Tweedling Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 So the USPS needs to be privatized because one stupid person who works there made a mistake in weighing your friend's package? I've got several stories about UPS messing up deliveries, but won't bother because they aren't indicative of anything systemic, just like your story.Well MrRain it is good to see you around again. I don't think I ever said it needed to be privatized but it damn sure needs to do some changing. I asked why it would be bad? I've had both UPS and Fed Ex screw up and cost me money but they have impressed me more times than USPS. That's my experience and that's what I'm sharing. I personally believe it tends to be somewhat inefficient and sloppy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 ...I don't think I ever said it needed to be privatized but it damn sure needs to do some changing. I asked why it would be bad? you said, "At what point will the USPS have to say "we quit."? It's sad." I took that to mean if there is no USPS private companies would have to take up the slack (ie privatization of mail service). Unless you foresee a world with out mail service. This is why it is a bad idea: Believe it or not people still depend on the mail, many of these people are elderly and people who live in rural areas. These people do not use the internet or are unable to use the internet for communication. Privatization would lead to higher costs for people that live in these areas, or just plain refusal of service. And some Darwinian idea that people should pay extra because they choose to live somewhere is ridiculous. Not everyone has a true choice in where they live. The USPS provides a service equally to all citizens of the US. Just for fun I did some research, I wanted to see how much it would cost to mail an envelope from Madision WI to Nome AK. The USPS would charge $2.32. FedEX would charge (at the cheapest) 70.13. Yes this points to cost inefficiency of the USPS, but a business beholden to its shareholders could make a determination that it is no longer cost effective to deliver mail to Nome, AK. Really? That is where we want to go with this? We want a private company say who can receive mail just solely on the place you live. What is to stop a business saying they won't service a particular area because its socio-ecominic demographic (poor people are scare so we won't send our delivery trucks there), or political for that matter (My company doesn't service red/blue states during election years)? Yes that is hyperbole, but not too improbable. Listen, I have said before and I agree with you the USPS has to change, but the privatization is not the way to go. Anyway, what has not been talked about here is the reason why the USPS is so in the red. The USPS is required to prepay all retirement benefits for 75 years. http://truth-out.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=3190:postal-workers-the-last-union. No other governmental agency has to do so. Ask yourself why a GOP controlled congress would require a governmental agency to do so? It is not because it employs a half a million union members is it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 you said, "At what point will the USPS have to say "we quit."? It's sad." I took that to mean if there is no USPS private companies would have to take up the slack (ie privatization of mail service). Unless you foresee a world with out mail service. Really? That is where we want to go with this? We want a private company say who can receive mail just solely on the place you live. What is to stop a business saying they won't service a particular area because its socio-ecominic demographic (poor people are scare so we won't send our delivery trucks there), or political for that matter (My company doesn't service red/blue states during election years)? Yes that is hyperbole, but not too improbable. If Pottery Barn wants to send their catalogues to Nome, Alaska, they'll find a way. That's what's wonderful about free markets - the inefficiencies always create opportunities to make a better, cost-effective service or product. If one company won't deliver to Nome, another one will step in because they see the opportunity. There's always a work-around. There's always an innovative solution around the corner. Not that I'm advocating privitization of the USPS... But I would say maybe 10% of the mail I get isn't ripped in half and tossed before I even open the envelope. I could do with less solicitations from credit cards. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Anyway, what has not been talked about here is the reason why the USPS is so in the red. The USPS is required to prepay all retirement benefits for 75 years. http://truth-out.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=3190:postal-workers-the-last-union. No other governmental agency has to do so. Ask yourself why a GOP controlled congress would require a governmental agency to do so? It is not because it employs a half a million union members is it?This is THE reason!!! Of course the usual right wing suspects here (and all the ones in Congress) think this is a good idea I am sure. Killing the USPS would effect millions of currect and retired employees, many of whom are minorties. It should be pointed out that the USPS is no longer a government agency, but sort of a semi private institution. It will be another 20 to 30 years before the last vestiges of old people who actually like getting mail are gone. And the catalogue and other direct mail folks can't be happy about this. Some stuff is just better through the mail, particularly documntation that is on paper. Your example is well taken. Sending letters by snail mail may be slow, but at least it is cheap and sometimes amazingly fast. Killing the unions and sending all public assets into private hands is the entire agenda of the right. Sure I would like the USPS to function better when you walk in, but it remains and indispensible institution. LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 I won't miss Saturday mail. It's not really necessary. The PAEA is puzzling in its requirement for prepayment of benefits. The article linked to above was filled with a lot of rhetoric from a union representative, so I don't know that I would put a whole lot of stock into it. If it was such a union buster of a bill, why did it fly through Congress unopposed? It might have more to do with the fact that Congress can now use that $5.5 billion for more questionable budget finagling. The easiest fix seems to be refunding the overpayments. I'm sure you'll find plenty of bipartisan support against that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 If Pottery Barn wants to send their catalogues to Nome, Alaska, they'll find a way. That's what's wonderful about free markets - the inefficiencies always create opportunities to make a better, cost-effective service or product. If one company won't deliver to Nome, another one will step in because they see the opportunity. It is a nice sentiment, but not always true. If the free market can determine that it is not cost effective to do business in those areas they will not do so. Take for example high speed internet. My Uncle lives in the country, but only 20 miles from town and he cannot get high speed internet at his house. The cable, phone, etc simply do not see it as cost effective to run lines to his house (he did try satellite but it was too inconsistent and outrageously expensive). He is simply cannot get this service or afford the substandard service available to him. The "free market" has said that it is not cost effective to provide him that service. No other company has stepped up. There is no profit margin in making internet service available to my uncle. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 It is a nice sentiment, but not always true. If the free market can determine that it is not cost effective to do business in those areas they will not do so. Take for example high speed internet. My Uncle lives in the country, but only 20 miles from town and he cannot get high speed internet at his house. The cable, phone, etc simply do not see it as cost effective to run lines to his house (he did try satellite but it was too inconsistent and outrageously expensive). He is simply cannot get this service or afford the substandard service available to him. The "free market" has said that it is not cost effective to provide him that service. No other company has stepped up. There is no profit margin in making internet service available to my uncle. Well then, that's the risk/reward of living in the country. He gets more fresh air than I do, I get more internet. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 It is a nice sentiment, but not always true. If the free market can determine that it is not cost effective to do business in those areas they will not do so. Take for example high speed internet. My Uncle lives in the country, but only 20 miles from town and he cannot get high speed internet at his house. The cable, phone, etc simply do not see it as cost effective to run lines to his house (he did try satellite but it was too inconsistent and outrageously expensive). He is simply cannot get this service or afford the substandard service available to him. The "free market" has said that it is not cost effective to provide him that service. No other company has stepped up. There is no profit margin in making internet service available to my uncle. Do you know how long ago he tried satellite service? My dad lives in the country and he gets satellite internet service. I'm not sure how much he pays, but the service is vastly improved from when he first moved there. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
NoJ Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 I like mail. I like mailing things. I like receiving mail. Heck, I even like going to the post office (the gals in the basement of the Sears Tower are the best!). For the record.....anyone messes with the mail, they are messing with me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 "US Mail" pops up in lyrics every now and then. Off the top of my head:Dead Flowers - Rolling StonesBorn Late '58 - Mott the Hoople I want to say that there's a Rod Stewart song too... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Well then, that's the risk/reward of living in the country. He gets more fresh air than I do, I get more internet. But my point being, the free market is not as altruistic as you make it out to be. It will not come in to service a need, it will only come in to make a profit. Where it does not see profit it will not go. And would you be willing to limit someone from a vital service just because of where they live? Mail in this case, internet is not a vital service, yet. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 But my point being, the free market is not as altruistic as you make it out to be. It will not come in to service a need, it will only come in to make a profit. Where it does not see profit it will not go. And would you be willing to limit someone from a vital service just because of where they live? Mail in this case, internet is not a vital service, yet.My response would be that I don't see daily mail as a vital service. Is it reallly necessary to live? No. So you're either using hyperbole, or I don't appreciate the US Mail as fully as I should. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
NoJ Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 I still write checks too. This e-payment stuff is for the birds. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
lamradio Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Is it reallly necessary to live? No. Tell that to the people that receive their medication by mail. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Or their porn....I like Saturday mail. I wish there was Sunday mail, too. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Tell that to the people that receive their medication by mail. There's a work-around. I get my medication by Fed-Ex or UPS. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 There's a work-around. I get my medication by Fed-Ex or UPS.True. Or they can get a P.O. box in town where mail is delivered on a regular basis. Or, they could stop living in such a state of condition that requires them to have to take medications. Like, perhaps they could walk to town to retrieve their meds and maybe that would help to make them healthier. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
NoJ Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 I nominate Lammy for Post Master/Surgeon General. He is the man with ideas! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 My response would be that I don't see daily mail as a vital service. Is it reallly necessary to live? No. So you're either using hyperbole, or I don't appreciate the US Mail as fully as I should. You are probably looking only at yourself. People still use the mail, to communicate, to receive goods and services. Not everyone has access to the internet, not everyone has access to FedEx and UPS. You might not appreciate the USPS, but there people who do. Personally, I use the USPS as little as possible. I get very little from it and I use it very little. But just because I don't use something, doesn't mean it is not an effective tool for others. Will there be a day when there is no need for the USPS, probably. But now and the near future there is a need for it (when is the Star Trek transporter beam technology coming anyways?) I am all for no Saturday mail, I am all for increased efficiency, I am not for privatization of the mail service. There are too many people who could potentially lose out. On a tangental note, what about the Super WiFi the FCC is looking into? I think that would be a good thing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
NoJ Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 What about the xmas cards? Is that a tradition we can afford to lose? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Christ, nobody sends Christmas cards anymore! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Christ, nobody sends Christmas cards anymore!I don't but I sure seem to get some every year. LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
NoJ Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Well, I refuse to live in a world where my wife cant take a cute picture of the kids, get walgreens to fashion an xmas card out of it then she labels and signs them all, puts stamps on them and then drops them all in the mail. Life would seem empty and incomplete without her doing all that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Yet, your life is complete without lifting a finger to help in any part of that process, least of which is mailing the fucking things. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
NoJ Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Good thing I'm great in the sack, not sure she'd keep me around otherwise. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.