Postal Service wants to raise rates, end Saturday delivery

[Chris_]

Postal officials scheduled a briefing today to discuss the amount of the increase, which will go to the independent Postal Regulatory Commission for review.

The current 44-cent first-class rate took effect May 11, 2009.

Under the law, the post office is generally limited to increases no more than the rate of inflation -- 0.9 percent for the year en
ded in May.

However, the agency is allowed to seek a larger increase in unusual circumstances. Potter said in March he planned to take that step.

The agency lost $3.8 billion last fiscal year despite cutting 40,000 full-time positions and making other reductions. It has continued to face significant losses this year.

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20100706/NEWS02/100706008/Postal-Service-wants-to-raise-rates-end-Saturday-delivery

[rich_t]

I personally would have no problem with they went to 5 days a week service delivery.  It would be nice if the actual offices themselves stayed open on Saturday though, for those that can't get to the Post Office during the work week.

[thundley4]

I personally would have no problem with they went to 5 days a week service delivery.  It would be nice if the actual offices themselves stayed open on Saturday though, for those that can't get to the Post Office during the work week.

That and maybe still have pickup from the standalone mail boxes.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Higher stamp prices don't bother me at all, they are really underpriced when you look at postage rates elsewhere (Well, other places that have a reasonable service quality, anyway, not dumps where posting a letter means it has an even chance of actually getting to the addressee within a couple of weeks if t all). 

[Thor]

They've already ended Saturday delivery here in my town. It WOULD be nice if the main offices stayed open on Saturdays, as rich t mentioned.

[longview]

I sure wouldn't mind only 5 day a week delivery.  Most of my adult life I've lived where we only had 3 days a week.  Life was just fine.  Yeah, having the office open for a while on Saturdays would be helpful.  Or, you ask a friend or neighbor to do you a favor.  Most of mine were only open an hour on Saturdays, so I sometimes had to ask someone else.

I don't think our cost of stamps is too high either.  Quite a deal, when I think about what it would cost me to deliver letters for myself.

[bkg]

Higher stamp prices don't bother me at all, they are really underpriced when you look at postage rates elsewhere (Well, other places that have a reasonable service quality, anyway, not dumps where posting a letter means it has an even chance of actually getting to the addressee within a couple of weeks if t all). 

They have a gov't mandated monopoly and still can't break even... *I* have a HUGE problem with that... They're set to lose, according to Jason Lewis, $110B in the next 10 yeras.

Time to privatize... now.

[DumbAss Tanker]

They have a gov't mandated monopoly and still can't break even... *I* have a HUGE problem with that... They're set to lose, according to Jason Lewis, $110B in the next 10 yeras.

Time to privatize... now.

You have a huge problem with everything the Government does, what else is new.

[Thor]

Having listened to Jason Lewis ( a conservative/ libertarian talk radio show host), I would put some credence in what he says. He was vehemently opposed to the Mass Transit system in Minneapolis/ St Paul, noting that their system would NEVER EVER make any profit and would operate at a loss of some $13 Million/ year,  in perpetuity. There is something drastically wrong with the US Postal Service when they can't operate at a profit when UPS & FedEx can.

[bkg]

You have a huge problem with everything the Government does, what else is new.

I have a problem when gov't steps outside of it's bounds and does stupid shit... yes.

This qualifies.

When people don't have a problem - that's when we get in the mess we're in now. 

are you okay with 1-10B annual deficites for the post-office?

[bkg]

Having listened to Jason Lewis ( a conservative/ libertarian talk radio show host), I would put some credence in what he says. He was vehemently opposed to the Mass Transit system in Minneapolis/ St Paul, noting that their system would NEVER EVER make any profit and would operate at a loss of some $13 Million/ year,  in perpetuity. There is something drastically wrong with the US Postal Service when they can't operate at a profit when UPS & FedEx can.

Jason and I disagree on a number of things, but finances/economics are not one of them. He correctly calls out that the Hiawatha line runs >$10M annual deficites. The Northern corridor subsidizes riders to the tune of over $20/day/rider.

Now we want the Central corridor... a $1.5 (closer to $2.5 when done) Billion dollar transit line that connects MPLS and St. Paul... that even the U of M has fought against!

The MTC runs a nearly 100K deficit.... per day.

Wrong he is not when it comes to mass transit.

[NHSparky]

Having listened to Jason Lewis ( a conservative/ libertarian talk radio show host), I would put some credence in what he says. He was vehemently opposed to the Mass Transit system in Minneapolis/ St Paul, noting that their system would NEVER EVER make any profit and would operate at a loss of some $13 Million/ year,  in perpetuity. There is something drastically wrong with the US Postal Service when they can't operate at a profit when UPS & FedEx can.

