Postal Service Loses $3.5 Billion in 3rd Quarter

[angelatc]

cheaper AND faster?

even after flat rate boxes?

I don't doubt you can have one, I do doubt you can have both.

Most of my stuff won't fit into the flat rate boxes, but even they're not the great deal they used to be.

Media mail is dirt cheap, I'll give you that.

 

[WaltM]

Haha, yes! I don't know how they do it, but newegg typically will ship items within two days to my house for the normal rate.

I have noticed from my personal experience that items shipped long distances typically arrive a day or two sooner with UPS or FedEx. This is debatable, but I've made up my mind to avoid USPS whenever I can.

The costs of running the USPS are hidden and we as a nation would be all the more wealthy if it didn't exist.

the cost of people living is hidden and we as a nation would be wealthier if some people didn't live. (I didn't say which one was better, but can you deny this fact?)

 

[WaltM]

Most of my stuff won't fit into the flat rate boxes, but even they're not the great deal they used to be.

Media mail is dirt cheap, I'll give you that.

Yes. Media mail IS dirt cheap.

It's the kind of service that can help put college bookstores out of business (so I wouldn't be surprised of they're hating on USPS)

 

[angelatc]

I think you will find that as you get larger deliveries & earlier arrivals, the premium between private carriers and USPS starts to narrow. The one company that always boggles my mind on shipping is Newegg. Not only do they wave the shipping fee often, but they get it to you in 3 days (rarely longer than 4).

Check this out: http://redstateeclectic.typepad.com...rade-imbalance-and-the-us-postal-service.html

I can't put this in an envelope and mail it across the street for $1.88 US, but somehow they can manufacture it in China *and* get it here from Hong Kong?

 

[tpreitzel]

Ha, never said should.

thanks for admitting what it is.

For admitting that you're a socialist, sure. You're welcome.

Excuses.

You mean to tell me taxpayer subsidy still forced USPS to raise postage stamp rates?

Duh, yep I mean to tell you that taxpayer subsidy still forces the USPS to raise the price for those allegedly "free" postage stamps... just not as much as those allegedly "free" postage stamps should be raised.

You mean to tell me I should consider other things than what I pay on a personal level? You must love outsourcing and immigrants then.

blah, blah, blah ... Oh, in your mind, I'm supposed to have some clever retort for sheer nonsense unrelated to the topic at hand ..

On the contrary, you don't need to restrict it.

The competition IS open for anybody who's willing to waste money trying.

You might not beat first class mail, but you can make most of your money with packages.

Oh, you mean against a taxpayer subsidized mail delivery system which apparently is "free" in your little world?

ignore what you can't respond to?

It's not a matter of me being incapable of responding to your nonsense. It's rather more of wasting my time or ignoring irrelevant remarks which you like to scatter hither and yon ...

YOU SAID KIOSK!

Nah, really? And kiosk was fully qualified to be located in a secure, monitored compound ... which shouldn't even need mentioning.

Why don't they do it? Are you smarter?





customers prefer to pay nothing, who's filling that demand?

Duh, they'll have to create and expand their distribution networks eventually... especially when really competent competition arrives which will happen in due time and taxpayer subsidized competition is eliminated, i.e. the postal service. Amazon does it around the nation on a much larger scale.

Anything further that I need to repeat for the umpteenth time?

 

[WaltM]

Check this out: http://redstateeclectic.typepad.com...rade-imbalance-and-the-us-postal-service.html

I can't put this in an envelope and mail it across the street for $1.88 US, but somehow they can manufacture it in China *and* get it here from Hong Kong?

yep.

is China's postal service private? why are they cheaper?

 

[WaltM]

For admitting that you're a socialist, sure. You're welcome.

Duh, yep I mean to tell you that taxpayer subsidy still forces the USPS to raise the price for those allegedly "free" postage stamps... just not as much as those allegedly "free" postage stamps should be raised.

who ever said free?

I said equal access, not the service itself free, but that's too much for your brain

blah, blah, blah ... Oh, in your mind, I'm supposed to have some clever retort for sheer nonsense unrelated to the topic at hand ..

You can't.

Oh, you mean against a taxpayer subsidized mail delivery system which apparently is "free" in your little world?

It's not a matter of me being incapable of responding to your nonsense. It's rather more of wasting my time or ignoring irrelevant remarks which you like to scatter hither and yon ...


Nah, really? And kiosk was fully qualified to be located in a secure compound ... which shouldn't even need mentioning.

And the secure compound looks like what? keep talking to yourself.

Costs what?

Duh, they'll have to create and expand their distribution networks eventually... especially when really competent competition arrives which will happen in due time. Amazon does it around the nation on a much larger scale.

