chandab
Well-Known Member
Me, too. I know plenty of people that don't have a computer, don't have a credit card, don't want to give out personal financial information over the phone.
Does anyone really feel sorry for the US Postal service?"
- Thread starter weebiscuit
- Start date
Help Support Miniature Horse Talk Forums:
Riverrose28
Well-Known Member
There is no way the postal service can be dissolved, yes it can be scaled back, even stop delivering on Sat., but this service is needed. I know many who don't even own a computer, or even know how to use one. I don't pay bills online, I feel it's not safe, I use the postal service. We don't get high speed down here, wnen though we have satilite, we have no high speed, only dial up. sometimes it takes forever just to get to LB, and then can't view vedios. My youngest daughter pays her bills on line, great for her, but not us. No, I don't feel sorry for them, and think an over haul is justified. But no civilized Nation can do without a Postal Service. To those of you that say oh well it will cost us in the boonies more to mail if the system is priviatized, well can you loan me the money? We are all tapped out here.
Nathan Luszcz
Well-Known Member
ditto
Jill
Aspiring Cowgirl
Sooo... if there were no USPS because they can't do the job well and cannot run in the black, there's nothing out there in the private sector that would come together and fill that void? Oh-okay...
Seashells
Well-Known Member
Husband states: "No tax money at all goes into the postal service, and if they go private, you watch out what for what they will charge...Postal service does not profit off their service, it's designed to keep the service going for the people, not for profit."
Last edited by a moderator:
Minimor
Well-Known Member
Jill, you're missing the point.
We're not saying a private entity cannot/will not take over if USPS folds. We're simply pointing out that it will be a bad thing if some remote areas are going to get charged more or dropped completely because there is no profit in delivering to those areas...even in private enterprise there is no reason why the postal service should not deliver to everyone, all at the same postage cost...charge 60 cents for a stamp regardless if you live in New York City or on some remote ranch in the southwest, 20 miles off the beaten track. If the business has a profit overall, what difference does it make if NYC is subsidizing that remote ranch?
As you said, "Every place a person can decide to live has plus and minus issues to factor in..." so if you don't like paying 60 cents per stamp in the city, move to some out of the way place where you will be paying 60 cents per stamp and getting a real deal!
Canada Post, for instance, had a profit in both 2009 and 2010 (though a somewhat smaller profit in 2010) and they deliver even to Nunavut, which is about as out of the way as you can get. A package mailed between Nunavut and Brandon will take more postage than the same parcel mailed from Brandon to Winnipeg, just as it costs more to mail a package from Brandon to Toronto than the same package mailed from Brandon to Winnipeg...but ordinary postage is the same to all locations. I use the same stamp whether my letter is going to Carberry (15 miles from me) or to Nunavut. Am I upset over the fact that I pay the same postage to mail a bill payment to a local location as someone in Nunavut pays to mail a letter to wherever? No. I wouldn't have thought anyone would care about that but maybe there are a few who believe Nunavut should pay $100 to pay letter postage to/from Nunavut?
Even some stores subsidize some products. I was chatting with a pet food store owner one day and he mentioned one specific product that is so costly if he charged enough to make a profit on it no one would buy it--so he sells it at cost. By selling it at cost people come into the store to buy it and while they are there they buy other products as well--and so overall he makes money on those people, even though he is not making money on that one particular item. Sometimes, even in private enterprise, one thing subsidizes another.
We're not saying a private entity cannot/will not take over if USPS folds. We're simply pointing out that it will be a bad thing if some remote areas are going to get charged more or dropped completely because there is no profit in delivering to those areas...even in private enterprise there is no reason why the postal service should not deliver to everyone, all at the same postage cost...charge 60 cents for a stamp regardless if you live in New York City or on some remote ranch in the southwest, 20 miles off the beaten track. If the business has a profit overall, what difference does it make if NYC is subsidizing that remote ranch?
As you said, "Every place a person can decide to live has plus and minus issues to factor in..." so if you don't like paying 60 cents per stamp in the city, move to some out of the way place where you will be paying 60 cents per stamp and getting a real deal!
Canada Post, for instance, had a profit in both 2009 and 2010 (though a somewhat smaller profit in 2010) and they deliver even to Nunavut, which is about as out of the way as you can get. A package mailed between Nunavut and Brandon will take more postage than the same parcel mailed from Brandon to Winnipeg, just as it costs more to mail a package from Brandon to Toronto than the same package mailed from Brandon to Winnipeg...but ordinary postage is the same to all locations. I use the same stamp whether my letter is going to Carberry (15 miles from me) or to Nunavut. Am I upset over the fact that I pay the same postage to mail a bill payment to a local location as someone in Nunavut pays to mail a letter to wherever? No. I wouldn't have thought anyone would care about that but maybe there are a few who believe Nunavut should pay $100 to pay letter postage to/from Nunavut?
Even some stores subsidize some products. I was chatting with a pet food store owner one day and he mentioned one specific product that is so costly if he charged enough to make a profit on it no one would buy it--so he sells it at cost. By selling it at cost people come into the store to buy it and while they are there they buy other products as well--and so overall he makes money on those people, even though he is not making money on that one particular item. Sometimes, even in private enterprise, one thing subsidizes another.
Jill
Aspiring Cowgirl
I'm missing no point. If it goes private snd costs a little more for remote areas, but stops bleeding money and runs better -- sounds great to me. We surely may not agree but that doesn't mean that I don't understand a set of circumstances
. ...
vickie gee
Well-Known Member
I do not know if I really feel sorry for them but in their defense I say that at least they work for a living instead of voting for a living.