You want to spend $12 bucks to mail a letter, be my guest.

[DumbAss Tanker]

...are you okay with 1-10B annual deficites for the post-office?

Not particularly, but universal postal service is a necessary piece of national infrastructure, whether it runs at a profit or not really isn't all that important in the big picture.  Like highways, airports, and internet nodes, the economic activity it facilitates dwarfs the nominal operating loss.   Your analysis is too thin to dispute, since you don't actually seem to have any idea about how a privatized post office would become profitable, other than the magic word 'Privatized.'  There are only two possible ways, either drastically reduce the logistic structure and service levels, or drastically increase the postage cost, but you don't pick either one.  Lower wages and benefits would cut some level of cost (Part of reducing the logistic structure), but there would remain all the vested benefits that cannot legally be rewritten away just because the organization changes hands as a legacy cost.

The fact that UPS and FedEx can make a profit delivering single boxes at $10+ dollars a pop has really nothing to do with whether the post office loses money, they aren't doing the same thing - though there is overlap in the form of parcel post.  The post office loses money because it is more important to the Congress that ultimately controls it that postage be low and service broad, rather than the organization running in the black.  Congress would throw a fit if the Post Office charged what it really costs to deliver mail on the universal door-to-door basis they do without a deficit, but that is their choice and an operational restriction they force onto the Post Office.  The Post Office wouldn't have a deficit if first class postage was a buck; it probably would be in that same ballpark if privatized, because a private entity is not going to be able to do the same job of universal delivery at least 5/7 and at the same first class price point the PO has, and make money at it. 

[debk]

I would rather they cut back to just 3 times a week, than continue to "eat up" money.

More and more people pay their bills online, do their banking online, their checks are auto-deposited, cutting down drastically on the amount of mail.

However, the amount of junk mail continues to increase, while still at about 1/2 to 2/3 the cost of a regular letter. Increase the cost of bulk mailing and let those monies help to make up the deficit. Might save some trees.

I know that sounds "tree-hugger"....but how many of you really look at every bit of junk mail you receive? I stand next to the waste basket as I look at the mail, and most of the junk stuff goes straight to the trash, I barely glance at it. I find it an extreme waste. I recognize that a business justifies it by if they get 3-10 customers out of 1000 mailouts, that may cover the cost of the mailing. However, the total cost of the advert(design, paper, print) and mailing is a 100% tax write-off for the business.

I'd also like to add....all the Congress-critters get all their mailings for free. 

[bkg]

You want to spend $12 bucks to mail a letter, be my guest.

Not to be too blunt...

You already are paying an insane amount to send a letter. But since it's hidden in debt and other taxes, you don't see it, and therefore you can ignore it.

[NHSparky]

Not to be too blunt...

You already are paying an insane amount to send a letter. But since it's hidden in debt and other taxes, you don't see it, and therefore you can ignore it.

If the USPS raised rates enough to cover costs and sustain itself, to mail a letter still would be less than 55-60 cents.

[bkg]

If the USPS raised rates enough to cover costs and sustain itself, to mail a letter still would be less than 55-60 cents.

would that increase their revenue by $10B/year that they need? Then why not do it and be solvent?

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

I have a problem when gov't steps outside of it's bounds and does stupid shit... yes.

This qualifies.

If I may:

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

IF--and granted this is a mighty big if--the PO can stop doing stupid shit then there is no reason to oppose it being under government purview. As this is a legitmate government function the question becomes: HOW do we get them to be functional.

The military does tons of stupid shit, a lot of it codified, but that doesn't mean  we race off and privatize the military, we improve it. It ain't easy but it isn't impossible either. Rumsfeld, for all his foibles created a sytem that allows wounded US service personnel to be evac'ed out of theatre in 72 hours rather than the 2 weeks on average when he assumed his responsibilities.

[bkg]

If I may:

IF--and granted this is a mighty big if--the PO can stop doing stupid shit then there is no reason to oppose it being under government purview. As this is a legitmate government function the question becomes: HOW do we get them to be functional.

The military does tons of stupid shit, a lot of it codified, but that doesn't mean  we race off and privatize the military, we improve it. It ain't easy but it isn't impossible either. Rumsfeld, for all his foibles created a sytem that allows wounded US service personnel to be evac'ed out of theatre in 72 hours rather than the 2 weeks on average when he assumed his responsibilities.

You're twisting my words... Because the PO is fawked up and wasting money, I must think we should rid of the military as well? Never said that.

You can't get the PO functional unless they have a need to be functional... they have no need when they don't have to break even.

[NHSparky]

You're twisting my words... Because the PO is fawked up and wasting money, I must think we should rid of the military as well? Never said that.

