The Billionaire Behind Efforts to Kill the U.S. Postal Service [pdf] • Hacker News Board

Re: The Billionaire Behind Efforts to Kill the U.S. Postal Service [pdf]

#131

Post by 8ytecoder » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 11:52 PM UTC

quickthrowman wrote: post #99

sparkling wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its easy to point at a greedy billionaire who wants to ruin [insert public service here] so that he can squeeze out another dollar for himself. But have you considered that they _genuinely_ belive that minimal government and more privatization leads to overall better results? It might just be that they have good intensions, that they really wish for a better outcome for all. I don't share that view, but i do think th…

> But have you considered that they _genuinely_ belive that minimal government and more privatization leads to overall better results? It might just be that they have good intensions, that they really wish for a better outcome for all. Yes, and that makes it even worse. They’re so out of touch with common people and so insulated from routine everyday life, their opinion shouldn’t count for anything. I don’t care if j…

It’s also extremely hypothetical. And counter examples on why it won’t work is plenty abound. The concept that market and competition will result in better services and price and efficient operations is true only when then there are checks and balances in place. Market collusion, using monopoly power to squish and consolidate power and extort people happen in almost every industry. I do share their concern that govt enterprises can become corrupt or complacent but I don’t share the the view that the solution is privatisation. Our elected government officials are also corrupt, should we throw away democracy?

Re: The Billionaire Behind Efforts to Kill the U.S. Postal Service [pdf]

#132

Post by 8ytecoder » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 11:54 PM UTC

bmitc wrote: post #124

quickthrowman wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But have you considered that they _genuinely_ belive that minimal government and more privatization leads to overall better results? It might just be that they have good intensions, that they really wish for a better outcome for all. Yes, and that makes it even worse. They’re so out of touch with common people and so insulated from routine everyday life, their opinion shouldn’t count for anything. I don’t care if j…

I agree with you in that wealthy people are given too much power in the U.S. In the U.S., becoming wealthy has somehow become a fast pass to do basically whatever you want and inflict change that could affect millions of people negatively or be self-beneficial (to the wealthy person) or both. Allowing individuals to accumulate so much wealth is just not good for the common people, and the fact that our government is…

Almost like a warlord. They have the power to rule us (albeit indirectly) with their wealth and lobbying power instead of weapons and fear.

Re: The Billionaire Behind Efforts to Kill the U.S. Postal Service [pdf]

#133

Post by reaperducer » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 11:54 PM UTC

mktk1001 wrote: post #98

bhupy wrote: post #74

Something I don't normally see discussed re privatization of US Postal Service is that it doesn't appear to be a novel idea. Singapore's postal service, SingPost, is a publicly traded company[1]. The UK's postal service, Royal Mail, is a publicly traded limited company[2]. Germany's postal service, Deutsche Post AG, is a publicly traded company[3]. Japan's postal service, Japan Post, is a publicly traded company[4].…

There's no incentive for public companies to serve rural areas.

You're being downvoted because most people believe it when FedEx or Amazon or UPS say they serve 100% of Americans. There's no way they would do so if they had to have the same footprint as the USPS.

Is Amazon going to run ships around the Great Lakes to deliver mail to vessels moving between ports?

Is FedEx going to send a truck an a four-hour round-trip to deliver a single letter to someone on an indian reservation for 50¢?

Is UPS going to charter bush planes to deliver mail to remote outposts in Alaska, Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands?

There are post offices so far out in the middle of nowhere that while they have a concrete pad for handicapped parking because it's required by the ADA, no customers ever arrive by car, so there's also hitching posts for people's horses, which is the primary mode of transportation. I don't see Amazon doing that. It'll just say, "Wait 20 years for your mail while we work the bugs out of our super-cool drone delivery service!"

Re: The Billionaire Behind Efforts to Kill the U.S. Postal Service [pdf]

#134

Post by AnthonyMouse » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 11:54 PM UTC

bmitc wrote: post #20

The amount of narcissism these people (the Koch's, for example) have is just astounding. If you're a billionaire, what could possibly be a reasonable explanation for why you even care about the post office? Why are these people so hell bent on hurting people to feed their own narcissism? The USPS could be improved but struggles primarily due to active efforts to kill it off. But it's a wonderful idea of a service tha…

> The USPS, libraries, public schools provide basically guaranteed service to anyone, anywhere.

