• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Postal Service Is Nearing Default as Losses Mount

Harry Guerrilla said:
What?

That such a waste of resources, seeing that anyone can get a free email account from multiple, different entities now.
There are also multiple and different social networking sites, that are free to use.

That would be a huge boondoggle.
Click to expand...

Think outside of the box.......This is completely different than what one thinks about a government program but........First off, the Post Office is another quasi government agency. It's not actually a government entity.

Anyway........what if they created something like a Google site for the Post Office? Now we link all the government agencies from this site. I'd consider some sort of program that would allow this site to charge in the same way Google does to make a profit.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Post office needs to end home delivery and switch to P.O. boxes, except for package delivery.
Click to expand...

How much would it cost to expand the Post Offices to this size for something that is going to continue to get smaller?
 
1Perry said:
Think outside of the box.......This is completely different than what one thinks about a government program but........First off, the Post Office is another quasi government agency. It's not actually a government entity.

Anyway........what if they created something like a Google site for the Post Office? Now we link all the government agencies from this site. I'd consider some sort of program that would allow this site to charge in the same way Google does to make a profit.
Click to expand...

There are already multiple referral pages and indexes of government websites.
Having government email accounts and a government social networking site is really, really dumb.

Of all the Google services I use, I've yet to be charged by Google for any of them.
 
1Perry said:
How much would it cost to expand the Post Offices to this size for something that is going to continue to get smaller?
Click to expand...

It would likely save more money by creating a longer lasting service post, than by using more consumable resources like oil based fuels to deliver coupons.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
There are already multiple referral pages and indexes of government websites.
Having government email accounts and a government social networking site is really, really dumb.

Of all the Google services I use, I've yet to be charged by Google for any of them.
Click to expand...

Me either but they are profitable, no? There were search engines before Google, no?
 
1Perry said:
Me either but they are profitable, no? There were search engines before Google, no?
Click to expand...

Google makes use of the sale of ad space, among other things.
It's a loss leader to get eyes looking at their web pages.

Setting up a government site for this is dumb, there is no reason to do so.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Google makes use of the sale of ad space, among other things.
It's a loss leader to get eyes looking at their web pages.

Setting up a government site for this is dumb, there is no reason to do so.
Click to expand...

They are profitable, right?
 
suits against the USPS are defended by Justice Department attorneys which saves the Post office quite a bit but they have their own agency counsel who handle EEO administrative actions, arbitrations etc and those things are costing the USPS tons.

here is another factor-cited from the OP's reference

At the same time, decades of contractual promises made to unionized workers, including no-layoff clauses, are increasing the post office’s costs. Labor represents 80 percent of the agency’s expenses, compared with 53 percent at United Parcel Service and 32 percent at FedEx, its two biggest private competitors. Postal workers also receive more generous health benefits than most other federal employees.
 
Ikari said:
It's not a business, but a necessary service. So yes, it can consume money without the restriction of necessitating profit. That's why it's government and not private. Business has a different set of constraints than government does.
Click to expand...
So again your answer is: Just keep dumping money into it.
 
MrVicchio said:
So again your answer is: Just keep dumping money into it.
Click to expand...

There's no requirement for a profit. I don't see what the contention is. For mail, I think it's a necessary service. There is a government branch to ensure that everyone can have access. There is a private branch which can do what private business does and in a way to make a profit. Good for them. But they don't have to service everyone, nor do they have to be in all locations even poo-dunk arkansas. The Post service MUST be there. I don't have the innate problem a lot of people do with the post service. Now there were suggestions for improvement, like limiting delivery days, etc. Not a bad idea. Ain't saying that there aren't improvements to be made. I'm only saying that the post office does not need to turn a profit.
 
Ikari said:
There's no requirement for a profit. I don't see what the contention is. For mail, I think it's a necessary service. There is a government branch to ensure that everyone can have access. There is a private branch which can do what private business does and in a way to make a profit. Good for them. But they don't have to service everyone, nor do they have to be in all locations even poo-dunk arkansas. The Post service MUST be there. I don't have the innate problem a lot of people do with the post service. Now there were suggestions for improvement, like limiting delivery days, etc. Not a bad idea. Ain't saying that there aren't improvements to be made. I'm only saying that the post office does not need to turn a profit.
Click to expand...
Well, the Post Office is on the verge of going into default due to mis-management and not "having to turn a profit". It would seem your, theory in practice merely leads to insolvency. Interesting for one with a "libertarian" lean.
 
MrVicchio said:
Well, the Post Office is on the verge of going into default due to mis-management and not "having to turn a profit".
Click to expand...

