U.S. Postal Service Has Not Earned a Profit in Almost a Decade

a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

2. The U.S. postal service is not a business. It is a government service. It

Actually, I did read the article. Y

Failing to see the absurdity of the US government having to bailout the USPS which is basically government 'business'

I was clearly pointing it out.

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
Can you provide citations to back this up?

If you doubt my details call up the Bulk Mail Center in Jersey City and ask them. The accident occurred in 2012 above the Route 280 entrance to the Turnpike.

a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

4. The USPS is a mess not because it is a bad or dysfunctional institution, but because we have been electing bad, dysfunctional people in office to run it. Somehow, I don't think the private sector is going to improve this.

Point 4 is the heart of the matter.

Privately owned postal service would turn a profit, just like FedEx and UPS do.

After a while, when the new company learned the ropes, the service would be better and cheaper, or at least not a money pit.

The only time a private company tried to deliver the mail, it was able to deliver it cheaper and drove down the postage rates for a few years.

The American Letter Mail Company was started by Lysander Spooner in 1844, competing with the legal monopoly of the United States Post Office (USPO, now the USPS) in violation of the Private Express Statutes. It succeeded in delivering mail for lower prices, but the U.S. Government challenged Spooner with legal measures, eventually forcing him to cease operations in 1851.

Although the business was forced by the U.S. Government to close shop after only a few years, it succeeded in temporarily driving down the cost of government-delivered mail
en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Did you make a whistle blower report?

No?

Then YOU are part of the problem. Thanks for that.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

There's always going to be a need for physical mail delivery whether for documents or for advertisements or for mail ordering merchandise. There's no need to go with only a private model. There's other things the USPS can get involved in as well, for example, recently they adopted passport issuance.

There is zero need to eliminate the USPS, the only motivation is private companies such as Fed-ex lobbying for them to do so. The USPS has never in it's entire history been funded by tax dollars and it's been a fantastic employer.

The requirement for them to fund their benefits packages for seventy years in advance is absurd, I think you can agree with that as well as it being deliberate, it will reach full funding by next year... if USPS lasts even 10 more years, retirees will never use up that fund. What happens to the billions of dollars left over that's sitting in federal hands?

originally posted by: Montana
Did you make a whistle blower report?

No?

Then YOU are part of the problem. Thanks for that.

That is an employee form.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

No one said a word about putting people out of work, and gutting it.

Sell it, and make it someone else's problem.

you don't know what your talking about....tell me something....if you were told you have to pay all your wages upfront for the next X amount of years until your entire retirement is paid for, before you are able to keep one cent, would you go into a hole?.....that's what the REPUBLICANS got through...and even when they made a profit a couple of years ago before the REPUBLICAN debacle, it immediately went back into the federal governments general fund....my wife retired as a supervisor for the USPS after 32 years of service.
if you sold it to a private firm, the cost of a regular stamp would go up to $1.00 or more

a reply to: Kali74

I am not quite sure what the solution is for the Post Office but it needs to change on many different levels. That is not embellishment, that is fact.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

The Bill should be repealed and USPS allowed to take its own money back and pay off its debt.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: neo96

They are also inefficient in many of their practices, particularly purchasing and maintenance. As someone who sold to them in a previous role, where they were also our largest customer by far, we had visibility to many of the poor operating policies they utilized.

those policies that you point to doesn't seem to include a part about following congressional mandates....the policies you speak of, have to be ok'ed by the postal board of governors who answer to congress.....if you worked with them so closely, it would seem to me you would KnoW this, but, are deliberately leaving that out.

a reply to: jimmyx

Here's a thought?

Stop paying cadillac wages, and cadillac benefits.

After all it's a GOVERNMENT business.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Kali74

I am not quite sure what the solution is for the Post Office but it needs to change on many different levels. That is not embellishment, that is fact.

Their solution is to keep throwing 50 billion dollars down the drain until we have to bail them out.

Then rinse, and repeat.

After all it's 'someone' else's fault.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

OIC


lol's


lol's

and more lol's

The US postal system rocks!

But how do America’s mail carriers stack up internationally? In late 2011, Oxford Strategic Consulting, a British firm, released a report ranking the postal services of the G-20 countries based on three metrics: “provision of access to vital services,” “operational resource efficiency,” and “performance and public trust.” Guess who came in first? That’s right: the good old U.S. of A. 1. The United States Postal Service

source

While ATS members may have different opinions or agendas, the US postal service is Number 1 in the G-20 countries. Now why would anyone want it sold?

UPS and FedEx might want the competition removed, to make higher profits.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Yep, sorry. That is the old form.

This is the new form.

I notice you didn't answer the question. Did you or did you not report what you obviously consider to be waste?

a reply to: neo96

Can you show anything to support your inference to another $50 billion will be needed?

Would that be $50 billion in the next decade?

The article you sourced said nothing to that effect, where did you get this number?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Kali74

I am not quite sure what the solution is for the Post Office but it needs to change on many different levels. That is not embellishment, that is fact.

you can always refuse mail service and have everything sent to you C.O.D. by FED EX or united parcel, then you can experience the joy of paying much more to private firms.

a reply to: AlaskanDad

While ATS members may have different opinions or agendas, the US postal service is Number 1 in the G-20 countries. Now why would anyone want it sold?

Agenda's?

Would that be those that constantly defends everyone government does, and creates ?


Only agenda I have here is keeping more money in our pockets for things that no longer need to exist.

The only time a private company tried to deliver the mail, it was able to deliver it cheaper and drove down the postage rates for a few years.

"The American Letter Mail Company was started by Lysander Spooner in 1844, competing with the legal monopoly of the United States Post Office (USPO, now the USPS) in violation of the Private Express Statutes."

I doubt anyone here will fall for a business comparison from over 150 years ago. Current day greed alone will prevent it from being cheaper.

a reply to: AlaskanDad

Still haven't read the article ?

Geez.

There is no turnaround in sight,” states the report. “The Postal Service will almost certainly register another multibillion dollar loss in 2015; for the first two quarters of 2015, it suffered a net loss of $2.8 billion.

taxfoundation.org...

a reply to: neo96

That did not support the $50 billion comment that you posted, nice try though.