US Postal Service will be broke by Oct

[3chordcharlie]

During something as simple as a power outage local POTS line still works. Anybody with phone service from their cable provider is out of luck. We've seen cell towers jammed during emergencies and massive numbers of dropped calls. You can pretend that new technology is more robust, but that simply isn't true. It may have different weaknesses, but it still has weaknesses.

During short term local power losses, phone over cable is fine - they have battery backup.

During a major outage, you're boned anyway; Your POTS phone is connected to a sophisticated network which is only pretending to be an old, simple one.

As usual, ignorance of history is bliss; one-price postage was the magic bullet that allowed affordable and profitable/sustainable mail delivery.

The issue is it is now a shrinking market, and is unlikely to ever recover to pre-internet levels. It is equally unlikely to disappear in the forseeable future. So reduce service, raise prices, and move on.

 

[CycloWizard]

During something as simple as a power outage local POTS line still works. Anybody with phone service from their cable provider is out of luck. We've seen cell towers jammed during emergencies and massive numbers of dropped calls. You can pretend that new technology is more robust, but that simply isn't true. It may have different weaknesses, but it still has weaknesses.

I never said new technologies don't have weaknesses. All of those you listed will be solved in the near future as technology catches up with demand. Cell phones are still a very new technology. The power problem will also be solved soon as cell towers are taken off the electricity grid and run from local power generation units and batteries. These advances won't solve all of the problems, but breakdowns in the system will become so rare that land lines will virtually disappear except in large facilities (e.g. hospitals and universities) where it makes sense to have a numbered line corresponding to a location rather than a person.

Do you think the Pony Express should still be in service? At what point is it ok to let a technology go?

 

[Fern]

-snip-
During a major outage, you're boned anyway; Your POTS phone is connected to a sophisticated network which is only pretending to be an old, simple one.

Are they still using mechanical switches like those made by Stromberg, or have they switched to some newer tech?

Fern

 

[alkemyst]

I see where you're coming from. But seriously their waste they bring pisses me off on lots of levels. Besides holidays I get probably one legit piece of mail every two days but the stack is 1 inch thick everyday.

umm put on your reading glasses and check the opt out box.

Most places will happily take you off their mailings as it costs them a ton and makes the post office money.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

We need to take the profits from these evil corporations like FEDEX. If we remove their unfair corporatist influence overnight delivery will come to the masses at pennies per package. Single Deliverer. An idea whose time is long past due.

 

[BoberFett]

I never said new technologies don't have weaknesses. All of those you listed will be solved in the near future as technology catches up with demand. Cell phones are still a very new technology. The power problem will also be solved soon as cell towers are taken off the electricity grid and run from local power generation units and batteries. These advances won't solve all of the problems, but breakdowns in the system will become so rare that land lines will virtually disappear except in large facilities (e.g. hospitals and universities) where it makes sense to have a numbered line corresponding to a location rather than a person.

Do you think the Pony Express should still be in service? At what point is it ok to let a technology go?

The USPS is the Pony Express, just without the ponies. In the event of a worldwide oil crisis, I imagine they could scrape together a couple of horses and a wagon unless horses have been eliminated and I didn't notice.

The issue though is the distribution network, not necessarily the mode of transport. Eliminating the USPS completely due to economics that could change seems short sighted. Should we also torch all libraries now that the Nook and Kindle are available?

 

[CycloWizard]

The USPS is the Pony Express, just without the ponies. In the event of a worldwide oil crisis, I imagine they could scrape together a couple of horses and a wagon unless horses have been eliminated and I didn't notice.

The issue though is the distribution network, not necessarily the mode of transport. Eliminating the USPS completely due to economics that could change seems short sighted. Should we also torch all libraries now that the Nook and Kindle are available?

Exactly - it is the Pony Express. The Pony Express survived for two days after the telegraph was available in the west, yet the USPS hangs on by receiving billions of dollars in bailouts. I'm not sure how you expect a change in the economy to negate the effects of the internet unless you think we're going to lose power. Even if that did happen, the USPS would be in just as bad a spot as those relying solely on e-mail, since most of the sorting is done electronically now. If we're talking zombie apocalypse here, I don't think getting bulk mailings is going to save anyone.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Are they still using mechanical switches like those made by Stromberg, or have they switched to some newer tech?

Fern

All I know for sure is you can still have 'pretend' pulse/dial service, instead of touchtone, but it's somewhat obvious that it's being emulated.

edit - Phone service is definitely still unaffected by at least minor power outages.

