Depending on one's point of view, the USPS is not as "broken" as (mostly) Conservatives have been saying since the Reagan era, or at least not as much through any fault of their management or of competing carriers in the Internet era. Arguably, one major culprit is The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006.
As consumers, we know they're often incompetent/bumbling. Their formula for calculating postage on large mailings is like something from the IRS. Overcomplicated and encourages consumers to game the system.
Depending on one's point of view, the USPS is not as "broken" as (mostly) Conservatives have been saying since the Reagan era, or at least not as much through any fault of their management or of competing carriers in the Internet era. Arguably, one major culprit is The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006.
I bet they would trade those for relief from universal service mandates, and junk mail at standard rates. I'm honestly not sure if that's a good idea or not. I think mail used to be more of a utility style service that worked well as a universal service mandate in exchange for a monopoly - not unlike the phone company. I think those days may be over. With shipping being the big mover and able to justify it's own existence, and communications being done by other means, maybe it's time to rethink post.
Well past time.
Lysander Spooner answered the usual criticism of breaking the monopoly (competitors would just skim off the profitable routes and leave the unprofitable to the PO) by proposing outsourcing the least-profitable routes first—in 1844.
I know FedEx has the USPS handle the last leg of some non-overnight packages; we get Prime so anything from Amazon comes faster than that. But I wouldn't be surprised to learn that UPS uses the mail system too.
Amazon delivers its own packages in some cities, cutting out the carrier altogether. I think the video mentioned that.
My job isn't junk mail, per se, but it's unsolicited. So I sort of hope they figure out a way to keep the post office posting.
yeah that's a tuffy
it seems that industry is in decline (maybe even a "sun-setting" technology)
most of us including myself see things changing (i'm good with efficiency/technology changing business, i'm not fond of change for politics sake)
i'd start with raising the cost of postage to reflect the true costs
at least stop the bleeding and see if they can raise the retirement age and possibly freeze their pension cola to address the massive gap
have a survey on their website to select my interests or customize the mail advertising i receive (i think they call that targeting)
then they could pimp me out so to speak
As consumers, we know they're often incompetent/bumbling. Their formula for calculating postage on large mailings is like something from the IRS. Overcomplicated and encourages consumers to game the system.
This may vary by locale, but I sometimes get United Parcel Svce. (Amazon) packages delivered by local U. S. Postal Svce. letter carriers - which is like the inverse of USPS subcontracting to other carriers.
I know FedEx has the USPS handle the last leg of some non-overnight packages; we get Prime so anything from Amazon comes faster than that. But I wouldn't be surprised to learn that UPS uses the mail system too.
Amazon delivers its own packages in some cities, cutting out the carrier altogether. I think the video mentioned that.
My job isn't junk mail, per se, but it's unsolicited. So I sort of hope they figure out a way to keep the post office posting.
The thing about junk (unsolicited advertising) mail is, I seriously doubt companies would continue to spend money on it if it was not cost effective, would they?
Maybe instead of thinking about how to put a stop to junk mail we should think about changing peoples' behavior to make it less cost effective.
i'd start with raising the cost of postage to reflect the true costs
at least stop the bleeding and see if they can raise the retirement age and possibly freeze their pension cola to address the massive gap
have a survey on their website to select my interests or customize the mail advertising i receive (i think they call that targeting)
I bet they would trade those for relief from universal service mandates, and junk mail at standard rates. I'm honestly not sure if that's a good idea or not. I think mail used to be more of a utility style service that worked well as a universal service mandate in exchange for a monopoly - not unlike the phone company. I think those days may be over. With shipping being the big mover and able to justify it's own existence, and communications being done by other means, maybe it's time to rethink post.
ah.. the days when publicly-owned utilities did what they do in the spirit of public utility outside of the market
(ok, ok, protected from the market if you will, but hell). seems so long ago.
Any constitutional ramifications you're concerned about?
Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 empowers congress to establish post offices and post roads, but the monopoly it enjoys is statutory, not constitutional—the Private Express Statutes of 1797.
