly longer.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

That is exactly the problem with health care in the US: it's a mix of socialism and capitalism. They sell it as the best of both worlds, but in reality, it's the worst of both worlds. Either socialism OR capitalism would have resulted in a better outcome. But that will never happen, because more money can be made by mixing the two. This is exactly why the US has, by far, the most expensive health care in the world.

Re: Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

You pay into it, the government spends it the next day. The only thing in the trust fund is special bonds (IOUs). There is no real money there. Same for Medicare and Medicaid. Many trillions of unfunded future liabilities.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[MightyYar]

Yes. But this is overly burdensome and no private companies do anything like this.

I don't think it is overly burdensome in the long term going forward. It avoids the absurd game of promising non-existent benefits in exchange for lower salaries. What was burdensome was forcing them to make up for 25 years worth of bad behavior over a 5 year period. The change in rules should have been phased in more slowly, or even been subsidized with tax dollars.

Private companies do have to fund their pensions, and they are pretty highly regulated. They would never get away with a pay-as-you-go plan.

Furthermore the USPS was forced to do this by legislators who are trying to drive the U.S. Post Office out of business and privatize all delivery of mail and packages.

They can try to do that, but the federal government is forced to run a postal service by the constitution. It's about as privatized and independent as it is ever likely to be. Anyway, its a perfect illustration of why I say elsewhere that unfunded pensions are immoral - you and I living today cannot guarantee what politicians in the future will decide to do with the pensions. You can call the future politicians any name you like, but if they are unwilling or unable to keep our ancient promises, they will leave the retirees hanging. The solution is to actually pay people for the work they are doing. Unions and politicians hate this idea, because they would have to do more than talk and shake hands for photo ops.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[MightyYar]

I don't think you understand how private pensions work or how highly they are regulated. And no wonder, with an attitude like that you'll be plenty ignorant.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[PeeAitchPee]

Every day they deliver billions of pieces of junk mail at a loss.

Citation? I can find no evidence backing this claim. Every article I find about USPS financial losses points back to the Congressional pension funding mandate previously mentioned by others -- nothing that is intrinsically related to junk mail. Seriously, if you have a link, please post it because I'd be interested to see it.

Bear in mind that modern junk mail like Every Door Direct Mail (EDDM) is not individually addressed to the recipients, versus 1st Class Mail which is. There's a huge amount of overhead related to reading those individual addresses, forwarding / routing them, handling exceptions like people that moved / Return To Sender or Wrong Address, etc. None of that overhead is there with EDDM (which literally is bulk mail which gets delivered to every residence on the route -- hence the name), which is a very large percentage of modern junk mail and part of the reason why it's so much cheaper than 1st Class. EDDM junk mail also must be delivered by the sender to the local post offices prior to final delivery on the local routes (though most folks use a 3rd party to do this part for them). But all of these things knock the cost per piece way down versus a 1st Class letter.

Re: Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

Governments are different and can't run out of money because we put them in charge and they have all the guns.

Which is why government employee unions are evil incarnate.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

When we talk about Social Security being funded - what that would mean was that "contributions" to Social Security were invested, and the investments used to pay beneficiaries in the future. Instead of investing, Congress mixed the money with the general fund, and current beneficiaries are being paid by current "contributions". That is not sustainable.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

UPS is the least reliable delivery service in my little backwater of New York City. The drivers typically just drop packages at UPS access points with no attempt to deliver to the original address, proven by the complete absence of any notice. My favorite one was when they returned my sons almost-birthday present for non-delivery after no attempt to deliver and no notice (I work from home). Fedex + USPS > UPS for me anyway, so my anecdote negates yours.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not likely that this would change anything. Republicans are out to prove government doesn't work so they de-fund and constrain things such as AmTrak, USPS, park systems, and other government operations.

Re: Capacity or Cost?

[Lord Kano]

That's the purpose of the pension. It was intended to be golden handcuffs, to keep experienced and knowledgeable employees with you. I have a co-worker who has been here for 40 years and this guy knows where all of the bodies are buried.

Unfortunately, it also means that there are employees who will do just enough to keep from getting fired until they can cash in.

LK

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

This applies to rural internet service and ISPs as well.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[sexconker]

The 3-generation pension thing is a myth. They are simply required to fund the benefits that they promise existing workers given standard actuarial tables which estimate lifetime. I would like this rule extended to the entire government, as we are sitting on a liability time bomb. My beef with the treatment of the USPS is I don't think congress phased in the new rules slowly enough for the business to adjust - but no matter what it was going to be traumatic.

From the government's perspective, there is no time bomb.

In the worst case scenario, pension/benefits funding is drained / costs grow way too high. The government just prints out a few trillion dollars to fund it.

The problem is solved, from the government's perspective. Congress critters are already wealthy, and if they don't like the inflation they'll give themselves a pay raise / demand more from lobbyists. Everyone with a government pension / benefits gets their shit fulfilled. It doesn't matter if their pension is now worth a third of what it was worth before, because fuck you. It doesn't matter if people are fighting for bread in the streets, because the ivory towers will be well stocked.

Re: Capacity or Cost?

[sexconker]

A ruling several decades ago states that SS is not a contract between you and the government so collecting any is not guaranteed.

Odd, them taking it out of my fucking paycheck is guaranteed.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[sexconker]

can they grow in a way that is profitable for the USPS that doesn't cost more than e-commerce is willing to pay?

In short, no. The USPS depends on a certain percentage of spam to exist. They also wouldn't exist without the deal to take small packages from UPS and FedEx. Without a federally-granted monopoly on delivering to your mailbox, the USPS would have gone away already, and good riddance. They are incompetent dickbags who do their best to only hire the dumbest people on the planet. Their autorouting system is so pathetic that it creates routing loops that can only be broken by deliberate human intervention. Their hours are garbage that robs the nation of productivity by expecting people to run their errands at the same time that their employer expects them to work. They suffer no penalties for failure, and there is no accountability. Every single package is scanned and the data handed to the government as part of the spying-on-citizens program. There is just no way in which the USPS is not crap.

Let's see which service you use if you want to mail legal documents.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[gurps_npc]

The problem is best described as neither cost nor capacity, but instead speed limits. As in 65 mph. Basically, we can't get things physically anywhere unless it is coming from less than 100 miles.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[sexconker]

If the volume goes down enough they can do with less trucks and drivers.

Fewer.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[unrtst]

The perception of these companies is all about the last mile. Whomever is your USPS/UPS/FedEx driver(s), that's who is responsible for your opinion of all of USPS/UPS/FedEx.

I've had awful service from all of them at different home addresses. Currently, USPS is the worst for me. I'll get a notification of missed delivery, even those I work from home, have a dog that barks when someone touches the door, live on the ground floor (no excuse of steps), and they leave the mail for the the upstairs tenants in my mailbox downstairs to save themselves from walking up the stoop.

If that's not bad enough, there's a storage facility VERY near me, and I've started having my stuff delivered there. They always deliver it there no problem (as long as they're open). It feels an awful lot like a personal attack, but that's not the case. They're just not doing their job.

The UPS guy I have is awesome though. He's also a happy guy, and seems to even enjoy his job.

I don't think it matters which company logo they wear. There certainly is some value to the various routing systems they all use, but that's rarely the part that pisses me (and, apparently, most others) off.

Retailers just need to allow users to pick the company that will deliver their goods, and provide their actual cost so people can decide which deliver option is worth it to them.

Re: Capacity or Cost?

[TheCastro1689]

Taking your taxes in guaranteed, but not any of the public policies. Like cops don't need to protect you and the government doesn't have to help you out.

Re: Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ad what does this have to do with collecting SS tax?

Re: Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

Originally, Social Security was supposed to be similar to a savings account. You paid into it, and the money was supposed to be there when you retired. But then there was this large pool of $$$$ sitting there, and the government said we can't have this $$$$ sitting there, we gotta go spend it!

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[pnutjam]

Social Security was designed to avoid accumulating large pools of money. Because large pools of money cause problems. They are truly what caused the 2008 crisis.
Pools of pension dollars are irresistible in our managementist system, even capitalism would be an improvement over this mess.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[faedle]

With civil asset forfeiture and certain "trivial traffic infractions", often the police department is, in fact, generating profit.

We have a small town here in CO named "Mountain View", a suburb of Denver. It is like eight blocks by three blocks. BUT, they have the west side of Sheridan Blvd as "in their city limits". Don't drive with a broken taillight, missing a license plate lamp, or with anything hanging from your rear view mirror. You will get pulled over.

Two years ago I got pulled over for a HANDICAPPED placard on my rearview.. Yes, really.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

Every day they deliver billions of pieces of junk mail at a loss.

Citation? I can find no evidence backing this claim.

I can confirm that they deliver at least a billion pieces of junk mail to me every year.

Re: Capacity or Cost?

[Wycliffe]

Originally, Social Security was supposed to be similar to a savings account. You paid into it, and the money was supposed to be there when you retired. But then there was this large pool of $$$$ sitting there, and the government said we can't have this $$$$ sitting there, we gotta go spend it!

Not really. From day 1, Social Security paid out money from people currently working to people over 65. It started paying out immediately so the first beneficiaries never even contributed.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Wycliffe]

Hello douche bag. It's funded. That's how it works. You and you're employer pay into Social Security.

