Even though their financials have improved a bit, I don't think our tax dollars should go toward this dinosaur.
Even though their financials have improved a bit, I don't think our tax dollars should go toward this dinosaur.
if we got rid of the post office service we could give each american over 1 million dollars per quarter
why have we not done this yet?
Because we need someone to deliver the mail.
I don't understand why they don't just raise the rates to a dollar per letter. No one should be using the mail so often that $1 vs $.49 makes a difference. They should charge out the ass for the garbage they leave in my mailbox
fsddfsa wrote:
Even though their financials have improved a bit, I don't think our tax dollars should go toward this dinosaur.
Someone at USPS read your post, got into his Deloreon, went back to 1982, and implemented your idea. Thanks!
the numbers add up wrote:
if we got rid of the post office service we could give each american over 1 million dollars per quarter
why have we not done this yet?
You wouldn't know this posting out of your parent's basement, but the USPS is excellent at it's job relative to other national postal systems.
You also probably don't have a clue how/why the losses suddenly spiked? The answer is not "the Internet."
Do your research! USPS isn't funded by tax dollars.
fsddfsa wrote:
Even though their financials have improved a bit, I don't think our tax dollars should go toward this dinosaur.
Problem solved, good job!
Postmaster General wrote:
Do your research! USPS isn't funded by tax dollars.
fsddfsa wrote:Even though their financials have improved a bit, I don't think our tax dollars should go toward this dinosaur.
Type:
www.usps.govinto your browser. You're welcome.
I really hope that a Republican crazed congress kills off USPS so we can see the reaction from all the people that will be most adversely affected--rural conservatives. The main reason USPS is important is that it is required to deliver first class mail from any address to any address in the US for the same postage. Someone living in South Dakota pays the same amount of money to send a letter to Boston, MA as would someone living on Boylston Ave in Boston pay to send a letter to someone living just a few miles away in Cambridge, MA. If you get rid of the post office, private companies will charge based on distance and on whether an address is in a big city or in a rural area. Retirees living in tiny Burwell, NE will find their annuity payments being subject to a $25 a month fee for private mail carrier charges. People in rural towns will have to drive hours to big cities just to be able to send a package through a private carrier.
the numbers add up wrote:
if we got rid of the post office service we could give each american over 1 million dollars per quarter
why have we not done this yet?
$586,000,000 / 321,000,000 people = $1.82554517134
No, if we got rid of the postal service we could give each American $1.83 (rounded) each quarter.
You must have taken math at Liberty University. (whose distinguished alums circulated a meme about how they could give every American a million dollars for the $300 million they spent on healthcare.gov.)
It seems that it makes sense to charge more for parcels that have to travel longer distances.
Since when are government services supposed to make money?
How much did the pentagon lose in the 3rd quarter of FY15?
Probably in the vicinity of 500 times what the Post Office did
WTF Dude wrote:
Since when are government services supposed to make money?
How much did the pentagon lose in the 3rd quarter of FY15?
Probably in the vicinity of 500 times what the Post Office did
You make a great point. Many government departments don't make money. Why should we expect the USPS to make money?
I don't even know where to start with this.... Well, how about this:
The Postal Service? It's in the freaking US constitution! A document, distinguished principally by the fact that no tea partier has ever read it.
fsddfsa wrote:
Type:
http://www.usps.govinto your browser. You're welcome.
Having a government web address doesn't denote funding status.
The USPS is funded by postage revenue. Government money received is in the form of loans.
Why is this market distortion "important"? It takes more resources to send a letter between two small towns than to send a letter between Boston and NYC. Why shouldn't it cost the sender more?
it should cost more wrote:
Why is this market distortion "important"? It takes more resources to send a letter between two small towns than to send a letter between Boston and NYC. Why shouldn't it cost the sender more?
Outside of the fact that having distance based postal rates for basic mail would hammer the middle of the country, you have to note that private companies don't do it either. Why don't airlines charge by the mile? Market forces. Why does a FedEx letter cost the same regardless of distance? Market forces. Who complains the most when the rates go up? Businesses.
The postal service was created to facilitate COMMERCE. In any case you're also assuming that the distance traveled is an overly significant portion of the cost. Pickup and delivery as well as origin and destination sorting are the majority of the cost. The time it sits in the back of a truck or the belly of a plane isn't that much of a cost generator as compared to the time and effort on each end which is pretty much the same regardless of distance.
All of those sound like perfectly rational market decisions.
I'm not particularly a rabid conservative but I don't understand why we need a nationalized post office.
Mail exists only so hillbillies can receive their welfare checks and sweepstakes entries. Nobody else would even notice if the post office disappeared overnight.