
Save the USPS - mooreds
https://2pml.com/2020/08/10/usps/
======
rectang
The article admirably covers 10% of why the USPS needs to be saved and
studiously omits the most important 90%. You cannot reasonably talk about the
USPS right now without talking about the implications for the sanctity of the
upcoming election. (Which means we pretty much can't talk about it on HN,
because we'd need to broach the subject of acting in bad faith.)

~~~
geofft
True. You also cannot reasonably talk about saving the USPS without talking
about who it needs saving _from_.

------
zaroth
Amazon builds out its own private delivery network to service their densest
customer areas, while leveraging the USPS — which is legally mandated to
deliver to every US address — to service their rural customers.

This strategy starves USPS of package revenue for profitable routes while
inundating them with packages to unprofitable addresses.

If USPS needs to raise money, they can start by charging Amazon a surcharge to
defend against this type of arbitrage.

~~~
dougweltman
Solution is either to discriminate against individual shippers (can't imagine
how _that_ might be abused!), or to charge based on destination / cost of
route.

The answer is just so elusive!

~~~
aaron_m04
Or we make sure the USPS is funded regardless of profitability.

~~~
dougweltman
or that! the policy for decades. I'm continuing with the thread's premise that
USPS needs to break even at minimum on its activities.

~~~
aaron_m04
That is a silly premise. :)

------
EarthIsHome
I'm all for the USPS. It's my favorite parcel carrier.

Yes, Save The USPS! But how? Voting? Electorialism is too slow to meet urgent
demands. There's nothing I or any of my friends can do to save the USPS.

The article mentions "The USPS’ financial woes have three main causes, one
acute and two chronic." The acute woe is COVID-19.. fine, that was unexpected.
But the other two financial woes are chronic. After decades of both Republican
and Democratic administrations and legislatures, the chronic issues still
exist. So, it seems like we need other solutions to "Save The USPS."

~~~
newacct583
Maybe at least you could vote against the administration trying to
deliberately kneecap it?

~~~
EarthIsHome
Have the opposing candidates even promised to do anything about it?

These are chronic issues that not even an Obama administration along with a
majority in Congress did anything to cure these issues. What makes you think
either party will do anything to prevent its demise?

~~~
dbtc
I think the choice is between one party who is actively seeking the demise and
one party who, probably, at least won't do that...

~~~
ghthor
Its not the good guys vs the bad guys here. Both parties are inundated with
corrupt actors.

------
learc83
My stepdad works at one of the largest USPS sorting facilities.

When he came in to work today 2 multi million dollar sorting machines were
padlocked.

He was told by the facility manager that they are selling them for scrap.

1 of the machines is very new and in the past when they replaced machines they
sold them to postal services in other countries. They’ve never scrapped them.

He is certain removing these machines (they are enormous machines) will
drastically reduce their capacity.

~~~
jollofricepeas
This article makes little sense and so do most of these personal “my dad used
to work for USPS” anecdotes in the thread.

The problems at USPS have little to do with anything mentioned and everything
to do with well established facts:

\- USPS is mandated to prefund employee healthcare and pensions for 75 years
in advance

\- USPS cannot add a fuel surcharge to pricing (as FedEx and UPS can) to
maintain profit levels

\- USPS is required to provide service to people and businesses in remote
areas even when it may be highly unprofitable

\- USPS is governed by Congress and the Postal Rate Commission (PRC), which
restricts potential avenues for expansion into other products and limits
competition with other companies (such as UPS and FedEx). Congress has been
influenced by competitors to get the USPS to abandon new products such as
online payment systems, phone cards, money transfers, postal meter cartridges,
etc

\- USPS is required to invest exclusively in government bonds while private
companies can invest in a wide variety of securities to improve profitability

\- USPS is forbidden by law to lower prices to get more business

The quality of commenting has really fallen at HN. It’s starting to feel like
a raging boomers Facebook wall filled with conjecture, gossip and conspiracy
theories. Let’s stick to the facts please.

SOURCES: [https://cms-colorado.com/its-time-to-allow-the-usps-to-
compe...](https://cms-colorado.com/its-time-to-allow-the-usps-to-compete-
fairly/)

[https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/03/04/how-the-
po...](https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/03/04/how-the-postal-
service-is-being-gutted.aspx)

~~~
foogazi
> Congress has been influenced by competitors to get the USPS to abandon new
> products such as online payment systems,

What does that have to do with the USPS’s mandate to deliver mail?

All of your points are presented as facts. Can you explain how they have
anything to do with the current discussion about keeping the USPS’s capability
to deliver mail and ballots ?

