Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Postal Workers Were on the Front Lines Before. They Were Ignored

thereader.mitpress.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 160 posts

Re: U.S. Postal Workers Were on the Front Lines Before. They Were Ignored

#111

Post by Loughla »

dantheman wrote: post #85
Loughla wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in rural America. If we relied on for-profit, I imagine I would have to drive to the closest pick-up location (40 minutes), as I have to do right now for my UPS/FedEx packages.

That seems fair, unless you want to pay more. Why should someone be subsidizing your housing choice?

I guess the same can be said for roads, water, electricity, and any other utility. And it also points out that the one thing that is for-profit is completely unavailable in any modern form out here - internet and phone. Our options for internet are dial-up (35/mo, no download/upload cap as if that matters) or satellite (75/mo, 15gb up/down cap monthly). Phone has copper home phone options at 60/mo. Cell doesn't work.

Not everyone can live in cities, is my only argument for you. My work, and the work of those I serve, relies on my existing in a rural area. Food comes from somewhere. I know it sounds hand wavy and dismissive, but that's the truth for me, and my area.

Without some amount of cooperation and working together, who would want to live out here where there is nothing? Then who grows the food?

Re: U.S. Postal Workers Were on the Front Lines Before. They Were Ignored

#113

Post by osrec »

Spooky23 wrote: post #60
osrec wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a US resident, but as an outsider, it does seem like the government is not doing all it can to save the postal service, especially given the corporate bailouts they're looking to hand out.

It's a specific long-term strategy called "Starving the beast", implemented by the conservative wing of the republican party. Control of the US Senate makes it easy to persist policies for a long time. It's a somewhat unusual philosophy where you collect less revenue and borrow to cover the difference to encourage fiscal prudence. The USPS is a target for a variety of reasons. Think of it as a leveraged buyout target…

Do you feel this is a good thing or a bad thing?

I know that privatisation of Royal Mail here in the UK was terrible for the average user as prices went up significantly.

Re: U.S. Postal Workers Were on the Front Lines Before. They Were Ignored

#114

Post by cactus2093 »

Loughla wrote: post #98
cactus2093 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't seem to be a common opinion, but I generally don't understand why USPS is critical infrastructure. Vote by mail is just about the only essential service they provide that I can think of, and that could potentially still be supported in other ways without USPS the other 364 days of the year. Many of the justifications I've come across of why mail is essential seem to center around transmission of informat…

>It's easier to keep a phone number or email address active for many years, but an address for a large percentage of the population is temporary. Working with low-income folks daily, this is not true in total. We have to check phone numbers and e-mail addresses every time we interact with our clients, because they cycle through them almost monthly. Physical addresses tend to change annually. >And public libraries pro…

> I don't want to link my bank account to a third party site anyway.

And this is just my take, but this last sentence really weakens the rest of your argument. Your view seems to be that of someone who's uncomfortable with modern technology. At some point, we'll need to accept that being uncomfortable with the status quo of antiquated, painfully slow, inefficient non-tech solutions is just as valid of a viewpoint as being uncomfortable with technology.

Re: U.S. Postal Workers Were on the Front Lines Before. They Were Ignored

#115

Post by mytherin »

Reedx wrote: post #53
cjsawyer wrote: post #2

Unrelated to this specific article: The USPS is a crucial part of the US infrastructure. The thought that we could loose it over mail in ballot voting is a sick joke.

At the same token, we probably should rethink the USPS from first principles. We want delivery to every address, but certainly there is a problem when ~50% of what's being delivered is junk mail[1] 1. https://facts.usps.com/table-facts/

That seems less of a problem with USPS itself, and more of a problem with the funding structure of USPS. They are now in the position where they are forced to deliver junk mail to subsidise the loss-making deliveries they are mandated by law to perform.

If the government mandates USPS to perform deliveries for a price that is below cost, these deliveries should be partly funded by the taxpayer. They should not be forced to subsidise these deliveries by delivering spam mail.

Re: U.S. Postal Workers Were on the Front Lines Before. They Were Ignored

#116

Post by sio8ohPi »

burkaman wrote: post #83
sio8ohPi wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's weird to me to hear comments like this. To me the postal service just seems like a slow email service with no spam filtering. (Sure they can delivery packages, but they're not unique in that regard). I get the utility of certified mail and associated services, but I don't really understand why we need first-class/marketing mail service in the 21st century. I agree it was important infrastructure 250 years ago.