Libraries are a public service. They're free. The people who use them don't have to pay anything for it, which is a boon to those who otherwise couldn't afford it. It's basically a public subsidy for access to books.

The postal service is a business. There isn't supposed to be any subsidy, you pay for it through postage, and they're not doing anything that UPS or FedEx couldn't do just as well. Public libraries don't need a law prohibiting private libraries to keep everyone from abandoning them, but the USPS needs a government monopoly on carrying letters? If the post office was so great then they shouldn't need that -- but then they'd likely fail, because private competitors would do it better and people would stop using USPS.

It's the same thing with public schools. The benefit is that the government pays for them, so no one can say they can't afford to send their kids to school. But that doesn't require the subsidy to go only to schools operated by the government. Give the parents education vouchers and let them choose their school. If the public schools are so great then they'll choose them anyway. The opposition to this comes from people knowing full well that they're not.

Re: The Billionaire Behind Efforts to Kill the U.S. Postal Service [pdf]

#135

Post by egypturnash » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 11:54 PM UTC

donor20 wrote: post #92

uses wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your first sentence isn't even true and you can go right here and read the table that shows their revenue sources: https://about.usps.com/newsroom/national-releases/2019/1114-... To spoil it for you: in 2019, First-Class Mail and Shipping and Packages made significantly more revenue than Marketing Mail. Yes, USPS needs some new revenue streams. They do provide significant value that others cannot meet, which is daily…

The chart doesn't show the relative volumes of mail. For every priority mail package at $14.95 that same $14.95 buys HUNDREDS of pieces of junk mail. The terrible thing - you CANNOT opt out of the junk mail, at least in the past (hopefully this has changed). I have no interest in the USPS as a result. What type of business that is supposed to be providing a service FORCES its future and current customers to kill tree…

You can opt out of junk mail. It is an annoying process that involves finding multiple places to opt out, and takes a few months to take effect because all this shit has a lengthy production pipeline. But it is doable. I get a lot less junk mail than I used to, and if I was willing to put a little more effort in I’d get even less - I had it pretty close to zero in my old place.

Re: The Billionaire Behind Efforts to Kill the U.S. Postal Service [pdf]

#136

Post by Avicebron » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 11:55 PM UTC

0xddd wrote: post #106

sparkling wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its easy to point at a greedy billionaire who wants to ruin [insert public service here] so that he can squeeze out another dollar for himself. But have you considered that they _genuinely_ belive that minimal government and more privatization leads to overall better results? It might just be that they have good intensions, that they really wish for a better outcome for all. I don't share that view, but i do think th…

Sure, but with the amount of wealth and power that they have, it goes beyond lobbying. If there were any sense of the other side getting equal bargaining power, maybe people would be less upset.

I agree, and I will add that once someone's net worth and exaggerated power are quite apparent, there should be some serious oversight if they are utilizing their money to vote like a block of x billion people. I think there should be more oversight at the government level as well...but the government isn't just one person's opinion.

Re: The Billionaire Behind Efforts to Kill the U.S. Postal Service [pdf]

#137

Post by sdinsn » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 11:55 PM UTC

unethical_ban wrote: post #120

bhupy wrote: post #74

Something I don't normally see discussed re privatization of US Postal Service is that it doesn't appear to be a novel idea. Singapore's postal service, SingPost, is a publicly traded company[1]. The UK's postal service, Royal Mail, is a publicly traded limited company[2]. Germany's postal service, Deutsche Post AG, is a publicly traded company[3]. Japan's postal service, Japan Post, is a publicly traded company[4].…

On the surface, the Constitution specifically cites a role for the federal government in operating a postal service. Now, why does it have exclusivity for letter service? I don't know the history. I'd rather look at how it can do an already pretty good job, better. I know I go to USPS when I ship anything. Why isn't it in the banking business? Why doesn't it operate an official email / Identity Provider? Among other…

> specifically cites a role for the federal government in operating a postal service.