And my money goes straight to the people who are already retired not into some magical savings account waiting for me.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[drinkypoo]

You willing to pay for such a thing?

WE ALREADY PAID FOR SUCH A THING. We gave the money to the telcos, and then they gave it away in executive bonuses. Literally. This is not even a slight exaggeration.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[painandgreed]

They are incompetent dickbags who do their best to only hire the dumbest people on the planet. Their autorouting system is so pathetic that it creates routing loops that can only be broken by deliberate human intervention. Their hours are garbage that robs the nation of productivity by expecting people to run their errands at the same time that their employer expects them to work. They suffer no penalties for failure, and there is no accountability. Every single package is scanned and the data handed to the government as part of the spying-on-citizens program.

It's like you've never actually had a package delivery attempt by FedEx or UPS. lol

Isn't FedEx or UPS who they're talking about?

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[roman_mir]

And, well, if you consider government gone poof... ain't that worth losing your pension over?

- no. But it's a good reason to celebrate.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Ambassador Kosh]

If this brings the rules in line with private businesses than that is fine. Neither government nor private companies should be able to make empty promises for compensation. What I don't want to see is a government program essentially forced to fail by having it operate under rules that can't work.

I know people where their companies have raided the pension funds and then told the workers that they were effectively screwed. The workers could of course sue for the lost pension but will die before they could ever hope to collect. That is why I would like to see a single society wide pension and not have private companies involved at all.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[MightyYar]

That is why I would like to see a single society wide pension and not have private companies involved at all.

In the US, we do have that - Social Security. Ironically, only government employees can be exempted from it, and in fact people were screwed by the government in Detroit - fortunately private charities and the state bailed out the Detroit pensions with $800 million (Google "Grand Bargain"). But it's illustrative of how private vs. government is just an implementation detail and you need to fully fund any obligations regardless. If those former cops and firefighters in Detroit had lost their city pensions, they would not have had any Social Security to fall back on - crazy, huh?

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[david_thornley]

The real problem with the USPS is that it's either too independent or not independent enough. A government corporation run like a business can work. A government department can work. A government business that's subject to micromanagement by Congress is in deep trouble.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[david_thornley]

Regrettably, unless we mandate the connectivity we paid for (which isn't happening with the current Congress and administration for sure, and I saw no sign of action from the Democrats), this is a sunk cost.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[drinkypoo]

Sure, but there's no sense throwing good money after bad. The only remedy is to mandate the connectivity we paid for. Paying again would be beyond idiotic. It would be completely corrupt. I guarantee you that if there is another attempt to pay, the people behind it will be getting kickbacks. I completely guarantee it.

Re: Capacity or Cost?

[Anonymous Coward]

And remember, if there is a shortfall we will just raise your Social Security taxes. Thank you very much from a soon to be retired fellow.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Ambassador Kosh]

I like the idea of competition to build a better cell phone, computer, etc but for many things it seems competition doesn't really do anything to increase quality or lower prices since what needs to be done is extremely clear. Things like roads, water, and healthcare seem obvious to me on that one. I would probably put an internet connection on there also since the towns that have done their own internet have ended up with MUCH faster service at a fraction of the price without passing costs on to people that don't use the service.

A country wide single pension system also seems like an obvious case for this. There is not really any room to innovate on this without potential for some huge screwups. Since we don't want innovation just have a single societal wide system that is publically and transparently run.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[TechnoJoe]

I agree with you. That doesn't make sense, especially with what USPS employees have told me first hand. The short version is, since they are going to practically every house every day anyway, it makes sense to increase the volume per drop to offset that cost; otherwise, the per-drop cost for just one/two pieces of mail would be huge.

Re:Capacity or Cost?

[MightyYar]

We've had Presidents who tried to implement that, but no one wants Social Security to be modified in any way. Right now it's a dressed-up Ponzi scheme. I mean, there is a "trust fund", but the same government responsible for running the program also immediately loans itself and spends this money... so there is not a trust fund except in the form of IOUs. Contrast this with any number of pension funds which have investments in actual company stock or other tangible investments. We've had attempts at letting people invest their SS money in actual investments, but this was defeated. Simply making the Ponzi scheme even larger does not seem wise to me, so I think this is a dead end.

I also think that there is some efficiency and value in having investment choices for retirement plans. For instance, at my company we are allowed to broadly choose where we want to put our 401k money. Some people like risk and so they can invest in individual equities or index funds. Some people like safety and so they can invest in bond funds. This lets a broad spectrum of people invest in the capital markets in a way that is healthy. Letting a few unelected people head up a gigantic multi-trillion dollar pension fund... that sounds quite dangerous. Lots of room for corruption, and it would seem to run counter to the free market principles of investing. With such a huge fund, it would also be trivial to almost accidentally nationalize major corporations - again, I'm not very comfortable with that.

buying the lie should be convenient

[Anonymous Coward]

soap opera 'society' fake history & heritage scam must be bought into.. cease fire stand down.. sing along https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WD3cnivUVXc .. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJ7pupHCZY0 ..& our standard answer.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pekhxxngQ3s ... spirit of creation all ++++, colorblind process

Re:buying the lie should be convenient

[uvajed_ekil]

Angry much, AC? No one is going to follow your descriptionless, apparently off-topic, anonymously-posted links, so you can stop now.

You know how many of them can solve that?

[DeplorableCodeMonkey]

Make in-store pickup really, really fast. Many brick and mortar stores make it too slow. So that is one of the main reasons why they are losing out to Amazon. If it takes half a day or more from me hitting "buy" on the site and the local store putting together the order, that's too slow for what it is. Most of the time I go into brick and mortar stores in our area, they don't have that much volume. There's no excuse for them to be slow. As far as I'm concerned, they're slitting their throats while Amazon sits there like \_()_/ while chucking tens of billions in low-hanging fruit into their cart.

Re:You know how many of them can solve that?

[Gilgaron]

We bought something at Sears the other day (shocking, I know) and they had redone their pickup area with a computer to scan the email barcode and a timer would start where the person had 5 minutes to bring the package out (she took 2). I was pretty impressed versus the first (and last) time I tried to do this at Best Buy where the item was not ready for pickup, despite the email stating it was, and they had to run around and ended up finding an open box item of similar type they discounted further in recompense. It would have been faster and as accurate to give my children a sketch of the item in crayon and send them wandering throughout the store. They'll probably go out of business anyway but the way Sears did it was the best I've seen so far.

Re:You know how many of them can solve that?

[Wycliffe]

Make in-store pickup really, really fast. Many brick and mortar stores make it too slow. So that is one of the main reasons why they are losing out to Amazon. If it takes half a day or more from me hitting "buy" on the site and the local store putting together the order, that's too slow for what it is.

Some stores are even worse than that. If you order from "Bass Pro Shop", they show you the inventory of the local store, but their online orders don't actually pull from that so it takes a week to get anything you order online from their website for in-store pickup. They should treat it like a walk in order and immediate pull the items the second they are ordered and have them waiting for you when you get there. Even walmart.com usually takes more than an hour. It would be rather trivial for them to autoprint an order when it comes in and page an employee to immediately start pulling the requested items and have them in a basket by the door waiting for you.

Re:You know how many of them can solve that?

[hackertourist]

The whole point of e-commerce is to not have to go to the bloody store!

Re:You know how many of them can solve that?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most stores like Home Depot or Walmart are like "we'll deliver it to the store in 2 weeks" ... and we'll charge more than Amazon

Re: You know how many of them can solve that?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not necessarily. The value of not having to traverse the aisles of the store and navigate through the cluttered plan-a- grammed mazes is significant. If stores could have a drive-through window for fast pickup it would be great.

Re:You know how many of them can solve that?

[houghi]

When I buy hardware, I often look what I want, put it in an order and pick it up the next day. Delivery at home is not possible as I work during the day and in Belgium, where I live, if there is no signature, they are responsible and I would keep calling them I never received it till either I have no place to store it or if they give me back my money and I still have several items.

U have the option of several places and sometimes I pick the store itself. Depends on the item and the situation. For me going to the store after ordering online means I have it faster.

Re:You know how many of them can solve that?

[Radish03]

Micro Center has done a great job at in-store pickup for years. Orders are usually ready by the time I get to the store, if I left home right after ordering. Plus you get to bypass the 10+minute checkout line by going through the less busy pickup desk.

On the other hand, I was shocked at how terrible in-store pickup is at JoAnn Fabrics last week. First, with regular in-store purchases they don't price match their own website, which had everything I was planning to buy at 40% off the store price. Second, if I ordered online to get the discount, I'd have to wait 3 hours for the order to be ready at the store. Is either of those options supposed to be appealing?

Re:You know how many of them can solve that?

[sexconker]

My BestBuy has the items ready to go on a shelf right by the customer service / online pickup counter. I've pretty much only done it with games and Amiibo, but they do have a closed off area just behind it where larger items could be stored. I also recently did an in-store pickup at a Target for a larger item. They had a similar deal where you get there and confirm the shit you're picking up, then they send someone to the back to go fetch the thing. I didn't time it, but it did take longer than I expected. They were fairly heavy items, so I don't fault them for not pulling it out in advance. For all they knew I wouldn't show up for days.