You can't get the PO functional unless they have a need to be functional... they have no need when they don't have to break even.

bkg--I believe he's showing that there IS in fact a Constitutional mandate for a postal system under Article I, Section 8.

But if we're holding the same standard, when's the last time the military turned a profit?

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

You're twisting my words... Because the PO is fawked up and wasting money, I must think we should rid of the military as well? Never said that.

You can't get the PO functional unless they have a need to be functional... they have no need when they don't have to break even.

There is certainly no intent of twisting your words.

I was responding to your assertion "I have a problem when gov't steps outside of it's bounds...". Article I Section 8 says the PO is within the government's bounds.

That being said one should not always use the perfect to argue against the good. If the PO can be improved then we should do so on every front possible for improvement's sake alone as well as not wasting money better spent elsewhere or saved altogether. Even then the clause in A1S8 has no profitability contingency.

Of course none of this excludes the possibility of privatization but even that is of debateable value in a world where private carriers already flourish.

[AllosaursRus]

Having listened to Jason Lewis ( a conservative/ libertarian talk radio show host), I would put some credence in what he says. He was vehemently opposed to the Mass Transit system in Minneapolis/ St Paul, noting that their system would NEVER EVER make any profit and would operate at a loss of some $13 Million/ year,  in perpetuity. There is something drastically wrong with the US Postal Service when they can't operate at a profit when UPS & FedEx can.

Nicely said!

Over in Spokane, the bus system was privately owned about 15 or 20 years ago. As ridership declined they told the city they were going to have to 1, raise rates a dime, and 2, stop those routes that weren't paying their way.

What did the city do, you ask? Well they bought them out and have yet to bring the losses under 15 mil/year! I think the price tag was 60 million! Never asked the voters, never even brought it up before the city council! They knew what was best, period!

It's the government! They don't care whether they sustain a service by it's own revenues! Hell, we'll just raise property taxes of those that never use the damn system in order to pay for the loss!

[Thor]

Sparky, ever try mailing a package through the Post Office when it didn't "fit" in one of their predefined  boxes??  I mailed a package to my nephew in Iraq. The whole thing couldn't have been 8 lbs. It cost me some $23. I could have mailed it less expensively should FedEx or UPS deliver to Iraq. Half of that cost is absorbed by the military, so the USPS  got off cheap.

Secondly, IF the USPS would quit giving the junk mail people reduced rates, then they JUST might make a profit. Instead, they hoist the price increases on the public.

Allo:

When Minnesota voted on the mass transit system, they were intentionally mislead by false advertising. I forget the specifics, but the advertising campaign was worded in a way as to confuse the voters. It also rerouted some badly needed road money into the light rail system.

[AllosaursRus]

Sparky, ever try mailing a package through the Post Office when it didn't "fit" in one of their predefined  boxes??  I mailed a package to my nephew in Iraq. The whole thing couldn't have been 8 lbs. It cost me some $23. I could have mailed it less expensively should FedEx or UPS deliver to Iraq. Half of that cost is absorbed by the military, so the USPS  got off cheap.

Secondly, IF the USPS would quit giving the junk mail people reduced rates, then they JUST might make a profit. Instead, they hoist the price increases on the public.

Allo:

When Minnesota voted on the mass transit system, they were intentionally mislead by false advertising. I forget the specifics, but the advertising campaign was worded in a way as to confuse the voters. It also rerouted some badly needed road money into the light rail system.

yep! Typical gubmint decoy politics!! The gubmint doesn't have to rely on profits. If it were so, there would be a great disolvement in hand-outs!

No politician in immediate memory, has actually put forward how in the hell they are going to pay for their pet projects!

[bkg]

Sparky, ever try mailing a package through the Post Office when it didn't "fit" in one of their predefined  boxes??  I mailed a package to my nephew in Iraq. The whole thing couldn't have been 8 lbs. It cost me some $23. I could have mailed it less expensively should FedEx or UPS deliver to Iraq. Half of that cost is absorbed by the military, so the USPS  got off cheap.

Secondly, IF the USPS would quit giving the junk mail people reduced rates, then they JUST might make a profit. Instead, they hoist the price increases on the public.

When there is no consequence for living in the red, there no reason to try to make a profit.

When Minnesota voted on the mass transit system, they were intentionally mislead by false advertising. I forget the specifics, but the advertising campaign was worded in a way as to confuse the voters. It also rerouted some badly needed road money into the light rail system.

I think you're talking about the constitutional amendment allocating all vehicle excise taxes to "Transportation"???  The amendment reads a MAX of 60% to roads and MIN of 40% to mass transit... That means 100% can go to mass transit... when the people buying vehicles pay for it.