 

[charrison]

That's just plain foolish. Bulk mail is keeping the postal service alive. Without junk mail, the USPS would lose half it's revenue. Do you honestly think they could function on the $0.44 that Grandma spends once a year to send a $5 bill to little Timmy? Even B2B mail has dropped significantly, it has been dropping since the adoption of the FAX. Everything has gone electronic.

Actually they probably could survive without junk mail, but they would be a fraction of the size. They would not be able to stop at every house, every day and that is what is killing them.

 

[dmcowen674]

US Postal Service will be broke by Oct

No it won't.

UPS is getting the business June 1st.

 

[Throckmorton]

It’s all about technology.
Emails, facebook, im, electronic payments, etc etc.
Even my family now just facebook’s a happy birthday to family/friends,
instead of a actual card. And emails a gift card for Amazon or Wal-Mart.
Also posts the family Christmas card photo, in front of the tree,
on facebook. No hard copy in the mail.
Then you have facebook calendar for events, news, parties, reunions.

If the PO invented facebook they'd be ok.
But face it, snail mail is gone forever. Same with the rotary dial phone.
And soon, the landline phone.

So the demise of the PO, or some massive scale down, was inevitable.
They are old world and never had the foresight to evolve into the
new world of technology. Same with the phone companies, would suffered the
same demise except they entered the world of wireless, and made packs with
satellite television, not to mention Apple, to remain in the game.

The US post office never seen it coming, or had the options to prepare.
Like the death of the dinosaurs, this will be inevitable.
The great asteroid has already hit their world. Technology.
The post office will be reduced to a basic package handling outlet, with
no daily delivery. No mailman walking or riding the route.
And still, the PO will probably will have a hard time holding their own against UPS and FEDEX as basic package handlers.
I wouldn’t be surprised if some private company offered to buy them out
from the US government, and run as a private business.
Might just be the solution.
Or... they could raise the cost of a first class stamp to $5 and squeak by for another two or three years in the black...maybe.

The reason the USPS isn't profitable is because mail isn't profitable, especially when it's UNIVERSAL. Sound familiar? FedEx and UPS choose what to deliver and who to deliver to.

It's pretty bizarre that the USPS has managed to run without federal funding just by charging businesses for junk mail.

Imagine if the military was like that...

 

[Throckmorton]

I've been giving this some thought recently and discussing it with more rational people than those that inhabit this forum. Modern society is beginning to form a habit of abandoning old systems completely. I'm sure this is partially to do with the geometrically increasing pace of technology. If there's a new, better, faster, more efficient system, why maintain the old one, right?

Sometimes I wonder though if we aren't kicking out our legs from underneath ourselves when we do that. Sure, we've got new hover chairs so we won't fall. But what happens when the hover chair fails? The USPS is a good example, as is the POTS system. Yes, we could eliminate the USPS and save money. Let private enterprise handle first class mail, they might be able to do a better job. More and more people are going to wireless phones exclusively. It's conceivable that someday the old POTS system could be retired completely.

But what's our fallback when new systems fail? As you are well aware, our current economic situation is untenable. Who knows what the straw that breaks the camels back will be, but it could happen at any time. If we've eliminated these old systems, what happens when our fragile new systems fail during a time of economic turmoil? If we eliminate the USPS, what happens when the price of oil skyrockets and private carriers raise rates and eliminate service to unprofitable areas as a result? Same with phone systems, if customers can't afford cell phones and the expansion of those system stops, maybe with towers in less profitable areas being decommissioned. If the POTS system was abandoned simply because it's "old" technology, where does that leave those who can't get other service?

Now don't take this as an endorsement of propping everything up on the taxpayers dime. It's simply an observation, and something to think about.

What happens when our major cities get bombed or EMPed? Suddenly not only is there no internet, but there's no mail either. Getting rid of vital infrastructure because it's not profitable is asinine.

BTW, are you gonna lobby the federal government to tear down your local interstate highways because they don't make a profit? How about the airports?

 

[Throckmorton]

I have an exercise for you guys. Make a list of infrastructure you want to eliminate because it doesn't make a profit.

I'm guessing Conservatives would have one thing on the list: The USPS (we can use FedEx and the internet, if you don't have access to either it's because you don't work hard enough)

Liberals would also have one thing on the list: Roads (we can all use high speed rail and subways and bike paths, if you can't then you hate the earth and the planners' plans for the course of your life)

 

[CycloWizard]

I have an exercise for you guys. Make a list of infrastructure you want to eliminate because it doesn't make a profit.