Other stores have a system where you reply to a text or click a link when you're arriving. This presumably gets the ball rolling. Amazon has it for their lockers. Even Taco Bell has it for online ordering.

Re:You know how many of them can solve that?

[demonlapin]

Can you not have it delivered to work? I've done that with anything valuable for years. It comes to the office, a secretary texts me that it has arrived, and I pick it up on the way out the door that evening.

Re:You know how many of them can solve that?

[houghi]

The company I work frowns upon it, because that would mean the people at the reception are doing a lot of signing of on deleveries. Also, because they signed, they are responsible for the goods till I signed of on it. So extra work for them. Or the erson has to wait for me to come and sign of and it could well be that at that moment I am not available.

This was implemented when some people started abusing the system. One person had 5 deliveries a day for 2 weeks.

As I said "frowned upon", so not forbidden. But as I have other options, I do not use it. Some people do it if there are no other options for them. They will infor, reception upfront. No need to give cow orkers extra work for my personal pleasure.
If it is send by the post, I can easily pck it up during my lunch break. If DHL or UPS, they will have pick-up points beween where I work and where I live. The only issue there is that many companies do not tell me what they use or do not pay for the pick-up option and also do not let me pay for it.

Re:You know how many of them can solve that?

[david_thornley]

A good clicks-and-mortar operation will allow me to determine which store has what I want. Once I've accessed that, it makes sense for me to put in the order. If I want the item that day, I like to be able to go pick it up.

Re:Barak Obama

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, we have a constitution in this country which limits the executives term to a maximum of eight years over two terms.

Thank you for playing and go fuck yourself.

Trump 2020.

Re:I HATE CENSORS (AKA MODERATORS)

[Anonymous Coward]

No you didn't. I did. I'm cool. You're a douchebag.

Re: Easy solution.

[Anonymous Coward]

Congratulations on not even reading the summary: "UPS, Fedex and especially the United States Postal Service aren't able to keep up"

Amazon already figured this out

[Anonymous Coward]

That's why Amazon started their own delivery service: https://arstechnica.com/business/2016/09/amazon-wants-to-challenge-ups-and-fedex-with-its-own-delivery-system/

Apparently Penny's is slow to catch on.

Re: I HATE CENSORS (AKA MODERATORS)

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, look, it's a right winger posting nonsense to try to discredit me. You failed miserably, just like the moderators who keep trying to censor my posts to -1. Trump is a nutjob and you right wingers need to accept it rather than attacking me or censoring me. Mark my words, Trump will be in a room with padded walls by the end of the year. He's melting down faster than Nixon.

Is it really a problem?

[Gussington]

Most ecommerce sites I use have next day delivery, some even do offer same day delivery if you order early in the morning. I can't think of many things I need faster than that. Is this really a problem?

Re:Is it really a problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

If only... It was possible to have the item as soon as you bought it.
But for some reason I can't possibly imagine that happening, or how it could be possible.

cap: queenly

Re:Is it really a problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most ecommerce sites I use have next day delivery, some even do offer same day delivery if you order early in the morning. I can't think of many things I need faster than that. Is this really a problem?

You obviously live in a big city. Try living in a remote rural location. For me, even next day delivery is seldom next day.

Re: Is it really a problem?

[KGIII]

USPS doesn't even deliver here. There is no RFD service here. The other companies just leave my packages down in the village or at the post office. UPS used to come up, but then they slid off my driveway and weren't able to get the truck out until the following day. The driveway is paved, too.

Re: Is it really a problem?

[demonlapin]

If you don't mind my asking, where do you live that has Internet but no RFD? Seems incongruous.

Re: Is it really a problem?

[KGIII]

Unincorporated township in NW Maine. I have a PO Box in Rangeley. I have DSL, but no mail. There are no services in the township, not to speak of.

So there's another "last mile" problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

At least in urban/suburban areas of the US, the "last mile" problem for Internet access has seemingly been solved in my experience. It seems like Internet commerce is about to create an actual physical "last mile" problem. How amusing.

J.C. Penny's just does not want to pay

[Anonymous Coward]

If you want better shipping, you have to pay for it...

Yet another Complainer Executive Officer running off with their mouth.

Re: I HATE CENSORS (AKA MODERATORS)

[Anonymous Coward]

If you would comment on the article instead of spewing non-related political flame-bait, perhaps you wouldn't be downmodded. Also, the "moderators" on this site aren't some demi-gods, they are users like you and me. The only difference is that they have a good standing in the community and thus are awarded points to moderate the site.

Posting as an AC and not being on topic will ensure that you never get to moderate.

TL;DR: You are not being censored because of your political views. You are being downmodded because you express them in the wrong forum.

Re: I HATE CENSORS (AKA MODERATORS)

[MightyYar]

"Censorship" isn't bad. One of the great things about the forums here is the moderation/censorship system. We only forbid _government_ censorship, and even then mainly of political speech.

Don't worry Marvi

[Registered Coward v2]

At the rate JC Penney is going down the tubes and closing stores you won't have to worry about the lack of capacity as you will have done your share to slow its growth.

There'll be plenty of capacity if you want to pay for it; but you don't. Last mile delivery to homes is expensive, much more so than to businesses so unless companies can make a profit on it they will forgo expanding it. The USPS is the only one that actually passes every home every day (more or less) so ultimately tehy may become more of the solution to the last mile, if other shippers are willing to pay for them to be the last one to touch a package.

Slow?

[nitehawk214]

Now that Amazon is contracting it's own delivery to shave costs, serviced has gone straight to shit.

Random delivery notification, inability to follow some directions like "leave on covered porch not out in the rain by mailbox you fucktard." Items randomly disappearing.

Delivery notifications are entirely useless. I'll get notified of a delivery then have the item show up 5 hours later. I assume it's so they can report to Amazon that it was delivered on time.

Re:Slow?

[Anonymous Coward]

Same. I used their 'free shipping on orders over $25" a few weeks ago. Finally, the delivery was to arrive yesterday. I was home all day, since it was Sunday. I get a call from some shitty Google Voice number telling me my package was undeliverable, and that I could call back and tell them where to leave it. The Google Voice account never answered. First of all I was home waiting for my fucking package. Second, just fucking leave it in the door like UPS. It is a thin box. I was so pissed because the "free shipping" took 8 fucking days. Well, it sat in their warehouse as punishment for daring to use "free", and then shipped in one day, except it was never delivered.

I swore I would never shop at Walmart because are think they are lame for paying their employees just low enough for foodstamps and then helping them sign up. On the other hand "free TWO DAY shipping on orders over $35" is pretty god damn sweet. Not to mention I don't have to sort through all the "prime only", "pantry only", and "fresh only" crap to find the stuff that I can ACTUALLY order. If it's listed on Walmart's website I can buy it. Wow, what a fucking concept.

Amazon just seems to get more user hostile every day.

Re:Slow?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, yeah, Walmart, unlike Amazon, actually lets me use Paypal like every other retailer on the planet.

I've been happy with the run up in the Amazon stock price, but if I'm turning to Walmart, something I always swore I wouldn't do, then I wonder if that's a bad sign for Amazon.

Re:Slow?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll get notified of a delivery then have the item show up 5 hours later. I assume it's so they can report to Amazon that it was delivered on time.

So I'm not the only one that's happened to, I was wondering if my package had been stolen and was trying to figure out how to report it when it suddenly did arrive 3 hours after the text that I had received.

Re:Slow?

[BronsCon]

The Amazon drivers covering my area seem to do their jobs, even going so far as to deliver to my door if I am home and the leasing office if I am not. USPS, UPS, FedEx, and DHL all deliver only to the leasing office, which is really inconvenient for me when they deliver a large/heavy package and I have to drag it across the parking lot (they could have parked in front of my building) and carry it up to my 3rd floor walk-up.

I know, my fault I chose to live in a 3rd floor walk-up. That's actually why I don't expect the Amazon drivers to deliver to my door like they do, or complain when they don't.

I wonder, though, if it's because I've actually happened to be coming home a couple times as they were delivering to the leasing office and ended up meeting them at the truck to intercept my packages; direct-to-door delivery didn't start until after that. Both times, my apartment complex was their last stop of the way, so they had some time and we BS'd for a while, and we do tend to chat a bit when they deliver to my door as well. Perhaps getting to know your carriers and making an attempt to present yourself as a decent human being has an effect on that.

Not that I'm saying you don't, but I've noticed similar improvements in quality of service with the other carriers when I've done the same in the past.

In fact, I'll throw you another anecdote. The mail room at my apartments was closed for several months for renovation, so all mail was delivered to the leasing office to be picked up by residents. On several occasions, the office was closed (USPS carrier running late, manager was showing a unit, someone out sick, multitude of reasons it may be closed when USPS arrives) and she would end up hand delivering my mail, and only my mail. She'd come back later (or the next day) do deliver the rest when the office was open. If I had to attribute that to anything, it's the few times I've happened to make my way to the mailboxes (before they closed them for renovation) as she was actively delivering and (of course after checking that I wouldn't be bothering her or slowing her down) struck up friendly conversation. One time, I had walked to the office to get my mail, only to learn they were closed that day for a training event (with no advance notice to residents) and she happened to be pulling in as I turned around after reading the notice on the office door. I waved and called out to her to let her know not to bother parking as the office was closed; she parked anyway and replied "Well, I can deliver yours" as she got out of the truck, walked to the back, threw the door open, and sorted through to find my mail.

