Live data from Hacker News

US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

theguardian.com

51–60 of 86 posts

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But should the USPS operate that way? The purpose of a government-operated mail service arguably is to guarantee the quality and types of services that free-market competitors can’t or don’t want to offer.

The irony of so many anti-service people is that most of them turn around and hate big corporations just as much. It's like they envision a Comcast-esque corporation taking over USPS, but forget that they hate Comcast. Disliking corporations and anti-competitive behavior of big corporations seems to be a non-partisan issue; and yet there seems to be much support for making everything ran by massive corporations. I do…

I'm not sure if they're the same people or not -- but I don't think it really matters. There are pros-and-cons to any system of organization. Whether you have chosen the right one depends on the goals of the organization.

Be wary of anyone who fanboys too hard for anything in particular without discussing its merits and weaknesses versus the alternatives. They likely don't have a full understanding of either.

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#53
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copy/pasting jorblumesea's comment above that I think answers your questions. "It's interesting to see that in America, some government services can run at a loss but others are expected to be solvent. No one complains that the military doesn't pay back the 700 billion a year it takes but if public transportation goes over budget or the post office, suddenly it's a big deal. I honestly don't get it. Most services in…

Would you want a socialized fast food chain, or computer company? Probably not, and do you know why? It's because these are services clearly designed for the market to solve. I hope we can agree there. Delivery is just something that's FAR more efficient in the markets. And the difference in inefficiency is just going to grow. Look at what UPS has been doing the past x years. They constantly reinvest money into new t…

The USPS has mandates from the federal government like having to deliver mail to far flung unprofitable areas and to deliver mail on Saturdays. Lets see UPS get saddled with these requirements and then "look at what UPS has been doing the past x years".

There was a time when taxpayers were taking money out of USPS, maybe it should be returned to USPS with interest?

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably not new users, but the current time period. This is a US election year, which (for US users in particular) brings many political topics to the fore. Some posts are more appropriate here than others, but political content in general will get more attention as a result.

True. I don't remember it being so bad in 2016 - but then again I spent much less time reading HN then.

I remember a lot of posts (and a lot of them being flagged) but I have no solid numbers to base this on. But I also let myself get caught up in the politics in general and probably noticed them for that reason as well (my brain was primed to notice them).

I need to start taking year long retreats every four years.

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#55
The article says:

> Trump said on 13 August that he opposes providing additional funding to the USPS to make it more difficult to deliver mail-in ballots.

That comment links to another article, where the first paragraph states:

> Donald Trump admitted on Thursday he opposed additional funding for the United States Postal Service (USPS) in order to make it more difficult to deliver mail-in ballots.

I searched Google and YouTube but can't find the original source, only commentary on it. Does anyone have a link?

Edit: Maybe it's referring to https://youtu.be/0ieLG29X_oE?t=840. I don't know much about the facts here, but Trump seems to be asserting that Congress is bundling $15–25B in USPS funding in a mega-bill that includes trillions of dollars of bailout money for states, and thus the bill has stalled. He also keeps harping on the failures of mail-in voting (but says absentee works well). I don't know what to make of it, but it's certainly frustrating that multiple news orgs are claiming that Trump is intentionally hamstringing the USPS to harm democracy, when I don't take away any such conclusion from that shitshow of an interview.

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#56
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copy/pasting jorblumesea's comment above that I think answers your questions. "It's interesting to see that in America, some government services can run at a loss but others are expected to be solvent. No one complains that the military doesn't pay back the 700 billion a year it takes but if public transportation goes over budget or the post office, suddenly it's a big deal. I honestly don't get it. Most services in…

Would you want a socialized fast food chain, or computer company? Probably not, and do you know why? It's because these are services clearly designed for the market to solve. I hope we can agree there. Delivery is just something that's FAR more efficient in the markets. And the difference in inefficiency is just going to grow. Look at what UPS has been doing the past x years. They constantly reinvest money into new t…

> USPS just gets more money from the government

My understanding was that USPS does not receive funding from the government. Granted, I'm not counting reimbursement for franked mail because that seems equivalent to the sender having paid postage like any other sender would. Can you provide a link with more info on USPS receiving money from the government?

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#57
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copy/pasting jorblumesea's comment above that I think answers your questions. "It's interesting to see that in America, some government services can run at a loss but others are expected to be solvent. No one complains that the military doesn't pay back the 700 billion a year it takes but if public transportation goes over budget or the post office, suddenly it's a big deal. I honestly don't get it. Most services in…

Would you want a socialized fast food chain, or computer company? Probably not, and do you know why? It's because these are services clearly designed for the market to solve. I hope we can agree there. Delivery is just something that's FAR more efficient in the markets. And the difference in inefficiency is just going to grow. Look at what UPS has been doing the past x years. They constantly reinvest money into new t…

Delivery is just something that's FAR more efficient in the markets

Why then do private companies like UPS and FedEx rely on USPS for deliveries to rural areas?

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#58
post #34

USPS has been bound to fail for years. Isn't HN all about efficiency? What's so great about wasting money on a company that can't compete in the private markets and refuses to innovate? Give it to the markets, but give them tax breaks or loans for offering services USPS offered. (Shipping to far away areas for a low cost, for example) It's incredibly that some people still think we should have this cash burning & hor…

Copy/pasting jorblumesea's comment above that I think answers your questions. "It's interesting to see that in America, some government services can run at a loss but others are expected to be solvent. No one complains that the military doesn't pay back the 700 billion a year it takes but if public transportation goes over budget or the post office, suddenly it's a big deal. I honestly don't get it. Most services in…

[deleted]

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#59
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copy/pasting jorblumesea's comment above that I think answers your questions. "It's interesting to see that in America, some government services can run at a loss but others are expected to be solvent. No one complains that the military doesn't pay back the 700 billion a year it takes but if public transportation goes over budget or the post office, suddenly it's a big deal. I honestly don't get it. Most services in…

Would you want a socialized fast food chain, or computer company? Probably not, and do you know why? It's because these are services clearly designed for the market to solve. I hope we can agree there. Delivery is just something that's FAR more efficient in the markets. And the difference in inefficiency is just going to grow. Look at what UPS has been doing the past x years. They constantly reinvest money into new t…

Don't have much knowledge into the efficiency and the economics of government services, and you do have a valid point. But would the millions of elderly that rely on it for their medicine, SS checks, etc., still reliably receive their mail without additional cost to them or the sender if they were shipped through a private carrier? The suspicion and outcry for the changes to the USPS is clearly a timing matter. Why does Trump all of a sudden care about the postal service?

Lets be real here for a second. Trump simply doesn't want mail-in voting because he knows that it will result in more democrats voting and him likely losing the election. Every decision he's made about the USPS has been with that concept in mind. He even said in an interview on Fox news last month that if mail in voting is allowed you'll never see another Republican in office again. He knows it. Everyone in politics knows it. The right will never admit they know this, and will look for any and every excuse to hold back the USPS without directly saying that its because they don't want more democrats than republicans voting.

With mail-in voting being accepted in a majority of states, and even set as the primary method for a few with COVID present, it really screws things up for the GOP. Couple that with Trump's gamble that convincing his voters the virus is no big deal will get them to the polls, while the scaredy cat democrats will stay home. So he spent a very long time building up this giant "virus hoax" to calm his masses. He is simultaneously trying to train them to believe that mail-in voting is fraud, even though he, himself does so, as have many, many of his voters, historically.

It worked. But what he didn't account for was states creating blanket acceptances of mail-in voting applications. That instantly turns the tables, because not only does it undo the removal of polling places, but it also allows the democrats (and the GOP, if they so choose) to vote from the safety and comfort of their homes while avoiding lines, saving time, and not risking COVID. His supporters, however, will be going to polling places in full force, in what will likely be a very bad time for the country as COVID starts to rear its face again between flu-season and school openings (especially in red states that are in denial and have entirely in-person classes).

So then, what happens, is a ton of his voters are going to be against voting by mail, and most will have not applied to do so, forcing them to go to the ballots, in what will most likely be a time that the pandemic is gaining speed. His advisors basically laid out the future for him of his silly comments, and where they were leading. So, in recent weeks, you've seen him compliment "absentee voting", trying to making it a completely separate thing from "mail-in voting", as not to look like an incompetent liar to his voters. But he knows his advantage still lies at the polling places, so he is simultaneously trying to hinder the USPS from delivering ballots. The number of mail-in voting applications for democrats FAR surpasses those for republicans, so while it may cost him a few votes, he is betting that it will cost democrats so many that his supporters who do show up will be able to tip the scales. He is also taking the approach of preparing to call the election invalid due to the amount of mail-in voting, should he lose.

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#60

The article says: > Trump said on 13 August that he opposes providing additional funding to the USPS to make it more difficult to deliver mail-in ballots. That comment links to another article, where the first paragraph states: > Donald Trump admitted on Thursday he opposed additional funding for the United States Postal Service (USPS) in order to make it more difficult to deliver mail-in ballots. I searched Google a…

The source is this Fox News interview:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-seeks-to-starve-post-...

No timestamp because I couldn't bring myself to listen to all 40 minutes.

Post reply on HN