I'm guessing Conservatives would have one thing on the list: The USPS (we can use FedEx and the internet, if you don't have access to either it's because you don't work hard enough)

Liberals would also have one thing on the list: Roads (we can all use high speed rail and subways and bike paths, if you can't then you hate the earth and the planners' plans for the course of your life)

No one would have to work any harder than they do now if the USPS disappeared (except for some postal employees, of course). If it were no longer illegal, I'm sure UPS and FedEx would start picking up letters from peoples' houses and delivering them. Even if someone is disabled and can't make it to the library/drop box, the level of service would be at least the same as it is now.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Solution:
why not just declare bankrupcy and dump the Prefunded retiree medical benefits of $5.5 billion a year???

Yea, fuck all those people who worked for them; they don't deserve what was agreed to be paid to them.

 

[3chordcharlie]

No one would have to work any harder than they do now if the USPS disappeared (except for some postal employees, of course). If it were no longer illegal, I'm sure UPS and FedEx would start picking up letters from peoples' houses and delivering them. Even if someone is disabled and can't make it to the library/drop box, the level of service would be at least the same as it is now.

You do realize that one-price letter postage created affordable mail delivery, right?

As in it was one of the few true 'magic bullets' in human history. Right up there with penicilin, and the assembly line.

I'm not saying nothing needs changing, or even that national postal services will exist forever, just that it's awfully soon to write off something that has been so effective.

 

[CycloWizard]

You do realize that one-price letter postage created affordable mail delivery, right?

As in it was one of the few true 'magic bullets' in human history. Right up there with penicilin, and the assembly line.

I'm not saying nothing needs changing, or even that national postal services will exist forever, just that it's awfully soon to write off something that has been so effective.

Did I ever argue that it wasn't great that people could send letters for less than a buck? Or are you arguing that FedEx and UPS couldn't do the same thing? I'm a little confused because that comment seems completely out of left field and has nothing to do with anything I said.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Did I ever argue that it wasn't great that people could send letters for less than a buck? Or are you arguing that FedEx and UPS couldn't do the same thing? I'm a little confused because that comment seems completely out of left field and has nothing to do with anything I said.

'Complete' service, and cheap, one-price mail delivery kind of depends on a regulated monopoly. I didn't mean that it was 'great', I meant it was the only way to do it - previous mail delivery schemes (both public and private) cost 10x or even 100x as much, and generally lost money.

The first change to deal with shrinking volumes is the 'superbox' (i.e. neghborhood delivery, rather than door-to-door), which we started getting to all new developments over 20 years ago. Beyond that, ending 6-day service, or switching to 2 or 3 times a week, plus raising the price should allow continued sustainable service.

As older, non-email folks, etc shrink in number, I can see that national postal services may end up being wound down, but I don't think we are there in the short or medium-term future.

Running a business, I can say that 25-30% of our billing is now electronic, and that is likely to grow. Lots of other correspondence is also eletronic. Our goal (and I expect it is a common one) is 100%, but that isn't going to happen quickly.

The need for national, drop-box mail service is shrinking, but still massive; if business realities mean service and price changes that's fine. If a private company wants to work up a scheme that will offer better service/pricing, they should do so and launch a publicity campaign to make it happen, not just make blanket claims about competition and market forces automatically being better; in this case it's hard to see that they would be.

 

[qliveur]

Maybe the USPS should start charging companies and organizations 50 cents for every obnoxious piece of their junk mail they have to deliver.

That would solve the problem.

 

[CycloWizard]

'Complete' service, and cheap, one-price mail delivery kind of depends on a regulated monopoly. I didn't mean that it was 'great', I meant it was the only way to do it - previous mail delivery schemes (both public and private) cost 10x or even 100x as much, and generally lost money.

The first change to deal with shrinking volumes is the 'superbox' (i.e. neghborhood delivery, rather than door-to-door), which we started getting to all new developments over 20 years ago. Beyond that, ending 6-day service, or switching to 2 or 3 times a week, plus raising the price should allow continued sustainable service.

As older, non-email folks, etc shrink in number, I can see that national postal services may end up being wound down, but I don't think we are there in the short or medium-term future.

Running a business, I can say that 25-30% of our billing is now electronic, and that is likely to grow. Lots of other correspondence is also eletronic. Our goal (and I expect it is a common one) is 100%, but that isn't going to happen quickly.

The need for national, drop-box mail service is shrinking, but still massive; if business realities mean service and price changes that's fine. If a private company wants to work up a scheme that will offer better service/pricing, they should do so and launch a publicity campaign to make it happen, not just make blanket claims about competition and market forces automatically being better; in this case it's hard to see that they would be.