I'll definitely have to remember to get her a Christmas card and a small gift this year.

Re:Slow?

[Anonymous Coward]

I swore I would never shop at Walmart because are think they are lame for paying their employees just low enough for foodstamps and then helping them sign up.

That sounds like a talking point to me, do you have a citation?

Re:Slow?

[Anonymous Coward]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-walmart-workers-cost-taxpayers-6-2-billion-in-public-assistance/

Re:Slow?

[nitehawk214]

"getting to know your carriers" What is this the 1950s? Or do you live in a small down where there is only one Amazon delivery person.

Amazon contacts random people in large cities. It will be delivered by a random person from an entirely unmarked van. Unless you order often, chances are good you will never see the same person twice.

Re:Slow?

[BronsCon]

It will be delivered by a random person from an entirely unmarked van.

Not true, Amazon's own delivery people drive white cargo vans with huge Amazon logos on them. At least, the ones I've seen do.

Re:Slow?

[nitehawk214]

Not here; they are unmarked white vans, I am not even sure they have a commercial transport sticker decal on them, though I could be wrong about that. The operators wear no uniforms.

Though I actually don't know they are contractors, I am guessing since the whole operation seems to be fly-by-night. Maybe different regions operate differently.

Re:Abolish the USPS

[Anonymous Coward]

Cool made up story bro.

Sour Grapes

[Anonymous Coward]

Says the CEO of a company that is going out of business because people can wait 24-48 hours for most stuff....

Just saying

Re:Abolish the USPS

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, shut down the USPS because you don't like some guy. Sounds legit.

Create your own distribution network, then.

[Anonymous Coward]

Amazon has been using their own contractors to deliver packages in my area for a while now. From a customer's perspective, my packages arrive exactly within the timeframe as specified by Amazon.

They saw the same problem - instead of complaining about it, they invested and managed their own distribution network. That should be the spirit of American capitalism - for every problem, there's an opportunity to improve.

Re:Create your own distribution network, then.

[Geoffrey.landis]

Amazon has been using their own contractors to deliver packages in my area for a while now. From a customer's perspective, my packages arrive exactly within the timeframe as specified by Amazon.

Their technique there is to use their own contractors to deliver to places that are easy to get to, and the USPS to deliver to the ones that are hard to get to.

That business "opportunity to improve" relies on the U.S. Post office to work.

so stop offering cut-rate mystery shipping!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, retailers, I would PAY YOU for UPS GROUND as an option! The only options almost every single retailer has is mystery shipping - usually some cut-rate thing like UPS Mail Innovations, USPS, or UPS Sure Post - or the FedEx versions of them - and super-expensive shipping like next-day air. Give me the option to select the shipping I want, and problem solved. Right now, there are no options. All you can do is either get "free shipping" (which is always some cut-rate option that goes to the USPS) or pay for mystery shipping and be surprised. All I want is the option to buy UPS Ground shipping. Is that so hard?

Re:so stop offering cut-rate mystery shipping!!!

[andyring]

I sent a note to Bezos a while back offering this exact thing. I was tired of my Amazon packages going by US Mail and arriving on time maybe 20 percent of the time. I basically told him "Hey I'm a Prime member but USPS shipping sucks. I will gladly pay an extra couple dollars to have my packages upgraded to UPS or FedEx."

Sadly, they don't yet have a way to do that but if they did, I bet it'd really hurt the post office enough that they'd ponder getting their act together.

Re:so stop offering cut-rate mystery shipping!!!

[drinkypoo]

All I want is the option to buy UPS Ground shipping. Is that so hard?

You can usually actually do that with larger packages, IME. But with small packages, unless they are sent next day, they are likely to be handed off to the USPS even if you send them via UPS. The sender literally doesn't know who's going to show up at your door to deliver a small package sent via UPS or FedEx.

Re:so stop offering cut-rate mystery shipping!!!

[wbo]

Amazon is typically very good about issuing credit (usually $5 or so) if a prime package arrives later than the guaranteed delivery date shown when the order is placed. Also after requesting compensation a few times via their online support I notice that almost all of my Amazon packages now come UPS 2-day instead of via USPS.

I suspect the change was because of the multiple "Package arrived late" support requests I made.

Re: I HATE CENSORS (AKA MODERATORS)

[Anonymous Coward]

The reason most US is independent over Republican or Democrat is because there is mass retardation coming from both sides of the aisle. Russia to the left of me, Trump to the right, here I am stuck in an oligarchy with you.

Re:Barak Obama

[DontBeAMoran]

Sorry, we have a constitution in this country which limits the executives term to a maximum of eight years over two terms.

Thank you for playing and go fuck yourself.

Sanders 2024.

Re:Abolish the USPS

[CanadianMacFan]

Because the private couriers have never had bad employees. /s

Flawed system. Shippers may not be the biggest is

[jpellino]

As it was explained to me, Arne Nashbar made a great decision by expanding his bicycle mail order warehouse mere feet from a UPS facility. For as long as that was true he revolutionized buying bike parts. As it was explained to me, Amazon now has a live bidding system for shipping as your order is processed. Surepost seems to low bid/ win out a lot. That means UPS gets it as far as your local USPS PO, where it languishes because their schedules don't sync. Amazon waiting until a first-leg truck is full enough to roll doesn't help either.

They are forced to make a loss

[Anonymous Coward]

They're force by congress to run at a loss because they are mandated to over-inflate their reserves to pay for pensions to a massive level compared to any other industry, whether postal service or any other service in the USA. Which means they have to push revenue into the pension pot making a loss overall.

This is done SOLELY so that the USPS can be "credited" with being an "inefficient and unsustainable" service that must be closed to stop the government money being "wasted" on it and the work farmed out to any private industry that wants to do it.

IME the republicans don't care if trumpaline raids the government and bankrupts it like he's done every other business he ran, because they WANT government to be bankrupted.

Pro Tip: Anonymous posts are handled differently

[davide marney]

There are very, very few legitimate reasons to post anonymously. When I am moderating and I determine that the person is posting anonymously for a legitimate reason, then I give them the same chance at a positive rating as a named poster. But if not, I judge them much more harshly.

Why? Because if you don't have the guts to identify yourself when you could, then you don't deserve to be treated like others who do.

So, don't post anonymously if you want to be a valued member of the conversation.

Slow postal services?

[Anonymous Coward]

Slow post service are an euphemism...
.
  A simple letter around xmas time from the IRS can well arrive 2 or 3 month delayed.

The cherry on the cake was my sis-in-law sending to Lisbon a cake for xmas time, and it arriving in the mail 5 months later.

Re:Barak Obama

[Anonymous Coward]

Sanders will be dead in 2024.

USPS? Or UPS?

[Anonymous Coward]

UPS has walked through my wife's flower beds and when I said something to the driver: "Uh, I didn't see it." - even though I have a sidewalk.

I've waited all day for a time sensitive package only to walk out for the mail and see that yellow sticker on my door saying, "Sorry we missed you!" the SOB never rang the doorbell or knocked. The dumb lazy SOB just assumed nobody was home.

When I complained, the customer no-service in-duh-vidual (god knows where in the World she was) insisted that the driver DID ring the bell and knock. "Sorry for the inconvenience!"

So, I had to wait around for another day for the package that was needed for work.

My packages always arrive like they play soccer with them. Now, ANY damage at all gets sent back. I've sent back things as many as 4 times before I received something that wasn't damaged.

FedEx isn't any better - although, their drivers are a little smarter and know what a sidewalk is.

Re:USPS? Or UPS?

[Anonymous Coward]

AC due to modpoints + driver for FedEx Express. Ask yourself this, do you really think that the driver wants to go back there tomorrow? I sure as hell don't. I want your shit off my truck so that I might have a lighter day tomorrow. It also makes less work for me as I have to go back to the station, find the send again area and scan it in there.

Re:USPS? Or UPS?

[Hognoxious]

I want your shit off my truck so that I might have a lighter day tomorrow.

I'm off tomorrow. Pete or Miguel can deal with it, the fucking assholes.

Re:USPS? Or UPS?

[sexconker]

A good driver doesn't care. The truck is always full and they always time out on their shift before delivering all their packages. They don't give a fuck if the undelivered package is for your house or not.

A shitty driver "cares" about getting everything "done". What this really means is they take a long lunch, sit in their truck jerking off, or whatever else. Then they scramble to "deliver" stuff. The other AC describes typical behavior. Shitty drivers who are lazy / trying to make up time (that they likely frittered away) will mass-scan shit in the truck to generate door tags, then go around putting door tags instead of delivering the packages. Door tags are light, and you can carry many at once. They assume people won't be home in the middle of the day to accept a delivery, so anything that isn't flagged as "drop and forget" gets the phantom delivery attempt treatment. If it's flagged as "drop and forget", it gets the "chuck it toward the door" treatment. If it hits the door you get bonus points because that counts as the knock!