~~~
ardy42
>> Congress has been influenced by competitors to get the USPS to abandon new
products such as online payment systems,

> What does that have to do with the USPS’s mandate to deliver mail?

Postal money orders are _already_ a thing: [https://www.usps.com/shop/money-
orders.htm](https://www.usps.com/shop/money-orders.htm).

------
akamoonknight
I've been hearing a lot about the difficulties that seem to be attacking the
USPS recently and it definitely worries me. I was kinda hoping this article
would have some concrete steps to take on how to actually help the USPS as an
individual. Would the actions potentially be the same as usual with political
things? Call your congressperson and try to make it apparent it's important?

------
SN76477
USA infrastructure has been suffering for the last 20 years.

Now infrastructure has been politicized.

What is next, closing interstates?

~~~
btgeekboy
We're already past that:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Lee_lane_closure_scandal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Lee_lane_closure_scandal)

------
erentz
The quiet part has been said out loud by the president. The motivations have
been made clear here and the speculation about why this is happening should in
theory end there.

> “They need that money in order to have the post office work so it can take
> all of these millions and millions of ballots,” Trump said in an interview
> with Fox Business’s Maria Bartiromo. “If they don’t get those two items,
> that means you can’t have universal mail-in voting because they’re not
> equipped to have it.” [1]

Discussions around USPS funding or better alternatives are well and good, but
from these words of the very top of the executive branch that’s not why USPS
is being sabotaged here, today.

I see an awful lot of motivated reasoning in this discussion. I hope those
people can look at this more critically and save their desire to abolish the
USPS for a more appropriate time, done in a more appropriate manner.

[1] [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/aug/13/donald-
trump...](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/aug/13/donald-trump-usps-
post-office-election-funding)

~~~
ghthor
Perhaps its you who need to save your mail in voting experiment for a more
appropriate time where the public hasn't been fear mongered by the media
during a particularly bad flu season. Let's not be so reactionary.

------
supernova87a
Wow, I don't know if I've ever seen a thread where half the comments are
grayed out.

------
chb
For those wondering why the USPS cannot turn a profit, Jon Oliver does an
excellent job of explaining:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoL8g0W9gAQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoL8g0W9gAQ)

~~~
bobmalone123
Jon Oliver is a very partisan comedian and therefore cannot be trusted. And
when I say ‘him’ I refer to the very politicized team of writers and their
network.

~~~
whatever1
At least he provides the references to the info that he presents. I assume
that you did your research and the vast majority of the information he
presented was verifiably false. Can you please share your findings with us ?

~~~
jovial_cavalier
Watch literally any episode of Jon Oliver on something you've _glanced_ at the
Wikipedia article for, and his partisan bias is grossly apparent.

Guy you're replying to didn't really make an argument, no, but it's worth
ridiculing someone for posting Jon Oliver, because it is a thing to be
ridiculed. That's about as bad a linking to a Bill O'Reilly op-ed as far as
I'm concerned.

~~~
whatever1
Dismissing facts based on the accompanying commentary is fundamentally flawed.
You may not agree on the commentary part of a journalistic piece but you
cannot dismiss their stories a priori. Same applies for Fox News.

~~~
jovial_cavalier
The fact that he chose to share Jon Oliver instead of Jon Oliver's sources
indicates to me that he has not read those sources.

------
mike_h
Amazon needs to pause all USPS usage in the weeks leading up to the election,
and we need to organize to eliminate all but essential load on them ourselves.

------
twblalock
The article appeals to the USPS's historic role connecting rural communities
and employing African Americans at a time when many business would not. Fine.
But we don't live in the past, we live in the present. I don't want to keep
the USPS around because of the social impact it had a century ago.

The article also talks about the USPS's role supporting e-commerce businesses.
I don't buy it. E-commerce businesses use a number of other delivery services,
and I don't buy the idea that they would fold if the USPS went away. The USPS
is just one of many options for them. The majority of the stuff I buy online
is delivered by UPS and FedEx, and Amazon drivers.

There is substantial demand for delivery services, so much so that multiple
for-profit companies including UPS and FedEx are able to survive without
government help. If the USPS is having trouble thriving in that environment,
it must be doing something wrong.

I'd like to see an argument for saving the USPS that does not depend on
nostalgia.

~~~
PragmaticPulp
> Why is it that multiple delivery companies are able to survive on their own
> in the free market, yet the USPS cannot?

