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]

#231

Post by nerfhammer » Wed, Jul 22, 2020, 12:17 AM UTC

pryce wrote: post #151

darawk wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's ideological. They believe that the government should not be in the postal business. They probably believe that it's harmful to competition in various ways, and they are probably right in certain narrow contexts.

Ideological is close; If you are a billionaire, you didn't perform a billion dollars worth of labor; you got that way being the recipient of profits of significant fractions of entire industries based predominantly on other people's labor. If you make money this way, untapped resources don't necessarily look like untapped oil fields, instead they might look like entire industries that (with friendly legislators) can…

according to the labor theory of value google should be rewarded less than altavista depending on which performed more labor

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

#232

Post by djur » Wed, Jul 22, 2020, 12:17 AM UTC

ip26 wrote: post #149

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].…

The common argument is if USPS did not have that monopoly, then other providers would enter only the profitable regions. The result would be the USPS would not have the revenue to serve the unprofitable regions, and would either be forced to end service in the unprofitable regions or simply collapse.

Indeed, FedEx and UPS already do this where their services overlap with those of the Postal Service.

The problem is that the USPS monopoly is not as valuable as it used to be as less and less business is conducted by mail. In the long term the government is going to have to subsidize its necessary services, because those services are not and cannot be competitive advantages.

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

#233

Post by hogFeast » Wed, Jul 22, 2020, 12:17 AM UTC

bmitc wrote: post #153

hogFeast wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct, and that is why schools in many places in the world don't do a great job of teaching students. No competition, no consequences (and compare that to the position students are in...they have to compete like hell, the people teaching them can usually kick back in a unionised job). Btw, I don't support privatised education either, and the evidence on various programs where it has been tried (charter schools in t…

> Are they better than the status quo though? Yes. No question. The socioeconomic situation in the U.S. is so poor that some of the top things public schools offer their attendees is food, water, shelter, and socialization. The people benefiting from these aspects have 0% of attending private schools. The fact that public schools are struggling with their educational duties is a political one and not one inherent to…

I didn't mention public vs private. This isn't what the debate is about, although telling that you brought it up unprompted, because most of these programs are government funded and are not private schools (there have been programs where public students are funded to attend private schools...these existed decades ago, and are not anything like today's programs...those did work too though btw, it just wasn't possible to do this at scale). The issue is introducing competition (and btw, this isn't a left/right issue either...in the 90/2000s almost every left-wing govt moved in this direction...it is amazing how quickly people forget things that were common knowledge in the recent past).

The socioeconomic situation in the US isn't poor. It is tragic that someone thinks this but I would suggest leaving the US for a few days. Suggesting that schools are there to prevent some kind of public health catastrophe is ludicrous. The irony of incredible fortune is being unable to understand that you are fortunate.

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

#234

Post by refurb » Wed, Jul 22, 2020, 12:17 AM 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].…

Whoa there! You’re asking a lot for Americans to know how anything works outside the US.

It’s similar in Canada - a number of previously run public services were privatized (DMV equivalent, liquor stores, etc). And the level of service improved dramatically. I remember how awful the DMV was - crappy customer service, limited locations, terrible hours. Now I can go and register my car at 8pm on a Wednesday with a 5 min walk and no line. Many of the Canada Post centers are privately run as well - the big box stores use their employees to run it.

I was kind of shocked to come to the US and see how they’re still stuck where Canada was 30 years ago.

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

#235

Post by posguy » Wed, Jul 22, 2020, 12:17 AM UTC

missedthecue wrote: post #204

_emacsomancer_ wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The existence of billionaires is far more harmful to competition than government is.

How? How can a billionaire prevent competition without siccing the government on them through tariffs, regulatory hurdles, licenses, etc...

Buying up all the land that contains a particular resource then guarding it, thus permanently locking said resource away is one way to monopolize a market vertical.

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

#236

Post by rufus_3 » Wed, Jul 22, 2020, 12:18 AM UTC

I hope the billionaire is successful. For some reason every other courier that delivers to my address manages to bring my deliveries right to my doorstep - UPS, FedEx, DHL, Amazon, GrubHub, local pizza restaurants, etc. all manage to enter my apartment complex, locate my unit, and leave my items right at my door. The only exception is USPS, which consistently leaves a slip in my mailbox pretending that they "had no access" to my apartment, even though the gates are wide open during the daytime when they arrive. Instead of delivering my items, every time I have to drive several miles to the Post Office the next day, mask up for Covid, and wait in the long line to retrieve my packages.

Every aspect of my experience with USPS is dissatisfying - they can't be defunded soon enough.

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

#237

Post by faitswulff » Wed, Jul 22, 2020, 12:18 AM UTC

isthispermanent wrote: post #224

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 idea that it’s purely narcissistic is without merit. Privatization is about fostering competition to ensure better products are created. Just because the USPS works as is does not mean it couldn’t be better. This is a classic “I like things the way they are” problem. Where the other possibilities are unknown and inexperienced and so are not given equal weight to a decision. I don’t particularly care whether the p…

What is private industry's incentive to do better?

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

#238

Post by bhupy » Wed, Jul 22, 2020, 12:18 AM UTC

jayd16 wrote: post #220

andrewlgood wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The USPS has already lost a fair amount of business to email and overnight package services. It is interesting that the reason we cannot “opt out” of junk mail is because it would cause financial harm to the USPS. As for banking and check cashing businesses, why do we think it is appropriate for the government to actively compete in those businesses? What if they decide to set up a technology consulting business? A s…

I think the idea that there needs to be a philosophical line drawn is a fallacy. We could simply do things we want and not do things we don't want on a case by case basis.

Not sure what the philosophical argument is, but it sounds like we're using artificially inflated prices (due to lack of competition) in urban areas as a sort of roundabout way of providing mail to rural areas. The comment to which you replied seems to suggest that it's better/simpler to just provide loss-making mail services to rural areas funded through progressive taxes and be done with it, like we do for other services we deem socially necessary (military, education).

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

#239

Post by function_seven » Wed, Jul 22, 2020, 12:19 AM UTC

missedthecue wrote: post #204

_emacsomancer_ wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The existence of billionaires is far more harmful to competition than government is.

How? How can a billionaire prevent competition without siccing the government on them through tariffs, regulatory hurdles, licenses, etc...

They can finance the dumping of product at below market rates until they run the competition out of business, then corner the market for themselves.

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

#240

Post by AnthonyMouse » Wed, Jul 22, 2020, 12:19 AM UTC

djur wrote: post #196

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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, a…

Would these private letter carriers subject themselves to the necessary regulation and government scrutiny necessary to ensure that, for instance, a legally sufficient equivalent to USPS certified mail is available throughout the United States and its possessions? That election mail and other official business is conducted with sufficient speed, caution, and security? Would FedEx be willing to accept the liability an…

You keep using the word "unprofitable" to describe services that have a higher cost to provide. These things are premium services. Private companies are happy to provide them to anyone willing to pay their costs plus at least the market rate of return, precisely because doing that is profitable.