I've witnessed a FedEx driver literally throw things at my door. I was sick of having food deliveries destroyed so I waited and watched, and I caught the fucker red handed. I walked out to him and his truck and fucking let him have it, out in the middle of the street for all to see. He denied it at first, until I fucking told him I had video. I chased that shit up FedEx's tree pretty far, and the problem stopped. The trick with FedEx is that none of the drivers are direct FedEx employees (I'm not sure if this is area-specific or only true for FedEx Express or FedEx Ground or ...). So you have to bitch and moan and threaten pretty hard for them to give half a shit about contacting the actual guy who manages your area and then get them to contact the contractor that hires the actual drivers, and then get them to actually fucking do something. In my experience, video evidence that includes the FedEx logo helps a lot.

Heh...

[XSportSeeker]

Think you guys have it bad there in the US? Try postal service in Brazil. It's a state-owned monopoly that exploits people with extremely expensive pricing, and for products that are coming from outside the country (like chinese products bought on eBay and other sites), the review process to charge for importation taxes can take anywhere from a month to half an year - regularly. Yes, I'm not talking about extremes here, this is the average timeframe.
You never know what you are going to get, there is no tracking system for that, there's no online communication system (like really, when there are taxes to be paid you get sent a notice via snail mail, there is no other option), you can end up getting charged over double the cost of the product plus shipping, you have to go get the product yourself from a designated post office that's oftenly not the closest to your home address, and taxes need to be paid in cash - no other forms of payment accepted.

It's pure unbridled exploitation from a monopoly.

Things like same day delivery or guaranteed next day delivery like what Amazon do is pretty much impossible given Brazil's infrastructure. And the taxation structure is probably the reason why Amazon in Brazil never went above selling eBooks, plus bureaucracy and other crap. And services like Blue Apron, Dollar Shave Club, among others are kinda impossible to work well here.

I've seen packages of mine getting sent to the other side of the country or even to other countries due to postal service error.
But of course, there's absolutely zero pressure for the service to ever get better since it works that way.

Re:Heh...

[drinkypoo]

But Brazil is fractally corrupt. Everything you look at seems corrupt, until you take a closer look at it and find out that you were only scratching the surface of corruption.

Apparently they have a lot of the same problems in lots of other countries as well, and there's tons of little businesses which expedite shipping as a result. Clearly, the USA is actually a great place to operate businesses which depend on ordering a lot of parts from other countries, because you tend to actually get things.

Re:Heh...

[TheDarkMaster]

A correction in what the commentator above wrote. The entity responsible for customs delays and extra charges in Brazil is actually the Brazilian "Receita Federal" (something like the US Customs), where it in practice has no obligation to process the packages within an acceptable timeframe or even explain what happened when it withdrew the packages.

Re:Heh...

[Anonymous Coward]

Nailed it!

The same thing that the parent described happens in Argentina. (Then politicians love to brag about generating jobs and attracting investments...)

Or, we could just scale back our lust of instant g

[mbeckman]

Which is what higher shipping prices would do. No conflict here: supply and demand handles this situation nicely. As long as petulant millennials can get over their feeling of entitlement to free shipping. :)

Agreed

[ArchieBunker]

The service where I live is terrible. The old guy who delivers my wrongly addressed mail is a sour looking asshole. He also drops cigarette butts in my driveway and can't be bothered to walk up my porch steps to deliver packages. He leaves them out in the rain and also is so lazy he forgets to close the mailbox lid. He won't pick up outgoing mail unless he has something to deliver. I've had outgoing mail in my box for three days! I've complained to the post office but it's in the ghetto and they don't care.

Re:Agreed

[tquasar]

I've had outgoing mail left, usually utility bills. The mailman walks between 2-3 houses and is out of sight by the time that I walk to my front door.

Re:Agreed

[uvajed_ekil]

I see complaints like this all the time, and I get it, by I feel compelled to defend the drivers because I never have any issues with them, whether UPS, FedEx, or USPS. The only time I have a problem is when something gets hung up in an Amazon warehouse, they ship a day late, and try to blame the shipper on them missing their "guaranteed" date. Never any problem with the local drivers/carriers.

FedEx Smartpost (aka SlowPost) is horribly slow, as anything DHL-related always was, but anything else through the three main services always works out great here. Even the UPS reputation for destroying everything in transit fails to hold up, so maybe I'm just lucky, but I'm happy.

Re:Pro Tip: Anonymous posts are handled differentl

[EzInKy]

You and I are at odds. I see anonymous posting as the soul of slashdot. Sure some people post anonymously just to troll, but others have very good reasons to remain anonymous.

What is the Hurry???

[ve3oat]

I don't know why it is, but many of the companies that I buy stuff from over the Internet assume automatically that I want it delivered "tomorrow" or within 3 days at the most. If I needed stuff that fast, I would go to the store and buy it there, or I would have bought it all a month ago in preparation for what I am doing today.

So when I buy stuff over the Internet, it usually doesn't matter when it comes and I prefer that they ship it by Canada Post, or USPS, or the Royal Mail, whatever. I am not in a hurry and surface mail is just fine. We get very good mail delivery where I live and if a parcel is too big for my box then I go to the Post Office to pick it up, knowing that it is safe and secure.

What really bugs me is having to deal with the so-called courier companies who invariably come while I am not at home and leave stuff on the porch or leave a notice on my doorknob. They say they will "attempt delivery" again tomorrow but, No, no one comes even though I have made a point of staying at home, alert to the driveway and door. Then I end up having to drive all the way into the city to pick up my parcel at the courier's office anyway. Give me the Post Office any day!

Let those who need 72-hour delivery pay extra for it and leave me alone with much cheaper shipping charges and delivery within two or three weeks. I am fine with that.

Re:What is the Hurry???

[drinkypoo]

What really bugs me is having to deal with the so-called courier companies who invariably come while I am not at home and leave stuff on the porch or leave a notice on my doorknob. They say they will "attempt delivery" again tomorrow but, No, no one comes even though I have made a point of staying at home, alert to the driveway and door. Then I end up having to drive all the way into the city to pick up my parcel at the courier's office anyway. Give me the Post Office any day!

I have all of these problems too... with the post office. I'm going to go in this morning to pick up a parcel for which they claim they left a slip (they didn't) which would probably have fit into my mailbox just fine.

It's not that I've never had these problems with the other carriers, it's that I have them a lot more with the USPS than I do with UPS or FedEx. I'm supposed to get email from USPS, UPS, and FedEx for delivery exceptions. USPS is the only one that reliably fails to send me such messages. And uh, have you seen their website? Ugh.

Re:What is the Hurry???

[BronsCon]

Meanwhile, I've had a carrier shove a parcel into my mailbox that was the exact dimensions of the inside of the mailbox... from the back (it was a bank of mailboxes) where there was no lip... so I could not remove it from the front (the only part I could open) where there was a lip.

I ended up having to cut the parcel open to remove its contents and leave the empty package for the carrier to deal with.

I'm glad he's not my carrier anymore, as that was one of the less idiotic things he did.

Re:What is the Hurry???

[TheDarkMaster]

The trouble is more when your order takes literally months to be delivered

USPS - both good and bad

[zerofoo]

We have two locations and we receive amazon deliveries many times per week. At one location the USPS driver brings the mail (including packages) up a flight of stairs to our main office - very nice service. I assume free coffee, air conditioning, and an available guest bathroom also help get our packages in the building.

At our other location (also up a flight of stairs) our USPS driver never comes in the building, and if the package is too large to fit in our giant mailbox, it goes back to the post office for pickup - which results in me calling Amazon and telling them that if I wanted to pickup things I ordered, I would simply buy them from a brick and mortar retailer.

USPS does what they do very cheaply - and their delivery volumes are truly staggering, but their last mile performance does seem inconsistent.

Maybe Amazon should just buy the USPS?

China

[DontBeAMoran]

Something I'd like to know is how Chinese sellers on eBay are able to give "free shipping" on sub-$1 items. I've even won a lot of auctions below 25 cents and I've always received the items. Of course it takes weeks and sometimes nearly two months to arrive, but I get the items.

My question is, who's paying USPS, Canada Post, etc? Is China trying to bankrupt our postal services?

Re:China

[drinkypoo]

My question is, who's paying USPS, Canada Post, etc? Is China trying to bankrupt our postal services?

China post is clearly not making anything on these packages. The money has to be made up by the government. This amounts to a Chinese subsidy for people shipping a lot of crap to the USA. If they're trying to destroy anything, it's American retail.

Give me a break.

[Anonymous Coward]

The only thing that's an 'obstacle' to is people's sense of entitlement and/or greed. Sounds like a millennial 'problem'. Sorry that physical reality doesn't move as fast as your raging hormones. You'll outgrow it.

Re:Abolish the USPS

[Anonymous Coward]

Why abolish it? If you don't like it, then don't use it. And because of some weird rules, it's one of the few government agencies that if you choose not to use it, it actually doesn't cost you anything since they don't receive any tax dollars.

Re:Pro Tip: Anonymous posts are handled differentl

[Geoffrey.landis]

You and I are at odds. I see anonymous posting as the soul of slashdot. Sure some people post anonymously just to troll, but others have very good reasons to remain anonymous.

Unfortunately the flood of sewage spilling from trolls and one-issue-idiots have completely discredited the few with purported "very good reasons" to remain anonymous.

