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

61–70 of 179 posts

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

#61

Post by mmt »

krschultz wrote: post #8
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...

And I have equally aggravating anecdotes about issues with private companies' customer service. It doesn't prove anything. I'd take the people at my MVC (NJ's "new" DMV) and post office over the people at my cable or internet provider, my private healthcare, and my cell phone company in a heart beat. Those companies aren't doing themselves any favors but somehow they manage to make it. The Zappos in the world are few…

my cable or internet provider, my private healthcare, and my cell phone company

These aren't exactly archetypes of free market competition, being oligopolies, at best. I can't speak for NJ, but, in California, I consider it telling that they all have a state regulatory agency.

Number portability has improved telephony competition, but I don't think we're yet free of the effects of the old A/B cellular duopoly in the US.

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

#62

Post by jackfoxy »

jonknee wrote: post #53
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…

No need to handle the spam, simply stop subsidizing it with a bulk mail discount. If they continue to send then the financial troubles are solved.

Last I paid attention the USPO claimed the spam was making them money, and I tend to believe it. The "subsidy" is just a price break for large customers, which many businesses do.

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

#63

Post by hnal943 »

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…

The essential service here is mail delivery, not mail delivery "under a dollar."

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

#64

Post by cjoh »

mmt wrote: post #48
sachinag wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is the mandatory requirements for full service in unprofitable areas. The USPS literally has a plane that goes weekly to the most isolated part of Idaho: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/30/us/30idaho.html There's no way a private contractor could/would do that.

I think you're confusing outsourcing with deregulation. A private contractor would happily do that for enough subsidy.

(subsidies without regulation) == Corruption

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

#65

Post by jackowayed »

bhousel wrote: post #59
araneae wrote: post #47

Why Saturday? They should cut out a day in the middle of the week. This way, you'll have to wait up to two days longer for a given item. It's better to distribute that wait time.

This has more to do with staffing and hiring than with getting us our mail in an optimal way. Most people don't like to work on Saturday unless they're getting paid overtime.

Plus businesses would complain that they don't get deliveries and pickups on all of their normal working days.

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

#66

Post by cjoh »

Amazing stats in their footer:

With 36,000 retail locations and the most frequently visited website in the federal government, the Postal Service relies on the sale of postage, products and services to pay for operating expenses. Named the Most Trusted Government Agency five consecutive years and the sixth Most Trusted Business in the nation by the Ponemon Institute, the Postal Service has annual revenue of more than $68 billion and delivers nearly half the world’s mail. If it were a private sector company, the U.S. Postal Service would rank 28th in the 2009 Fortune 500.

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

#67

Post by dabent »

araneae wrote: post #47

Why Saturday? They should cut out a day in the middle of the week. This way, you'll have to wait up to two days longer for a given item. It's better to distribute that wait time.

Most businesses want delivery (and pickup) during working days.

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

#68

Post by anamax »

jonknee wrote: post #53
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…

No need to handle the spam, simply stop subsidizing it with a bulk mail discount. If they continue to send then the financial troubles are solved.

> No need to handle the spam, simply stop subsidizing it with a bulk mail discount.

The USPS claims that bulk mail more than pays its way. In fact, there's a federal law requiring that.

Yes, bulk mail does pay a lower rate. However, it must obey certain constraints which the USPS claims result in significantly lower costs. In other words, bulk mail is supposedly profitable even though they charge less for it.

If you're going to argue that they screwed up the accounting, you should show your work.

Post reply on HN