USPS operates with many government mandates that don't apply to private
companies.

Some of the financial woes are actually inflicted by the government. For
example, the government mandated that the USPS pre-fund retiree health
benefits well into the future, in a way that no rational private company would
ever consider. This alone has contributed significantly to their cash flow
problems:

They even provide a convenient chart of how their profit/loss looks without
the pre-funding requirement, at least up through 2010:
[https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/annual-
reports/...](https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/annual-
reports/fy2010/ar2010_4_002.htm)

~~~
twblalock
> USPS operates with many government mandates that don't apply to private
> companies.

Then let's remove those mandates before asking the taxpayers to pump more
money into a failing system. The system won't magically fix itself. If we
allow it to continue to demand more and more money, there won't be any
incentive to fix the underlying problems.

We could have a very similar conversation about the pension obligations of
Ford or General Motors, but I doubt people would be as enthusiastic about
bailing them out as they are about the USPS.

------
blhack
Can we please calm some of these wild theories about election sabatoge please?
It seems unbelievably unlikely to me that there is not a more obvious reason
why mail sorting machines are being removed.

Just some thoughts that seem much more realistic than crippling the post
office to steal an election:

1) Bulk pre sort mail is down due to reduced marketing budgets during covid.

2) Paper bill volume is down due to adoption of online payments.

And also: why save the USPS? It’s current form seems completely and totally
broken to me. The VAST majority of what I get is bulk pre sort literal
garbage. We’ve got thousands of trucks driving around every day delivering
trash into peoples homes. Why?

We need a postal system (obviously) but that doesn’t mean that this specific
iteration of the postal system is the right one. We are a bunch of hackers.
How would you improve the postal system if you had the power to do it?

~~~
GaryNumanVevo
A great "hack" to improve the postal system: Fully fund it. It's been death by
a thousand cuts for decades now.

~~~
blhack
What would fully funding it mean to you? Does that mean subsidizing junk mail?

~~~
GaryNumanVevo
The USPS relies on sending junk mail because it's treated like a business and
not a service. We spend billions on investment in infrastructure like roads /
bridges / power, yet those are never treated like a failing business.

The solution is simple, fully fund the USPS then stop relying on marketing
mail income and focus on delivering packages and letters like it's the 21st
century. Have the most cutting edge routing equipment / IT staff for package
tracking ever.

~~~
blhack
Okay! Does that mean that the employees can still negotiate their wages, or
should they go on the GS schedule?

And who determines if it’s junk mail or not?

~~~
GaryNumanVevo
As someone who was on the GS for the better part of a decade, it leaves a lot
to be desired. IFAIK the USPS uses banded GS which allows some wiggle room.
Fully funding would allow the USPS to attract more logistics talent as well.

As far as junk mail, just stop providing marketing mail contracts. Any
sufficiently large mailing campaign needs approval and it’s fairly easy to
create guidelines prohibiting marketing material.

------
2PMinc
Hi all, for what it's worth, I tried to steer clear of politics of this topic
to focus solely on its importance to eCommerce (though they are inextricably
linked).

We will need a robust eCommerce infrastructure in the coming years and that
will require servicing areas in the U.S. that will never be profitable to do
so for a private company.

The topic is politicized quite a bit and I thought that it was important to
explain why it has been over the centuries. That shouldn't deter us from its
importance to our retail infrastructure. The suggestion is that we tolerate
USPS losses so that we can continue to build strong and sustainable commerce
businesses. Amazon doesn't exist without the services that USPS provided the
company in its formative years.

~~~
rectang
The idea that we can have a reasonable debate over such matters right now is
ludicrous.

It is not acceptable to dispense with essential voting infrastructure. Full
stop.

~~~
briandear
Why can’t we vote in person and for the infirm, they can use the existing
absentee process? If a person can take to the streets in protest or shop at a
grocery store, certainly a polling place could be de-risked?

~~~
madhadron
> Why can’t we vote in person

Right now? Pandemic.

In general? Because in-person voting is desirable only if your goal is voter
suppression and people voting party lines only with minimal investigation of
the individuals on the ballot.

------
techer
Are we still worried about hackable voting machines?

------
Overtonwindow
We can save the USPS by deregulating first class mail, let them raise prices
as needed, and negotiate with private shippers. It has been allowed to
basically waste away since the 90s and it would take a massive infusion of
cash, and significant overhaul of its culture, not to mention many years,
before it will be sustainable again.

------
ibn_khaldun
How can I properly get up to speed with the USPS, it's problems and who's
involved with causing them?