Re:Pro Tip: Anonymous posts are handled differentl

[Anonymous Coward]

I post as AC because I'm too lazy to reset my password because I don't remember which email I used to create my account.

Re: I HATE CENSORS (AKA MODERATORS)

[aicrules]

Also...anyone can browse at -1 and see everything. Which I almost always do unless I'm looking for a particular comment that I know was rated higher.

Re: Pro Tip: Anonymous posts are handled different

[Anonymous Coward]

I post as AC because mobile Slashdot on my 10" tablet is so fucked up if I try to read it logged in.

I shouldn't be forced to the mobile site because my tablet runs a mobile OS. The screen is as big as some laptops.

China

[Anonymous Coward]

A large fleet of cheap motorbikes with huge panniers. This was taobaos solution to the problem and it works, nothing is as fast.

Re: Barak Obama

[that this is not und]

They will have to settle for Warren. Wait! She is almost as old as Sanders. When did the DNC get to be so frickin old? Have people like Wasserman-Schultz become so repellant to younger people that the Democrats will just die out like the Shakers?

Amazon Bloody Logistics

[RogueyWon]

Here in the UK, our biggest problem isn't the postal service. I've had experiences with both the USPS and the Royal Mail. By and large, the Royal Mail is not that bad. It has its problems, sure, but I've generally found it more reliable than the US equivalent. Our geography is generally just easier for that kind of thing, I suspect.

The biggest problem we have over here in the e-commerce sphere is Amazon Bloody Logistics. This is the single worst delivery organisation I have ever encountered, by a long reach.

Lost parcels. Parcels randomly delayed for days or even weeks in transit. Parcels delivered to the wrong address. Delivery status screens which may or may not update, and which probably contain the wrong information when they do. 15 hour delivery windows with no estimates within that. No opportunity for Amazon's call-centres to contact drivers or even delivery depots. No ability to re-route missed parcels to post-offices or collection points.

There's a theoretical option to have parcels sent to a pick-up locker instead, provided you select this option before dispatch. When this works, it works well. Unfortunately, over the last 12 months, Amazon have systematically widened the number of products this isn't available for to the point it's nearly useless. Even for products that are allegedly eligible, the system will often just say "nope, can't do that" for no readily appreciable reason.

It's also highly variable across regions. Urban areas seem to fare much worse than rural ones. I'm in London and promised Sunday-deliveries never emerge here. Friends and family in more rural locations seem to be slightly better served.

Over the last 12 months, I've shifted a large portion of my online shopping away from Amazon as a result of their whole-hearted adoption of Amazon Bloody Logistics. I'm also going back to bricks and mortar stores to a greater extent than at any time in the last 5 years.

Re:Amazon Bloody Logistics

[JeffOwl]

That's remarkable. My experience here in the US is that when Amazon handles the delivery on their own (same or next day stuff) they are very reliable. Of course this being the US it is an entirely different organization than you have over there. For regular stuff I have had issues with the US mail marking tracked packages as delivered in the system on Tuesday and then not actually delivering the package until Wednesday or Thursday.

Re:Amazon Bloody Logistics

[RogueyWon]

What's badged as Amazon Logistics seems to actually vary a lot from country to country, depending on local conditions and labour laws.

Here in the UK, it is an absolutely bare-bones system with very few actual employees. It's mostly self-employed drivers hired on a contracted basis via a system that seems to be total chaos.

I've certainly had problems with the Royal Mail as well in the past. When I was in my late teens, our local Post Office was raided by the police due to a systematic programme of theft of and from parcels (this was in the very early days of Amazon, when they still mostly sold books). Hilariously, we had one package arrive which had been opened and DVDs stolen from it, while the books were left intact.

But by and large, our Royal Mail has a fairly well established logistical chains and is reasonably good at keeping things moving through the system. Amazon Logistics in the UK, by contrast, is a case of "give it to whichever guy-with-a-van turns up on the day and hope for the best".

Yet Amazon doesn't have the same complaint

[Anonymous Coward]

I question if this is really a problem or if the problem lies in JC Penny. Amazon and Walmart don't seem to be complaining about it and ship far more than JC Penny would even dream of and continue to grow those numbers. The reality here I think is that JC Penny can't do the volume necessary to get the price that they want from the delivery services, as such their only recourse is to complain about it so shareholders don't punish them for incompetence.

Re: Barak Obama

[reanjr]

It's actually limited to 10 years and as many terms or partial terms as you can fit, with none starting after the six year mark.

Re: Pro Tip: Anonymous posts are handled differen

[KGIII]

Umm... Bottom of the page, desktop site. To go back, same thing, but it then says mobile site.

Mobile has some shitty bugs.

USPS because it is cheaper [Re:Capacity or Cost?]

[Geoffrey.landis]

In short, no. The USPS depends on a certain percentage of spam to exist. They also wouldn't exist without the deal to take small packages from UPS and FedEx. Without a federally-granted monopoly on delivering to your mailbox, the USPS would have gone away already, and good riddance.

You just told me that the USPS delivers to people to whom UPS and FedEx don't deliver.

What? No, no I did not,

Actually, you did, and you repeated it again in your comment. But, you're right: turns out that you apparently didn't actually know that the reason that UPS and FedEX use the US post office to deliver is because it's cheaper for them.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u...

and your lack of reading comprehension is appalling. UPS and FedEx did deliver to those addresses, and they still do, but they are now required to hand the majority of their small packages off to the USPS.

They are "required" to do so because they have a contract to do so. They have a contract to do so because it's cheaper. It's cheaper because the USPS is required to do deliveries.

This handoff typically adds a day on to delivery times, so it harms the customer directly even in cases where the package is subsequently delivered competently.

It may "harm the customer," but UPS and FedEX do it because it is cheaper.

Re:USPS because it is cheaper [Re:Capacity or Cost

[drinkypoo]

It may "harm the customer," but UPS and FedEX do it because it is cheaper.

It's cheaper because the USPS has a monopoly on delivering to your mailbox, which puts them on your street anyway. But that monopoly is based on spam. They can't do that without also delivering spam, which is what subsidizes the small-package-delivery system. That spam has an ecological cost. The USPS is fundamentally unsustainable.

Pensions in the U.S. Re:Capacity or Cost?

[Geoffrey.landis]

Employees of private corporations don't have independent pension funds in the US?

They may or may not. There are a variety of different types of pension plans in the U.S.

The old fashioned pension plan was simply that the company would pay a pension to the retired workers. But this type of pension plan is becoming obsolete, partly because the failure of several large corporations has made it clear that you can't necessarily count on the large corporation continuing to pay the pensions if they go bankrupt.

Re: Barak Obama

[Anonymous Coward]

Not my interpretation. It's two terms, rounded to the nearest whole number. So if someone does less than half a term coming off the bench that doesn't count.

So ten years, minus a day.

reinventing Social Security [Re:Capacity or Cost?]

[Geoffrey.landis]

However, what this says is maybe benefits should not be part of your job at all so that companies don't have to deal with this stuff and we can deal with it at a societal level where that is cheaper and more effective.

Hmm-- interesting idea. We could have a government-mandated plan that provides some sort of minimum benefits, which everybody pays into as part of their job, and that could be like a "safety net" applying to all employees, so they're not destitute even if their savings get drained and their company goes bankrupt. And then, companies could also offer benefits beyond this minimum, a "retirement plan," if you will, so people who worked for that company would have an income that's more than that safety-net minimum when they retire. A two-layer plan. The minimum plan would just be be security, be part of the overall social structure.

Say, we could even call it that: "social security." Good name!

Go To A Store!

[ThatNakedGuy]

Back in the day we could walk into a building, called a "store", find what we wanted and buy it. We didnt have to wait for delivery or pay extra for faster delivery. You had your product immediately.
Now people sit in a chair at home and spend hours searching websites looking for products. Once they find what they want they spend money they dont have (credit) and wait days or weeks for it to (hopefully) arrive. Or they pay extra to have it delivered quicker (hopefully).
Meanwhile, there is a WalMart within walking distance. I can go there and get my product NOW, probably for less because I'm not paying extra shipping. And if WalMart dosnt have it, I have a device called a "phone" I can use to contact other stores and ask them if they sell my product.
Kids these days think it's a convenience to wait for a delivery. You know what's convenient? Going to a store and getting what you want NOW.
And get off my lawn!

Re:Go To A Store!

[david_thornley]

Back in the day, I could walk into a "store" and find that what I wanted wasn't there. Actually, I can still do that.

FedEx and UPS do the same, hand all info to US FBI

[Anonymous Coward]

Title says it all.

How cheap is junk mail [Re:USPS because it is...]

[Geoffrey.landis]

It's not entirely clear to me that the USPS actually does make money on delivering junk mail. There is a lot of it-- but they don't get paid much for delivering it. First class mail makes money for them. I'm not at all sure whether junk mail does or not.

Keeping the cost of junk mail low, of course, is driven by the lobbying of the junk mail industry. I think we need to blame congress for that

So they need to pay for it?

[argStyopa]

...that's how capitalism works.
Either a new supplier will enter the field because there's money to be made, or the current services will raise prices as needed and expand.

I'd expect the latter. It's just that this shit doesn't happen as instantly as analysts seem to think it "should"..