Anything further that I need to repeat for the umpteenth time?

Amazon is probably an exception to the rule, as they have a high portion of their market (and they too, rely on other shipping services).

You've not repeated anything. Amazon also benefits greatly due to LACK OF COMPETITION (but I dont expect you to know that)

 

[Kludge]

Walt, would you support legislation mandating the USPS no longer be held to try making a profit and instead require the USPS not to charge fees for any shipments while still maintaining their delivery speed? Isn't that the logical end to your thinking?

 

[angelatc]

yep.

is China's postal service private? why are they cheaper?

I'm more curious about the deal they've cut with our postal service that allows them to ship their packages cheaper than I can.

I assume they're cheaper because they don't allow the yuan to float.

 

[tpreitzel]

who ever said free?

You did or implied it in post #21 when I stated that free markets could do a better job of delivering mail than the postal service. The implication from your remark is that the postal service can deliver mail for free whereas free markets can't. Of course, free markets can't deliver mail for "free", but neither can the postal service.

"No, I'd love to believe it can be done for free *, I've waited too long to see if happen. Can I blame you for not believing in Santa Claus?"

I said equal access, not the service itself free, but that's too much for your brain

See my aforementioned remarks ... apparently, you need to reread your own posts.

And the secure compound looks like what? keep talking to yourself.

Costs what?

Even your limited imagination should give you a clue as to the potential appearance of such a compound... costs a lot less than a taxpayer subsidized monstrosity called the postal service... guaranteed. Do I need to provide a floor plan? Sorry, use your imagination. The technology is readily available.

Amazon is probably an exception to the rule, as they have a high portion of their market (and they too, rely on other shipping services).

LOL, No, the use of secure distribution centers is a very common, efficient means of rapidly transporting and receiving goods to general areas.

You've not repeated anything. Amazon also benefits greatly due to LACK OF COMPETITION (but I dont expect you to know that)

Shall I count the number of times that I've repeated specific points in this thread? You'll look even more ridiculous than you already do.

* emphasis mine

 

[WaltM]

Walt, would you support legislation mandating the USPS no longer be held to try making a profit and instead require the USPS not to charge fees for any shipments while still maintaining their delivery speed? Isn't that the logical end to your thinking?

No. I don't believe in regulating profit, because it's very subjective.

Even more complicated when wages are regulated.

 

[WaltM]

I'm more curious about the deal they've cut with our postal service that allows them to ship their packages cheaper than I can.

I don't think it matters on our end.

They just worry about making it to the shore, the rest is taken care of usually in bulk, unless they paid for expedition.

I assume they're cheaper because they don't allow the yuan to float.

if that's so, who's investing in chinese yuan?

 

[WaltM]

You did or implied it in post #21 when I stated that free markets could do a better job of delivering mail than the postal service.

"No, I'd love to believe it can be done for free, I've waited too long to see if happen. Can I blame you for not believing in Santa Claus?" - WaltM

I said I love to believe it CAN BE, in response to your accusation that I think it's impossible for somebody to do it for less than USPS.

See my aforementioned remarks ... apparently, you need to reread your own posts.

I know exactly what I said.

By the way, do you dispute that you benefit from free and equal access to police and fire? Or do you pay for a superior private defense that renders the socialist service useless to you?

Even your limited imagination should give you a clue as to the potential appearance of such a compound... costs a lot less than a taxpayer subsidized monstrosity called the postal service... guaranteed. Do I need to provide a floor plan? Sorry, use your imagination. The technology is readily available.

you can't.

Technology is available, but nobody's doing it.

LOL, No, the use of secure distribution centers is a very common, efficient means of rapidly transporting and receiving goods to general areas.

At the cost of land, maintainence, electricity, fun.

Shall I count the number of times that I've repeated specific points in this thread? You'll look even more ridiculous than you already do.

Yes, please count.

I don't look ridiculous, you're the one proposing a fantasyland that no private company is doing (or is doing better than USPS).

 

[Kludge]

No. I don't believe in regulating profit, because it's very subjective.

Even more complicated when wages are regulated.

I don't follow. You would oppose having USPS being legislated to ship everything at no charge because you don't believe in regulating profit???

 

[WaltM]

I don't follow. You would oppose having USPS being legislated to ship everything at no charge because you don't believe in regulating profit???

I would not propose of support any rule that says "you cant charge a profit", as they're meaningless and hard to enforce.

 

[tpreitzel]

I said I love to believe it CAN BE, in response to your accusation that I think it's impossible for somebody to do it for less than USPS.



I know exactly what I said.