~~~
aaronbrethorst
The USPS: [https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/postal-history/pmg-
frankli...](https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/postal-history/pmg-franklin.pdf)

Its problems: [https://ips-dc.org/how-congress-manufactured-a-postal-
crisis...](https://ips-dc.org/how-congress-manufactured-a-postal-crisis-and-
how-to-fix-it/) (when the Republican Party held the White House, Senate, and
House simultaneously)

Who's involved with causing them: [https://www.theguardian.com/us-
news/2020/aug/13/donald-trump...](https://www.theguardian.com/us-
news/2020/aug/13/donald-trump-usps-post-office-election-funding)

~~~
ibn_khaldun
Thank you. Perhaps this will lead me down the trail that explains why the
Postmaster General is apparently the second-highest paid U.S. govt official
after the President.

~~~
MagnumOpus
Hm? Most public college presidents/chancellors are paid better than the
postmaster, let alone all of the NCAA football and basketball coaches...

------
bodhi_mind
Not enjoying these comments. Does this thread really belong on this site?

~~~
bobbean
You could just not read them. Look at the comments, if you find them useless,
just move on instead of talking about whether or not this should be "allowed"
because you don't like what some people are saying.

~~~
bodhi_mind
I like that approach to “not sweat the small stuff”, but if the community
doesn’t speak up about the quality of the discussions, they will inevitably
degrade. I really enjoy the intelligent conversations that this site has but
recently I’ve noticed a lot more confrontation rather than civilized debate.

Anyway, I think this thread was eventually removed from the main feed.

------
andykx
Please excuse my potential ignorance here, as I fear that I may not have a
complete picture of the issue at hand.

Was it not confirmed yesterday that the USPS is being purposefully sabotaged
by the current administration? Or was it facing problems previously, and the
current administration decided to use the existing problems to its benefit? Is
it not well within the federal government's power to simply increase funding,
or does the USPS function like any other business?

I am not trying to spark a political debate here, I am genuinely curious.

~~~
afterburner
Yes. Republicans have long ago turned the USPS into a political football in
the culture wars. And they want to sabotage mail-in votes this time, that's a
new twist.

~~~
chrisco255
That's quite the conspiracy theory. Republicans are generally against mail-in
ballots because they are subject to all sorts of interference. Some elections
come down to a few hundred votes. As for USPS being a political
football...it's a government service.

~~~
salusinarduis
It's not a conspiracy. Fox news has been running content for years
characterizing USPS as a mismanaged business that needs to be privatized.

~~~
chrisco255
Have they? Did one of their contributors have that opinion? Is that a crime?
I'm guessing youve never met a libertarian.

That's a huge stretch from using the USPS to rig an election. Both sides are
accusing the other of trying to take advantage of the sudden surge in interest
in mail-in voting.

edit reply: you can't on the one hand argue that mail is a reliable way to run
an election and on the other argue that a politician is trying to use it for
their advantage. Not giving up, he didn't say he was using it. He said the
Democrats would use it. Either way, these arguments underscore just how
hackable and exploitable mail in voting is.

~~~
CamperBob2
_That 's a huge stretch from using the USPS to rig an election._

He admitted it on TV. Give it up.

------
whateveracct
Every person quoting Trump wanting you hamstring USPS to make it harder to
vote by mail is getting downvoted.

------
nostrebored
Why are we saving the one of the largest distributors of physical waste?

~~~
nostrebored
"The amount of fuel used to transport the catalogs and credit card offers US
citizens don't ask for is gargantuan—in 2010, postal service vehicles used 146
million gasoline gallon equivalents, at a cost of $1 billion.

And the amount of mail sent overall is down from about 212 billion pieces per
year in 2005 to just over 155 billion in 2014. This number is even including
parcels, which have gone up in proportion to paper mail. While the rise of
online shopping has seen the number of delivered packages shoot up, those are
capable of being delivered by UPS or FedEx in significantly populated parts of
the country."

------
booleandilemma
Do we really need a USPS anymore? Or at least, a USPS in its current form?

No more mail carriers, no more paper letters.

Packages handled by the private sector.

And digitized mailboxes for every person.

Something like: john.smith.uniqueid@uspsmailbox.com?

Why aren’t we doing this already? Are any countries doing this?