Re: Easy solution.

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't even read your post but I am sure it is wrong and I disagree with it. Why do you hate puppies?

"Esp the USPS"

[whitroth]

Right. Who first was semi-privatized (and Founding Father Ben Franklin, first Postmaster, is spinning in his grave), and then the GOP doesn't want to fund it well enough that they've been cutting back hours and delivery. Same as Amtrak.

The GOP: Government doesn't work... because we make *SURE* it doesn't.

markets make no sense

[Anonymous Coward]

In Portugal the national postal service was making profits and they still "had" to sell it - for a pittance,
I might add - because debt. Of course in private hands they are making even more money, at the personal cost to the employees, who slave away, and of the costumers who now wait forever for their turn.

Oh, and they are now also a bank. And sponsoring national sports events.
Hurraaaaay....

It's their own inefficiencies

[Anonymous Coward]

Take the USPS out because most of the time that's "Smart Post" where FedEx/UPS/etc. handle the movement and then hand it off to USPS for actual delivery. Only adds a day but also is free Saturday & Sunday delivery.

The problem is the network behind it. FedEx is utterly stupid with their Smart Post. I tracked some shipments the store I work for sent to some customers who pre-sold some cosmetics. Both shipments were going in-town but Fed Ex took them to the local depot, then sent them out of state, sent them back into a different part of the state, and then back over to town. It literally took a week for something the USPS could have had delivered in 24-48 hours. When this was pointed out to FedEx, their "response" was 'Well, that kind of service is only guaranteed delivery within 3-5 business days...". Yeah, because 3-5 business days is acceptable for something going from Los Angeles to say New York City. Not from one zip code to the next one over.

Doesn't have to be this way

[tgrigsby]

The USPS could build out the necessary infrastructure and at a lower cost than Fedex and UPS, if the GOP would just stop trying to kill them off. And let's be honest, it's Fedex and UPS lobbyists providing the incentive to pass crap legislation like this. Their entire drive is to hamstring the USPS, because they can't compete long term against a non-profit government agency like that unless they can buy legislation forces the USPS prices up and limits the services that can be provided.

Bullshit

[sexconker]

USPS has been growing like crazy. They do Sunday delivery now, and they do 3 or 4 delivery rounds in my area per day.

Years ago you'd only get one delivery round per day (and none on Sunday), unless you paid a ton for registered / certified / whatever the one with real tracking and direct signature confirmation is.

Maybe USPS isn't growing as fast as they'd like, but ecommerce isn't going to grow forever. In ye olden times, people would pick up their goods themselves from "stores". Today, people want everything delivered to them. Trucks handling deliveries for dozens of people is far more efficient than dozens of cars handling deliveries for individuals. And people also have more options to pick up items from a store, warehouse, or locker.

Amazon loves offering incentives to people to delay shipping and group multiple items together. Amazon does this because it reduces their shipping costs. If Amazon feels the pain of shipping costs, everyone does. So if the shipping carriers actually get overwhelmed, they can simply increase prices. This will ultimately be passed on to the consumer (even Prime members have to bundle cheap items and meet a threshold before anything ships), and the consumer ultimately drives demand.

It's a self-correcting problem. My guess is that whoever wrote this report doesn't like the "increase prices" part of the correction. They just expect carriers to infinitely increase capacity without raising prices.

Re: Easy solution.

[unrtst]

IMO, GP is on the right track, but simply didn't explain it clearly.

We're mostly talking about deliveries in the USA (based on the summary, USPS, etc).

When you order from Amazon, you get a choice of when to have something delivered, but you do not get to choice the delivery company (USPS, FedEx, UPS, DHL, etc). How the fuck are they supposed to compete and improve if you don't give the consumer the choice to pay more for better service?!?!?!

FWIW, it wasn't always that way. They used to offer a choice. I used to have very good USPS service, and would always choose them. I currently have very shitty USPS service (frequently leave handwritten notes that they missed me while I was home the whole day, and I have a loud dog - they had to sneak that note onto my door!!!), and I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to specify UPS! When I do find a site that lets me pick UPS, they often don't differentiate between what I would consider a typical UPS delivery, and UPS's "Smart Post", which uses USPS for the last leg of the delivery (which goes back to being awful for me).

JUST LET CONSUMERS DECIDE AND CHARGE APPROPRIATELY!

Regarding Amazon Prime - they could still offer that as an option, as they do today, and, on that option alone, they (amazon) could pick the delivery provider, since they're footing the bill (sort of). That said, if they do that, I'll probably drop prime. I'd rather pay for shipping and actually get my product delivered, than have delivery fail faster and have to walk a mile to the post office and stand in line for an hour, only to have them complain and try not to serve me because I don't have the "sorry we missed you" pink note that they never left for me.

LOL, blame

[uvajed_ekil]

So now JC Penny is blaming the USPS, FedEx, and UPS for their complete and utter failure to adapt to meet the modern expectations of consumers? Yeah, the shippers are surely the problem, which is why Amazon is doing so poorly, too. Right. Nice try, but we're not stupid, JCP; y'all just suck.

I am a bit alarmed by the rapidity of the sea change in shopping habits, with so many big retailers closing their doors. But they are only doing so because we (as a whole) don't value the experience they provide and don't use them much anymore (and, of course, because they haven't been able to evolve). We are beginning to miss the idea of brick n' mortars, but we won't be missing their prices or selection, obviously. I, for one, won't miss JCP, Sears, K-Mart, or any of the traditional department stores once they're completely gone. They mostly given up on my area already, and I've already moved on.

Re:LOL, blame

[uvajed_ekil]

"We still haven't done much to build out our distribution or source networks, our ecommerce attempts are feeble to non-existent, all of our old customers are dying off, and the damn kids these days just don't respect dinosaur b'n'm retail anymore. But it isn't our fault we suck, it's all on the shipping carriers. We'll show you - we'll close store after store without replacing them with anything else visible. Surely that'll save our business!"

Obvious prediction for 5 years from now: JCP, Sears, K-Mart, and most mall-based clothing retailers will be fully gone. Even mighty Macy's will be teetering, and Kohl's will be surviving while being forced to close scores of stores. Go on, git!

The solution is at hand!

[Anonymous Coward]

Replace all post employees with computers, robots and drones! Throw the useless humans into a firepit! PROGRESSSSSSH!

Re:Barak Obama

[uvajed_ekil]

Sanders will be dead in 2024.

Take your threats elsewhere, or keep them to yourself, lest you be investigated by Federal law enforcement.

it's already here..

[Anonymous Coward]

manufacturers are using this same thing to "encourage" users to throw out lower-cost in-warranty items rather than make a warranty claim.

it cost almost 20 dollars to ship a broken keyboard less than 1000 miles via cheapest method available from any of those three carriers to get replaced.

ya, we shipped it back, mainly to make them pay to ship a replacement to a market ups charges extra to service.

fuck 'em.

Re:USPS because it is cheaper [Re:Capacity or Cost

[sexconker]

Thank you for calling that part of his bullshit out and following up. Saved me the work.

Re:reinventing Social Security [Re:Capacity or Cos

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell you what, you pay my SS taxes and you can collect my SS payments.

An offer that has NEVER been taken by ANY liberal. Funny how when it becomes optional, the "best thing in the world" suddenly isn't worth it.

The USPS isn't my problem

[Cro Magnon]

My problem with e-commerce is that there are 3 choices with delivery.

1. They leave my $1,000 computer out where the locals can steal it.
2. I have to drive to the middle of nowhere to pick it up.
3. I have to take off work.

The odds of them delivering after I get home from work, or on my day off are about the same as me getting eaten by a shark (I live in the Midwest).

Safety net

[Geoffrey.landis]

Tell you what, you pay my SS taxes and you can collect my SS payments. An offer that has NEVER been taken by ANY liberal. Funny how when it becomes optional, the "best thing in the world" suddenly isn't worth it.

So, I take it you didn't actually read what I wrote, right? It isn't intended to be the "best thing in the world."

Social security is intended to be a safety net. A safety net is most needed for the people who are so stupid that they think they don't need one.

Re:Safety net

[Anonymous Coward]

A safety net is most needed for the people who are so stupid that they think they don't need one.

A safety net is most needed for circus performers because the circus owner is an asshole who has no problem with his employees falling to their death. To save a buck.

PS - Social Security as a safety net is a joke. So is any program that allows for a tax reduction for retirement (for the employee or employer) or otherwise grants some sort of tax loophole for companies for employee benefits. It's precisely the bullshit that results in benefits that are affixed to the employer, not the employee. That makes no sense.

Re:Barak Obama

[Anonymous Coward]

Not a threat, Sanders is 75, the average US Male lifespan is 76.4 years.

It's a fairly decent bet he won't make it to 82 simply from natural causes.

Re:Pro Tip: Anonymous posts are handled differentl

[Anonymous Coward]

This. I remember outrage over unique processor IDs that could theoretically be the death knell of anonymity on the internet. How the prevailing voice of the era was that internet culture was rooted in anonymity.

Now it seems that battle has been lost, and no matter how good the point, it's made by a non-person without the appropriate credentials. Truth can no longer stand on it's own.