Again, meaning that YOU believe the post office is delivering mail services for "free" since your implication is that "I love to believe it (private mail delivery) CAN BE (free just like the postal service)". After all, the readers already KNOW that mail service isn't free, but you obviously think otherwise since you'd love to believe that private mail services can be "free" .... as the post office apparently is in your little world.

You have equal access as a citizen to these services for free. * Not the case where private sector refuses to open shop or service locations due to cost.

By the way, do you dispute that you benefit from free * and equal access to police and fire? Or do you pay for a superior private defense that renders the socialist service useless to you?

I certainly do dispute your nonsense as the cost of fire and police services are neither free nor "equally" available. Availability is dependent on population and that population should support the cost of their own infrastructure, e.g. solar, or move elsewhere. Personally, I can handle any cost for fire and police services just fine either alone, or with a group of my neighbors. Unfortunately, I've been forced to pay for "services" that aren't needed or used by me. I want decades of my money back.

Yes, please count.

Roughly, about 7 times I've repeated myself ... well, you're wrong again, WaltM ...

I don't look ridiculous, you're the one proposing a fantasyland that no private company is doing (or is doing better than USPS).

No, you do look ridiculous because you insist that no private company is providing postal services as cheaply as the taxpayer-funded postal service. Well, duh. Let's cut those subsidies and see if the US Postal Service remains competitive with private enterprise. Even with the subsidies, the postal service continues losing ground against other competition include private enterprise. ** Again, how many billions of dollars is the postal service in the red during the 3rd quarter alone? Nearly $4 BILLION ... so some poor souls living on mountain peaks have "equal" access. "Equal" access only exists in your little world. LOL ...

* emphasis mine
** difficult to determine at times since markets are so heavily distorted by government interference.

 

[Kludge]

I would not propose of support any rule that says "you cant charge a profit", as they're meaningless and hard to enforce.

I'm talking about simply stopping the USPS from charging fees altogether. If a US citizen wanted to ship a package, they'd just label it and take it to the USPS at no cost to the person shipping (less gov't money possibly).

 

[WaltM]

Again, meaning that YOU believe the post office is delivering mail services for "free"

No, it was in response to YOUR comment, that I believe it's impossible for private sector to do it cheaper.

I said I'd LOVE TO SEE anybody do it cheaper, if not free.

So in no way was I saying anybody "should" do it free, but I love to believe it to be true, and far from believing it impossible (which you accused me of)

since your implication is that "I love to believe it (private mail delivery) CAN BE (free just like the postal service)".

No, wrong context.

I used the word free in two different places.

Post office is "free" insofar as equal access, just like police and fire are free, nobody pays extra based on their location. The service itself is not free.

When I said "I love to beleive it's free" it was in response to "can private companies doing it cheaper", when I was actually referring to the price of services, low as possible, free even better.

After all, the readers already KNOW that mail service isn't free, but you obviously think otherwise since you'd love to believe that private mail services can be "free" .... as the post office apparently is in your little world.

So you too know it can't, or to your own accusation "believe it's impossible".


You'd like everyone to believe it's impossible so we, the people, are forced into

Coming ...

take your time.

 

[WaltM]

I'm talking about simply stopping the USPS from charging fees altogether. If a US citizen wanted to ship a package, they'd just label it and take it to the USPS at no cost to the person shipping (less gov't money possibly).

I am against that as well, as it wouldn't penalize abuse.

There's already major abuse on the part of bulk mailers.

 

[buffalokid777]

Article I, section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution grants U.S. Congress the power to establish post offices and post roads.

This says it all why USPS should exist. I know the free marketeers gone wild, would say otherwise, but the constitution expressly authorizes USPS.

That being said, there are things USPS does that causes waste and the losses like the op stated. In good economic times with high volume of mail, it is profitable, like several years ago, in poor economic times, with lower volume of mail, it is not.

Salaries aren't crazy like other public sector workers but their still above comparable positions in the private sector, I believe salaries are capped at a max of a little over $108,000 a year. I am not sure what kind of pensions or other benefits they get, but I am sure they are pretty darn good as my cousin who works for USPS told me the best part of the job were the benefits and job security and pretty good pay.

I ship alot of stuff being an internet seller, prices at usps for packages are really getting out of hand, the higher the weight, the better the deal shipping it through a private carrier like ups or fed ex if it won't fit in a flat rate box.

The real problem with USPS is they won't scale back where it counts in lean times like these, they'll make you wait in line 30 minutes to mail a package, but they won't cut salaries, some of the people at your local PO are making $20
+/hr to be a glorified cashier. Let them take a 25% pay cut, and if they don't want to, fire them and replace them with me who will be happy to be a glorified cashier with benefits at that rate, since that is 33% more than I make now being an online retailer, without benefits, you won't get that in the private sector as a cashier.