------
briandear
Not a particular advocate for either side of this, however, I did want to
point out the cool I story of US Mail pilots. A good portion of modern air
navigation comes from that legacy. Elrey Jeppesen was an airmail pilot for
Boeing in the 1930s, and during his routes, he began taking detailed notes and
that later become the business of Jeppesen —- one of the most important
aviation charting companies on the planet. And, coming full-circle, Boeing
bought Jeppesen in the year 2000 and a year or so ago, Jeppesen bought
ForeFlight.

The legacy of the postal service is extraordinary, especially in aviation.
Town names on water towers for example, that was for the mail pilots. Light
beacons (that later became radio beacons,) were also a result of the mail
pilots. Jeppesen (along with Jimmy Doolittle) was a pioneer of Instrument
Flight Rules.

That being said, UPSP filling my mailbox with “to current resident” junk or
pounds of unsolicited newsprint each week isn’t something I am sympathetic
towards. I am ok paying $5 to mail a letter — I do it so infrequently as to
make such an expense trivial. For poor people that still have to do things by
post, it would be easy to provide a postal allowance tied to receipt of other
government benefits (if you get food stamps, you also get actual stamps for
example.) And the package side of USPS — they are profitable. But it doesn’t
make a lot of sense to have 6 day per week letter service. If the argument is
that USPS is subsidizing Amazon, I might argue they are subsidizing all of the
junk mail senders as well. They shouldn’t be subsidizing anyone. The world
isn’t going to stop turning with 5 day a week mail service and three day a
week service to very rural areas. If a letter just has to get there quickly,
normal mail isn’t the optimal way to do it anyway. It wasn’t until 1863 that
mail was delivered daily so there is some historical precedence for less than
daily service.

Reducing service days, charging correct rates that reflect cost, and improving
efficiencies in both labor and processes would make the USPS both solvent
while still being relevant.

------
jovial_cavalier
Unless they offer a better service than private industry, they will be a money
sink. Throwing more money at them doesn't fix that (surprising, I know).
Waxing poetic about "The ground we stand on" and bringing up race for some
confusing reason (???) will do nothing to change that.

~~~
untog
But they do provide a better service than private industry. They deliver to
everyone. In rural areas even UPS and FedEx hand off deliveries to USPS.

Turns out operating in high density areas that turn a good profit _and_ low
density areas that don’t is difficult. It’s why UPS and FedEx don’t do it. But
it’s what USPS was set up to do.

~~~
jovial_cavalier
Why don't they just charge more to deliver to those areas?

If I live on a mountain top why should I expect people to haul shit to me for
free? Why would you expect them to be charged the same as someone who lives on
the corner of Main and State?

~~~
Imnimo
The USPS is not allowed to decide what postal rates are. And the commission
that is allowed to decide is prohibited by Congress from charging different
rates for different destinations.

~~~
jovial_cavalier
Yes, this is why I come to Hacker News. That bastion of independent and unique
thought. To have wikipedia copy-pasted at me.

It is obvious that I am making a prescriptive argument. I am under no
illusions that they are able to enact these policies tomorrow. Their hands are
tied by regulations.

You know what might make those regulations go away? Making them hurt a little
bit. If it becomes clear that USPS cannot exist as an institution in its
current form without being a perpetual sinkhole in which to dump taxpayer
dollars directly, then they will have no choice but to adapt or die.

...Or I guess we could just keep throwing money at them and hope they get
better because they super duper double pinky swear promised this time.

------
jariel
The author does not remotely address why, if USPS is so 'important' \- that
they cannot turn a profit, or break even.

How about we establish regulations, and then privatise USPS and encourage
other vendors?

If states made minimal requirements for coverage (i.e. if you deliver in
Chicago, you have to deliver everywhere in Illinois) and other types of regs,
there no real reason that Verizon can be private but USPS cannot be.

~~~
afterburner
Do roads turn a profit? They're pretty important.

What about the military?

~~~
jariel
Because both roads and the military are unsuitable for privatisation.

Roads represent a key problem with access, and of course, he military requires
a level of commitment and responsibility far beyond what would be appropriate
in the private market.

Mail delivery does not have such structural limitations as you can see
literally from the existence of UPS and Fedex.

The question remains:

1) Why is USPS consistently bankrupt? 2) If we didn't have the USPS today,
would the government create one?

~~~
afterburner
> Why is USPS consistently bankrupt

Republican many years ago passed a law that forced the USPS to allocate budget
for many many decades of pension payments in advance, something no one else is
forced to do. It was a deliberate act of sabotage by Republicans in the Bush
years.

~~~
sukilot
Republicans and Democrats passed that law unanimously