Re:Defined plans require increasing workforce

[Wycliffe]

a defined benefit plan requires an ever-increasing contribution base.

No, it doesn't. An unfunded defined benefit plan requires either a stable or increasing contribution base. A fully funded defined benefit plan puts away enough money that there is guaranteed to be enough money available to pay whatever they have promised. Take a look at the Missouri Teacher's Retirement Plan. It's a fully funded defined benefits plan. It's not perfect. Because of turmoil in the stock market, it currently only has enough money to fund 76% of its liabilities where back in 2000 it had enough to cover 103% of its liabilities but if it can't make up the difference, worst case scenerio is that they have to slightly reduce everyone's pension. The contribution base could go to zero and they would still be able to mostly cover the pension they promised.

Re:How cheap is junk mail [Re:USPS because it is..

[drinkypoo]

It's not entirely clear to me that the USPS actually does make money on delivering junk mail. There is a lot of it-- but they don't get paid much for delivering it.

They don't get paid much per piece, but as you say, there is a lot of it. And it's very easy.

Re:reinventing Social Security [Re:Capacity or Cos

[roman_mir]

That idea is part of what destroyed the very concept of America, the economy of which was built upon the premise of individual freedom from this type of oppression. Everybody should be saving for themselves and nobody should be forced to subsidise anybody else and nobody should be forced to do anything at all by any government actually and obviously all income and wealth related taxes are oppression and theft. Governments are criminal structures that are built to steal, rob, kidnap and murder.

Re: I HATE CENSORS (AKA MODERATORS)

[Anonymous Coward]

I think Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right sound better

Re:USPS because it is cheaper [Re:Capacity or Cost

[nephilimsd]

I've had UPS / FedEx put small packages in my mailbox plenty of times. I'm also on an easy route for package delivery. Everything I have read on the subject in about 15 minutes of searching seems to indicate that FexEx and/or UPS don't WANT to deliver small packages to the mailbox for rural / inconvenient customers, so they contract with USPS to finish the last mile. Care to provide sources that disagree?

Re:Are you talking to me?

[Anonymous Coward]

You fuck my wife?

Oppression

[Geoffrey.landis]

That idea is part of what destroyed the very concept of America, the economy of which was built upon the premise of individual freedom from this type of oppression.

Your definition of "oppression" seems to be different from mine. Telling old people that they should just starve to death when they're too old to work seems a lot like oppression to me.

Re:Oppression

[roman_mir]

Fascinating. You believe that somebody who lived his or her entire life in a system that wouldn't steal on their behalf that they have to save for themselves (instead of paying income or payroll or wealth taxes of-course), that this is oppression.

However the young people who didn't even live the same length of time yet, who may in fact die before they reach that old age where they would (for some reason) expect others to take care of them, those people can be oppressed by the system to provide the old with ... with money they should have saved on their own because the consequences of not saving *should have been clear to them for a long time*.

It is fascinating, you believe that forcefully removing money (which is time, so time of life, time of life it took to make that money) from one group of people and handing it over to another group of people is just fine because otherwise there would be ... oppression?

What oppression? If you are old and you didn't save or you lost your savings you believe yourself to be oppressed by somebody young who is not interested in your ass? Get some relatives. Get some friends. Make your case to some private charity or a private person who may help you.

However do not use the power of the guns in the hands of the government to take from others what you wasted yourself and now waste more on your ass.

You feel oppressed that somebody else will *not* be oppressed by the collectivist regime on your behalf? OK, then you are a dumb ass.

Just get some relatives. Easy. Re:Oppression

[Geoffrey.landis]

Your libertarian ideology chooses to define any action by governments as "stealing."

When you define people working together to promote the common welfare-- an explicitly stated goal of the U.S. constitution, for what it's worth-- as "stealing," your use of language is Orwellian.

But it's amusing how you sprinkle libertarian trigger-words through your post. Everything is "collectivist" and "stealing" and "at the point of a gun." No need to do any actual thinking, just grep the appropriate libertarian catch-phrases and string them together.

Yes, by all means, we should take seriously your suggestion for an alternate safety net, that people should just do "GoFundMe" campaigns. No problem! Or they should "get some relatives." (Right. How exactly do you "get relatives"? Post on ask-slashdot?) Sure, that'll work.

Re:Just get some relatives. Easy. Re:Oppression

[roman_mir]

You started it, didn't you? You said that NOT giving somebody money is oppression. Don't tell me you don't understand what oppression actually means - coercion by somebody with power against you, coercion, theft, robbery, kidnapping, murder. That's oppression.

*NOT* giving somebody money *STOLEN* from somebody else does not qualify as oppression and yes, everything that governments take away from individuals in form of income or wealth taxes is theft, it's criminal behaviour.

B&M to the rescue!

[syntaxflux]

B&M can compensate by using the B&M. Wal-mart has started doing this by offering a discount for online order & store pickup. The big issue will be the reluctance of B&M to share profits with their online counterparts. i.e. Best Buy, for example, is constantly squabbling over online/in-store orders. I have seen some shady stuff done by a store to keep profits in store. Amazon really needs to build more pickup centers. Especially for the areas where the distribution centers are located. They could staff and deliver the goods twice a day and cut UPS/USPS/FEDEX out.

Re: I HATE CENSORS (AKA MODERATORS)

[david_thornley]

"Censorship" is necessary. I haven't seen a general forum succeed without some form of moderation since the Eternal September started.

Re:Barak Obama

[david_thornley]

What the average male lifespan is is the average age that somebody male will die at after being born. Sanders is now in the pool of US males who have lived to age 75, which includes almost all guys who drag the average down. Since I'm 63, the statistical prediction is that I'll last another twenty years, maybe more. Sanders is not expected to die before he's 82.

Or, they could just die. That works.

[Geoffrey.landis]

No, I said that a reasonable society might includes a safety net for its citizens. YOU were the one who called that "stealing" and "oppression".

Specifically, what I said was:

Hmm-- interesting idea. We could have a government-mandated plan that provides some sort of minimum benefits, which everybody pays into as part of their job, and that could be like a "safety net" applying to all employees, so they're not destitute even if their savings get drained and their company goes bankrupt. And then, companies could also offer benefits beyond this minimum, a "retirement plan," if you will, so people who worked for that company would have an income that's more than that safety-net minimum when they retire. A two-layer plan. The minimum plan would just be be security, be part of the overall social structure. Say, we could even call it that: "social security." Good name!

This is what reasonable societies do: provide for the general welfare of the citizens, even when they're too old to work.

But your proposal works, too-- if peoples' savings get drained and the company they'd worked for goes bankrupt, sure, just let them beg, and if they're not good at that, they can just starve to death. That's totally reasonable, I guess. It just depends on what kind of society you want.

Re:Or, they could just die. That works.

[roman_mir]

No, I said that a reasonable society might includes a safety net for its citizens

- completely disagree, I don't see a society that legalizes criminal behaviour by government as reasonable or civilized, I see it as oppressive.

AFAIC oppression is coercion, theft, robbery, kidnapping, murder. That is oppression especially when done by a collectivist system, where the mob 'legalizes' this behaviour (gives power of the mob) to the government system.

That is a reasonable description of what is happening.

However here are your words:

Telling old people that they should just starve to death when they're too old to work seems a lot like oppression to me.

- you just redefined LACK of oppression of person A to provide person B with money taken from person A as oppression of person B.

So in your Orwellian mind *not* stealing is oppression.

Re:Or, they could just die. That works.

[Geoffrey.landis]

You know, just repeating libertarian trigger-words is not actually a form of thinking.

Re:Or, they could just die. That works.

[roman_mir]

You don't actually have any arguments. Go ahead, explain here how it is not oppression to use a government system of oppression (agencies, courts, cops, guns, military) money from person A to give that money to person B?

Explain here what is it that makes it different from person B stealing from person A directly? The difference is the legalized bureaucracy 'legally' armed with weapons that acts as the proxy for this robbery.

Actually it would be much more honest if person B simply came to person A with a gun and demanded some money. The way this is done it makes it more 'civilized', as if the principle is different. It's the same exact action, the difference is that the person B does not have to get his or her hands dirty while outsourcing this violence to the State, which is only too happy to oblige.

Re:Or, they could just die. That works.

[Geoffrey.landis]

As I said. Just repeating libertarian trigger-words is not actually a form of thinking.

Re:Or, they could just die. That works.

[roman_mir]

You have 0 arguments, nothing at all. All of my positions are my own, my journal on this site is what, 18 y.o., I have reasoned my positions in it enough, you haven't had an original thought once in your life, that is because you don't actually use thinking for your positions at all.

Re:Or, they could just die. That works.

[Anonymous Coward]

You've managed to claw your way back up to adequate karma to post at 0 (instead of -1 where you usually reside) and then you go back to lobbing personal insults at the other person instead of actually discussing the topic.

You have again given up your right to complain when your karma hits the shitter and you find yourself posting at -1 again. You're not being moderated down for your endless efforts to recruit the unwashed masses into your religious movement, you're being moderated down for being an ass.

How fitting that the CAPTCHA is "superior", as in your tendency to call yourself and your faith superior is what is causing you to not see the truth behind your awful kamra here.

Re: Easy solution.

[rpstrong]

I hate ponies, not puppies.