It specifically grants Congress the power to operate a postal service. Just because they have the power doesn't mean they have to do it.

Re: The Billionaire Behind Efforts to Kill the U.S. Postal Service [pdf]

#138

Post by ZekeSulastin » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 11:55 PM UTC

armitron wrote: post #89

hendiatris wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please provide more detail. I find the USPS to be one of the best things about this country. Every morning I get an email with photos of the mail I will receive, and a listing of the packages that are coming my way. I can’t remember the last time they’ve ever lost anything of mine. I’m sure not everyone’s experience is like mine - I’m curious how they can be so bad that they create a sense of loathing.

As I said, regularly losing mail. Regularly misdelivering mail. A lot of effort to get someone to even acknowledge the problem or even myself. My mailbox stuffed with junk mail all the time (even if I have permanent sticker telling them not to do so). I've even talked to the USPS delivery person and told her not to do so. Next week, same issue. Rinse, repeat. I've never, ever, ever had a problem with Fedex or UPS. Th…

Speaking from my anecdata on both the retail customer and business customer side, if you've never had a problem with a given carrier you are damned lucky and should probably go buy lottery tickets.

Re: The Billionaire Behind Efforts to Kill the U.S. Postal Service [pdf]

#139

Post by bhupy » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 11:56 PM UTC

unethical_ban wrote: post #120

bhupy wrote: post #74

Something I don't normally see discussed re privatization of US Postal Service is that it doesn't appear to be a novel idea. Singapore's postal service, SingPost, is a publicly traded company[1]. The UK's postal service, Royal Mail, is a publicly traded limited company[2]. Germany's postal service, Deutsche Post AG, is a publicly traded company[3]. Japan's postal service, Japan Post, is a publicly traded company[4].…

On the surface, the Constitution specifically cites a role for the federal government in operating a postal service. Now, why does it have exclusivity for letter service? I don't know the history. I'd rather look at how it can do an already pretty good job, better. I know I go to USPS when I ship anything. Why isn't it in the banking business? Why doesn't it operate an official email / Identity Provider? Among other…

The Constitution argument merely answers why things are the way that they are, they don't tell us whether the privatized model we see in the UK/Germany/Singapore/Japan is better or worse.

> I'd rather look at how it can do an already pretty good job, better. I know I go to USPS when I ship anything.

When it comes to packages, USPS vs UPS vs FedEx have their pros/cons, but the options mean that most end user's needs are met, whatever they are. The question is why USPS enjoys a state sanctioned monopoly on paper mail specifically.

Re: The Billionaire Behind Efforts to Kill the U.S. Postal Service [pdf]

#140

Post by llsf » Tue, Jul 21, 2020, 11:56 PM UTC

bhupy wrote: post #74

Something I don't normally see discussed re privatization of US Postal Service is that it doesn't appear to be a novel idea. Singapore's postal service, SingPost, is a publicly traded company[1]. The UK's postal service, Royal Mail, is a publicly traded limited company[2]. Germany's postal service, Deutsche Post AG, is a publicly traded company[3]. Japan's postal service, Japan Post, is a publicly traded company[4].…

It is not a novel idea to privatize the postal service. It can be lucrative business, especially if focused on the right areas.

The legacy system is based on the fact that it is public service, equally offered to all citizens, regardless of their gender, race, religion and location. So, it is not a business. A business would focus on the most profitable aspect of the postal service. It would likely not serve some areas, or even discriminate against some people.

I believe, the reason why USPS still has a monopoly in first class parcel mail, it is to satisfy people we claim that USPS should make money. Now, if it was clear for everyone that USPS should not be profitable (like military or education are not profitable), then it would make sense to break all USPS monopolies. Actually, I would argue the other way around, then let's USPS compete also with banks (account, loans, credit cards, stocks/bonds, CDs, etc.), title companies, check cashing business, etc. Which I believe USPS cannot currently. USPS could leverage its geographical coverage to bring banking services to remote areas. I would suggest to combine some services like DMV, so we could renew ID/driver/passports at postal office. We could pay taxes and fine. We could access notary services (titles), etc.