Imagine a world where state or federal government wants to do mail-in voting, or conduct a census, or mail emergency checks to all Americans, or send out tax refunds, or passports, or birth certificates, and private companies refuse to do it, or charge exorbitant rates. Would you prefer: a) The government can compel private companies to do any of these things at any time whether they want to or not. b) The government…

As I said, I understand the utility of services like certified mail. That seems like the appropriate level of care for most of the mailings you mention. You wouldn't want absentee ballots or passports to be lost, right? Or if my county wants to summon me for jury duty, they probably should pay the $3 to make sure I get the summons.

At heart, though, my beef with USPS stems from my hatred of spam. They're a service I interact with multiple times weekly... when I move their garbage from my mailbox to my trashcan. When 95% of my interactions with them are negative, it's hard for me to understand how some people can like them.

Re: U.S. Postal Workers Were on the Front Lines Before. They Were Ignored

#117

Post by Kalium »

Etheryte wrote: post #84
qppo wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why first principles? Create a do-not-mail list. Make up the funding gap with taxes.

It always puzzles me why this is the oft suggested answer. Surely the sane default should be to already not receive unnecessary spam? In the digital world, the general consensus seems to agree with this sentiment, I wonder why the same doesn't apply for the real world. If anyone wants your ads, they can sign up for it, delivering it to anyone else should be punishable by law.

The financial structure is very different. Email service providers deal with the costs imposed by spam. They wish to be rid of it. The USPS derives much of their revenue from direct mail advertising. They depend on it.

Re: U.S. Postal Workers Were on the Front Lines Before. They Were Ignored

#118

Post by compscistd »

Etheryte wrote: post #84
qppo wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why first principles? Create a do-not-mail list. Make up the funding gap with taxes.

It always puzzles me why this is the oft suggested answer. Surely the sane default should be to already not receive unnecessary spam? In the digital world, the general consensus seems to agree with this sentiment, I wonder why the same doesn't apply for the real world. If anyone wants your ads, they can sign up for it, delivering it to anyone else should be punishable by law.

"If anyone wants your ads, they can sign up for it, delivering it to anyone else should be punishable by law."

Let's say I am a Gray Actor, Company X, who sells great products but I want to make money on digital signups. I add this unchecked box to my order form: "By checking this box, you agree to be contacted by our partners with promotions." - can checking this box apply promotions to the mail address you entered on my shipping form? - can I sell the rights to send you mail promotions after you check this box? - how long can I send you promotions? - how hard can I make it for you to "unsubscribe" (phone, written by mail, difficult to navigate website)? - you demand proof from a partner that you did indeed check this box after I send you a promotion. What do I need to supply? - the original subscriber has moved (without my knowledge) and I send generic ads in their name to the new tenant at the old address. Am I still in compliance?

Even if you presuppose "sign up for ads" is the only way to get spam, there are a lot of protections that are still missing.

Re: U.S. Postal Workers Were on the Front Lines Before. They Were Ignored

#119

Post by qppo »

Etheryte wrote: post #84
qppo wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why first principles? Create a do-not-mail list. Make up the funding gap with taxes.

It always puzzles me why this is the oft suggested answer. Surely the sane default should be to already not receive unnecessary spam? In the digital world, the general consensus seems to agree with this sentiment, I wonder why the same doesn't apply for the real world. If anyone wants your ads, they can sign up for it, delivering it to anyone else should be punishable by law.

There's no reasonable way to tell if something is solicited or not, mail is not duplex, and it's not on demand. Most mail I get that matters was not explicitly requested to begin with.

As well, most ads I get in the mail look like normal mail anyway, and I don't really want the government opening my mail to check if it's spam or not.

I'd much prefer a way to opt out of receiving advertisements wholesale on a per-address basis (not per-person, mind you). While you can "opt out" of receiving ads, it's borderline impossible without giving PID to advertisers!

Re: U.S. Postal Workers Were on the Front Lines Before. They Were Ignored

#120

Post by cm523 »

eightysixfour wrote: post #25
TechBro8615 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody in power has suggested this as a possibility. It’s fearmongering by the democratic media.

The administration absolutely wants to privatize the USPS, see page 68: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Govern... Part of the plan includes a transition to a model "that delivers mail fewer days per week and to more central locations (not door delivery) [which] would operate at substantially lower costs." The plan notes "USPS already has over $100 billion in unfunded liabilities, a substantial c…

Sidebar to this, it seems interesting the Whitehouse uses Wordpress. Shouldn't it use something more secure like Plone?
Post reply on HN