Congress could repeal the sections that grant the post office a monopoly and allow private delivery. To allow private delivery to mail boxes marked "U.S. Mail" congress would have to repeal the "mailbox rule" that makes it a crime to deliver to a mailbox anything that hasn't had a stamp affixed and paid for. You can read far more than you care to about this here.
The post office subcontracts mail delivery to private companies already, but the delivery is paid for via postage.
This may vary by locale, but I sometimes get United Parcel Svce. (Amazon) packages delivered by local U. S. Postal Svce. letter carriers - which is like the inverse of USPS subcontracting to other carriers.
Any constitutional ramifications you're concerned about?
Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 empowers congress to establish post offices and post roads, but the monopoly it enjoys is statutory, not constitutional—the Private Express Statutes of 1797.
Congress could repeal the sections that grant the post office a monopoly and allow private delivery. To allow private delivery to mail boxes marked "U.S. Mail" congress would have to repeal the "mailbox rule" that makes it a crime to deliver to a mailbox anything that hasn't had a stamp affixed and paid for. You can read far more than you care to about this here.
The post office subcontracts mail delivery to private companies already, but the delivery is paid for via postage.
I bet they would trade those for relief from universal service mandates, and junk mail at standard rates. I'm honestly not sure if that's a good idea or not. I think mail used to be more of a utility style service that worked well as a universal service mandate in exchange for a monopoly - not unlike the phone company. I think those days may be over. With shipping being the big mover and able to justify it's own existence, and communications being done by other means, maybe it's time to rethink post.
Any constitutional ramifications you're concerned about?
Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 empowers congress to establish post offices and post roads, but the monopoly it enjoys is statutory, not constitutional—the Private Express Statutes of 1797.
Congress could repeal the sections that grant the post office a monopoly and allow private delivery. To allow private delivery to mail boxes marked "U.S. Mail" congress would have to repeal the "mailbox rule" that makes it a crime to deliver to a mailbox anything that hasn't had a stamp affixed and paid for. You can read far more than you care to about this here.
The post office subcontracts mail delivery to private companies already, but the delivery is paid for via postage.
The thing about junk (unsolicited advertising) mail is, I seriously doubt companies would continue to spend money on it if it was not cost effective, would they?
Maybe instead of thinking about how to put a stop to junk mail we should think about changing peoples' behavior to make it less cost effective.
and i do get a ton of direct mail advertising which i toss 95% into the waste basket
The thing about junk (unsolicited advertising) mail is, I seriously doubt companies would continue to spend money on it if it was not cost effective, would they?
Maybe instead of thinking about how to put a stop to junk mail we should think about changing peoples' behavior to make it less cost effective.
Wall Street banks have hollowed out our communities with fraudulently sold mortgages and illegal foreclosures and settled the crimes for pennies on the dollar. They’ve set back property records to the early 1900s, skipping the recording of deeds in county registry offices and using their own front called MERS. They lobbied to kill fixed pension plans and then shaved a decade of growth off our 401(K)s with exorbitant fees, rigged research and trading for the house.
When much of Wall Street collapsed in 2008 as a direct result of their corrupt business model, their pals in Washington used the public purse to resuscitate the same corrupt financial model — allowing even greater depositor concentration at JPMorgan and Bank of America through acquisitions of crippled firms.
And now, Wall Street may get away with the biggest heist of the public purse in the history of the world. You know it’s an unprecedented crime when the conservative Economist magazine sums up the situation with a one word headline: “Banksters.”
It has been widely reported that Libor, the interest rate benchmark that was rigged by a banking cartel, impacted $10 trillion in consumer loans. Libor stands for London Interbank Offered Rate and is supposed to be a reliable reflection of the rate at which banks are lending to each other. Based on the average of that rate, after highs and lows are discarded, the Libor index is used as a key index for setting loan rates around the world, including adjustable rate mortgages, credit card payments and student loans here in the U.S....