So you think that competition in the marketplace will... increase prices? And you claim that previous mail delivery schemes (which would have existed 250+ years ago) cost 10-100x more and lost money, and that that would somehow be relevant to today - do you have any support for that claim? If so, I'd really like to see it. You say that you don't oppose a private alternative to the USPS, but that's currently against the law. In other words, nothing you said here makes sense on any level.

 

[3chordcharlie]

So you think that competition in the marketplace will... increase prices? And you claim that previous mail delivery schemes (which would have existed 250+ years ago) cost 10-100x more and lost money, and that that would somehow be relevant to today - do you have any support for that claim? If so, I'd really like to see it. You say that you don't oppose a private alternative to the USPS, but that's currently against the law. In other words, nothing you said here makes sense on any level.

Sigh...

Competition in the marketplace will increase costs through duplication (in other words 'lost efficiencies' related to scale, marketing costs, etc). That is a given.

It will only increase prices because the current monopoly is regulated; i.e. forced to pass along the benefit of being a monopoly to the consumer.

Previous postal schemes did cost orders of magnitude more, because of the way they calculated pricing. This is perfectly relevent today; when you need to consult a table, a map, and a scale to figure out how much your letter costs to mail, it won't be 'efficient' or 'affordable' whether it's public, private, or kinda in between like it is now.

I don't oppose plenty of things that are currently against the law. I'm guessing you likely feel the same way.

 

[CycloWizard]

Sigh...

Competition in the marketplace will increase costs through duplication (in other words 'lost efficiencies' related to scale, marketing costs, etc). That is a given.

It will only increase prices because the current monopoly is regulated; i.e. forced to pass along the benefit of being a monopoly to the consumer.

Previous postal schemes did cost orders of magnitude more, because of the way they calculated pricing. This is perfectly relevent today; when you need to consult a table, a map, and a scale to figure out how much your letter costs to mail, it won't be 'efficient' or 'affordable' whether it's public, private, or kinda in between like it is now.

I don't oppose plenty of things that are currently against the law. I'm guessing you likely feel the same way.

What are the major costs of the USPS? I will speculate that they are labor, pensions, and transportation. Private industry would cut costs by doing crazy stuff like not paying a desk clerk a starting annual salary of $65k and offering ridiculous pension plans for unskilled labor. I can't find historical stamp data before the foundation of the post office, but I don't see any reason a uniform rate is required for sustainability of a postal operation. Why would a non-uniform system be necessarily unprofitable if I were to charge, say, 25 cents + 1 cent per 50 miles within the US (or whatever the proportions need to be to pay for the cost of the entire process)?

 

[IronWing]

What are the major costs of the USPS? I will speculate that they are labor, pensions, and transportation. Private industry would cut costs by doing crazy stuff like not paying a desk clerk a starting annual salary of $65k and offering ridiculous pension plans for unskilled labor. I can't find historical stamp data before the foundation of the post office, but I don't see any reason a uniform rate is required for sustainability of a postal operation. Why would a non-uniform system be necessarily unprofitable if I were to charge, say, 25 cents + 1 cent per 50 miles within the US (or whatever the proportions need to be to pay for the cost of the entire process)?

Evidence that the USPS does this?

Edit: Wait, this should help you out.

http://www.apwu.org/dept/ind-rel/pay/current/112109FTR.pdf

Seems that top grade, top step USPS regular employees don't make 65k. IT workers and accountants have a special deal where they can earn over 65k.

 

[sandmanwake]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but USPS overpaid by around $75 billion dollars into the pension system, which still have not been refunded to them and if it was, they'd be doing more than just fine?

Edit: http://www.apwu.org/news/burrus/2010/update03-2010-100120.htm

Yep, not surprised. I know of at least one other government agency which is fully funded by the fees it brings in and would be doing just fine, but it keeps being "robbed" of a good portion of the fees brought in by Congress who refuses to allow it full access to those fees, which instead gets diverted to the general funds to be spent elsewhere. Meanwhile, Congress and the public criticize these agencies for not being able to do their job as well as they could and argue that their business model needs to be overhauled.

 

[CycloWizard]

Evidence that the USPS does this?

Edit: Wait, this should help you out.

http://www.apwu.org/dept/ind-rel/pay/current/112109FTR.pdf

Seems that top grade, top step USPS regular employees don't make 65k. IT workers and accountants have a special deal where they can earn over 65k.

$52k is the median for clerks before benefits. Benefits for federal jobs generally add 33% for non-postal employees. Postal employees' benefits are generally better than non-postal, but I don't know what the cost is, so I'll assume it's also 33%. This puts the cost of a desk clerk at $69k per year.