The post office operates as a monopoly which means that they have the power to set prices and for the most part, will not lose revenue due to that monopoly status. Being a quasi-governmental agency, they have the obligation to provide a service as opposed to being (and staying) profitable. Can they provide a service AND stay profitable? Possibly, but that would require them to either cut services or raise prices which is obstructive in their purpose of actually providing a service.

It would seem your, theory in practice merely leads to insolvency. Interesting for one with a "libertarian" lean.
Click to expand...

How is the bold relevant to the discussion? That's right, it's not!
 
I hope you people realize that when you ship a package via USPS all they do is put it on Fed Ex and UPS planes to get to its destination. The USPS doesn't have their own planes, they lease space from the other major carriers.
 
MrVicchio said:
Well, the Post Office is on the verge of going into default due to mis-management and not "having to turn a profit". It would seem your, theory in practice merely leads to insolvency. Interesting for one with a "libertarian" lean.
Click to expand...

There's certainly a lot of areas for clean up. I'm talking about the base of the post office. Since it's government, it doesn't need to make a profit. It doesn't matter what one's lean in; that's the truth. There could very wel be mismanagement of various types; that doesn't mean that what I said is untrue.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Post office needs to end home delivery and switch to P.O. boxes, except for package delivery.
Click to expand...

Or it could go to localized mail boxes

Where an entire block or blocks of houses have a group of mail boxes located on a corner. Which makes delivery easier and vastly quicker. Mail does not need to be delivered 6 days a week, 5 would be more then enough and likely 4 would be fine. Of course the Postal Service signed some rather stupid labour contracts, limiting options
 
IMO, the U.S. Postal Service's current plight offers another case example of how an organization accustomed to general success over a long period of time can allow itself to lose sight of the incremental change occurring around it and lose focus on ensuring that its cost structure is fit for tomorrow's environment not the current one. A dramatic restructuring will be needed if the U.S. Postal Service is to be able to become self-sufficient.

Elements of such a restructuring could, among other things, entail:

1. Recognition that the traditional first-class mail industry is a declining market. Therefore, cost minimization should be key for that area. The focus should be loss avoidance there, not growth. Instead, investment should be focused on building capabilities relevant to tomorrow's industry.
2. More robust investment and an aggressive push to increase market share in the more lucrative segments associated with business-related parcels. The U.S. Postal Service has vast economies of scale that it could leverage to shift the competitive landscape in that sector, especially at a time when businesses are increasingly seeking to minimize costs.
3. Flexible rate structures tied to demand/costs rather than fixed ones that ignore the micro-level revenue-cost realities.
4. Elimination of all post offices that chronically lose money and services that are the biggest money losers.
5. Investment in building and scaling up digital mail technologies/services, interfaces with companies allowing the postal service to serve as a portal between companies and prospective customers as an alternative to first-class mail, bulk mail, etc. via the interactive nature of such a portal, etc.
5. A shift to a more realistic compensation model and less labor-intensive business model (unpopular given the nation's high unemployment rate, but perhaps essential to addressing the U.S. Postal Service's relatively excessive labor costs.
 
Last edited:
And stop delivering all the junk/spam mail that goes right in the circular file.

Actually, I shred all the junk :)
 
Last edited:
samsmart said:
I would prefer it if every bill that passed the House or passed the Senate be e-mailed to all citizens, as well as the version of a bill signed into law by the President. The same for bills and laws on the state and local levels too.
Click to expand...

At least that legislation would be read by somebody.
 
Tashah said:
And stop delivering all the junk/spam mail that goes right in the circular file.

Actually, I shred all the junk :)
Click to expand...
I knew someone that crammed it all back in the pre-paid return envelope and mailed it back. :lol:
 
samsmart said:
No it won't.

Because I think the U.S. Post Office should re-task itself to providing e-mail accounts to all American citizens, and possibly to running a government-based social networking sites.

By re-tasking the USPS to doing so the government can better communicate with its citizens, especially in regards to providing important information in case of natural disasters or the like. Government-provided e-mail can also send important educational information to citizens, and from local and state governments as well as the federal government.

That's what I think is the future of the USPS.
Click to expand...

Now why would, oh say I, need to use the USPS.com email instead of simply having someone send me email to my regular email account? -Or- giving the US government my regular email account instead of one ending in USPS.com? Can you tell me what advantage that is to me?

Tim-
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
Or it could go to localized mail boxes

Where an entire block or blocks of houses have a group of mail boxes located on a corner. Which makes delivery easier and vastly quicker. Mail does not need to be delivered 6 days a week, 5 would be more then enough and likely 4 would be fine. Of course the Postal Service signed some rather stupid labour contracts, limiting options
Click to expand...

I thought of that too, after that post.
Good idea.

4 day delivery isn't bad either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom