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

“There is no longer enough mail to sustain six days of delivery.”

usps.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 179 posts

Re: “There is no longer enough mail to sustain six days of delivery.”

#111

Post by kolya3 »

tsally wrote: post #44
jonknee wrote: post #9

> Ten years ago, the average household received five pieces of mail every day. Today, it receives four pieces and by 2020, that number will fall to three. ... And it would receive much less than that if the USPS wasn't mostly a delivery network for spam.

I think the current solution for snail mail spam is the optimal one. Consider the two possibilities: (1) the government raises taxes in order to increase the USPS's ability to handle spam or (2) the USPS offloads the majority of the filtering process to the recipients (the current solution). On days I receive spam in the mail, I waste approximately one second when I have to pause to throw it away. If the USPS were to…

It's surprisingly easy to opt out of a big portion of that spam.

-Stop credit card offers: https://www.optoutprescreen.com

-Stop supermarket coupon packages: Redplum (aka Valassis) by calling 888.241.6760

-Stop PennySaver: 1.714.996.8900, press 3, leave a voicemail message with your name & address, be sure to tell them you're trying to "stop".

Most of those coupon packages come from the same place. Hunt down the fine print phone number and you'll be off the list in no time.

I did this a few years ago and have been enjoying a relatively empty mailbox. I still get junk mail but very seldom.

Re: “There is no longer enough mail to sustain six days of delivery.”

#112

Post by solutionyogi »

tsally wrote: post #41
cwan wrote: post #2

While I don't doubt volumes have fallen as a result of things like email, the US postal service also hasn't done itself any favors. You read anecdotes like this, and it's a wonder that volumes haven't plummeted even faster: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/04/things-a...

Every time the US postal service comes up in discussion, someone invariably mentions how life would be so much better if the service was privatized. I think this argument represents a fundamental misunderstanding of public services; the post office is perhaps the canonical example of an extremely important service that only can exist in the public sector. As others have mentioned already ( http://news.ycombinator.com…

I would argue that the most essential service is 'grocery delivery'. And it's not run or subsidized by Government and we seem to be doing just fine. There is no reason what so ever for USPS to exist.

Re: “There is no longer enough mail to sustain six days of delivery.”

#113

Post by lanstein »

graywh wrote: post #16
wallflower wrote: post #7

The postal service derives a significant amount of its revenue from pitching direct mail to businesses as an effective way to reach customers (4) This whole report from USPS (1) is worth reading but some notable excerpts: "In 2009, 84 billion pieces of first-class mail and 83 billion pieces of direct mail were handled." Invoices and bills constitute a large part of first-class mail (and they continue to move online,…

> Imagine UPS/DHL/FedEx's profits if they went from deliver-on-demand to deliver-to-everywhere-regardless-of-demand: But UPS and FedEx already have something similar that occasionally leverages the USPS for the final leg of delivery. The FedEx version is called SmartPost.

UPS version of this is called UPS Basic. Don't mistake UPS Basic for UPS Ground.

Re: “There is no longer enough mail to sustain six days of delivery.”

#114

Post by solutionyogi »

tsally wrote: post #85
roboneal wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the dramatic drop in mail volumes, hasn't the market (businesses and citizens alike) "voted" that traditional first-class letter (USPS only monopoly) is not a "fundamental component" of our society? If we haven't quite reached that point yet, can't you see we will?

With the dramatic drop in mail volumes, hasn't the market (businesses and citizens alike) "voted" that traditional first-class letter (USPS only monopoly) is not a "fundamental component" of our society? No, mail is not the fundamental component I've identified. As I said, the fundamental component is: "the ability to affordability correspond with others around the country". If we haven't quite reached that point yet…

Do you really expect a government organization with all its bureaucracy to come up a solution for 'the ability to affordability correspond with others around the country'?

Private market has already found out the solution. Email, facebook, twitter.

And if you think that USPS (or any government organization for that matter) can do a better job hosting free email than Google, Yahoo or Microsoft (they all provide free email), I have serious questions about your sanity.

Re: “There is no longer enough mail to sustain six days of delivery.”

#115

Post by kscaldef »

cjoh wrote: post #101
kscaldef wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keep in mind that they also have a government-granted monopoly. They probably wouldn't be a big otherwise.

Maybe -- but that's a tough conclusion. While the USPS is a government agency, we still don't have enough data about the agency, or any agency's efficiency to be an accurate judge. It'd be great, for instance, if we could see what the average price per employee at the USPS was vs. UPS vs. FedEx. Sick leave comparisons, purchasing efficiencies, etc. Lots of this data isn't available though (which is why I have my job)

That information isn't all that useful, since UPS and FedEx don't compete (and are forbidden to compete) in the marketplace for mail (as opposed to package) delivery. Regardless, though, I'm making a very modest claim: competitors would take away part of USPS's marketshare if they were allowed to compete. If you feel like there's a natural monopoly on mail delivery such that that wouldn't happen, you need to support that assertion.

Re: “There is no longer enough mail to sustain six days of delivery.”

#116

Post by shade »

mrj wrote: post #105
pxlpshr wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, I see mail as a temporary problem. If Netflix Streaming contained all the top titles, I would use that almost exclusively. There really would be no reason for mail, it's slow and inefficient.

If they supported closed captioning, that would be more of an option for all of us.

Seriously. If Netflix instant streaming and the iTunes TV store supported closed-captioning, I'd seriously consider canceling my cable TV and going with those.

Unfortunately, I'm starting to think the only thing that's going to get consistent CC support in online video is a mandate from the federal government -- that was what it took in the early 90s to get caption decoders included in every TV 13" or larger.

Re: “There is no longer enough mail to sustain six days of delivery.”

#117

Post by solutionyogi »

btipling wrote: post #91
tsally wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the current solution for snail mail spam is the optimal one. Consider the two possibilities: (1) the government raises taxes in order to increase the USPS's ability to handle spam or (2) the USPS offloads the majority of the filtering process to the recipients (the current solution). On days I receive spam in the mail, I waste approximately one second when I have to pause to throw it away. If the USPS were to…

The USPS by law has to be profitable. It is not funded by taxes. (Although when there is a budget shortfall the government helps pay its bills.)

Law does not make reality. If it did, Obama can tomorrow sign a law saying that Government will reduce spending by 50% while providing more services. Obviously, the real life(TM) will safely ignore the law.

And I don't see a difference between whether USPS is directly funded by taxpayer dollars OR taxpayer are on the hook for unpaid USPS bills.

Re: “There is no longer enough mail to sustain six days of delivery.”

#119

Post by Avshalom »

steveklabnik wrote: post #95
argv_empty wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you explain FedEx and UPS? I think GP's claim is not that private parcel services cannot exist, but rather that if they were to deliver first-class mail, they would charge more than $1 per letter.

Gotcha. I would argue back that the "under $1" isn't even a legitimate path of arguing, because the post office doesn't deliver mail for under a dollar either; you'd have to factor in the cost of the taxes that subsidize that under a dollar price.

Taxes don't really subsidize the USPS, losses are paid for by tax money but they're supposed to run at a profit, which is why they have to cut mail delivery or increase stamp price.

They can afford ridiculously low postage because they have a government granted monopoly on mail so they can price their rates at a level to subsidize Remote, Oregon with profit from Portland. If they didn't have to deliver to the middle of nowhere they could probably lower prices significantly.

Which is why they need the monopoly, if I could set up a mail company in just the top 20 cities in the country I could undercut the USPS and then they'd suffer enormous revenue shortages because they'd still be mandated to deliver everywhere.

Re: “There is no longer enough mail to sustain six days of delivery.”

#120

Post by graywh »

dpcan wrote: post #78

Why can't I get/pay for a USPS.com email address of my physical address? 123MainSt.MyCity.State.Zip@usps.com? Anything that is emailed to this address must pay postage, but the message body or attachment can be printed, certified and delivered to my physical location? Maybe this isn't the perfect idea, but if the USPS would just embrace technology and innovate a little, they could really increase their revenues.

Just wondering: how would they handle it when you move?
Post reply on HN