I do not feel that they are overpaid either. Like all government jobs you enter into a specific entry pay and over 25 years are so with step raises and hopefully promotions and cost of living raises(this year an exception thanks to obama...guess he has not actually paid for any groceries or gas lately). Postal workers are at least in the segment of government workers who are all working. They are standing, lifting, driving, handling money and putting up with the public. Maybe some are more patient, kind, and friendly at the post office than others but that is the way it is no matter if you are dealing with a waitress, sales clerk, or any person who works with the public.
I work for the government and readily admit that a large majority of the co-workers there are lazy and have no intention of doing anything other than show up and get paid to have a social life. Some will never hit a lick and if they do will mess up and cause more work. Postal workers are working.
With so many of us using the internet the amount of service we need has certainly declined. I still appreciate the postal workers. What really perplexes me is that over the last 10-12 years the number of new rural post offices that were built. They are really nice. Guess folks in DC were not aware that the internet was out there and starting to do the work of the mail service. Heck, maybe Al Gore had already invented the internet but had not notified those in charge of designing and building new government buildings. Guess we will have to close them to "make" more stimulus money.
I do not feel that they are overpaid either. Like all government jobs you enter into a specific entry pay and over 25 years are so with step raises and hopefully promotions and cost of living raises(this year an exception thanks to obama...guess he has not actually paid for any groceries or gas lately). Postal workers are at least in the segment of government workers who are all working. They are standing, lifting, driving, handling money and putting up with the public. Maybe some are more patient, kind, and friendly at the post office than others but that is the way it is no matter if you are dealing with a waitress, sales clerk, or any person who works with the public.
I work for the government and readily admit that a large majority of the co-workers there are lazy and have no intention of doing anything other than show up and get paid to have a social life. Some will never hit a lick and if they do will mess up and cause more work. Postal workers are working.
With so many of us using the internet the amount of service we need has certainly declined. I still appreciate the postal workers. What really perplexes me is that over the last 10-12 years the number of new rural post offices that were built. They are really nice. Guess folks in DC were not aware that the internet was out there and starting to do the work of the mail service. Heck, maybe Al Gore had already invented the internet but had not notified those in charge of designing and building new government buildings. Guess we will have to close them to "make" more stimulus money.
My husband was a longtime employee of the now-oft-maligned BLM. He was ranch-raised to have a genuine work ethic, which he applied to ALL the work he ever did(in the Navy, as a Western Electric employee on far-off Kwadiejulin(sp?)Island after the Korean War, and in his years as a Range Specialist w/ BLM); he WAS a genuinely-WORKING employee, although I would readily agree that in MANY jobs today, there don't seem to be much by way of 'performance criteria', and in my observation, there are an increasing number of 'employees' at every level of both gov't and business who aren't earning their pay! As a Federal employee, he was eligible for the FEHBP. The USPS may not 'officially' be a US gov't. 'agency', but its employees, thanks I suppose to their unions, enjoy by FAR the best 'deal'of all the FEHBP benefits; they pay about one-third of what the rest of us pay for 'their portion' of their health insurance premiums. It is overly-generous 'deals' like this that are helping take down the USPS, along with the several other serious issues mentioned. JMHO, of course.
Margo
Margo
Bess Kelly
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2003
- Messages
- 2,298
- Reaction score
- 34
IMO, Sat delivery could be stopped, the door to door could become a bulk delivery station (as most newer apartment/townhouse/single homes areas) now have with a keyed box. Many rurals could be assigned boxes in nearest town and have a "group" of locked boxes, etc. That could save $$ by reducing # of employees, post office buildings, etc. If you want your mail you can still get it. Junk mail needs to stop and by upping the cost to the sender, it would. Give me a lower store price instead of an ad.
Personally, I could get by with 2 stamps a year and have one left over! (maybe 2
) I do use the net and I do have rural postal delivery. I would be happy to check mail at the local building! In most cases once a week would be sufficient. There are still some requirements that "some" things are delivered to you. A private service could do that as well as USPS, maybe a little more cost but, still could do. Wouldn't affect me if they closed & let private take over.
Personally, I could get by with 2 stamps a year and have one left over! (maybe 2
Jill
Aspiring Cowgirl
I came across these this morning and wanted to share them on this thread.
Riverrose28
Well-Known Member
It's the last line that gets me, "Wouldn't affect me if they closed & let private take over."IMO, Sat delivery could be stopped, the door to door could become a bulk delivery station (as most newer apartment/townhouse/single homes areas) now have with a keyed box. Many rurals could be assigned boxes in nearest town and have a "group" of locked boxes, etc. That could save $$ by reducing # of employees, post office buildings, etc. If you want your mail you can still get it. Junk mail needs to stop and by upping the cost to the sender, it would. Give me a lower store price instead of an ad.
Personally, I could get by with 2 stamps a year and have one left over! (maybe 2) I do use the net and I do have rural postal delivery. I would be happy to check mail at the local building! In most cases once a week would be sufficient. There are still some requirements that "some" things are delivered to you. A private service could do that as well as USPS, maybe a little more cost but, still could do. Wouldn't affect me if they closed & let private take over.
That's the problem, it may not affect me either, but what abought the ones it may affect?
What about the cost? What about the elderly that can't drive? I'm sorry but every time a company goes private cost increases. JMO!
Last edited by a moderator:
Jill
Aspiring Cowgirl
That's such a classic socialistic point of view. It is not the place of the US Government to level every private / personal playing field. The USPS is a quasi government agency that has strongly demonstrated its inability to stop bleeding money. The government can't prop up, fund or give any money to something or someone it doesn't first take from another. I think it's time to see the free market, efficient and viable solution to this hungry dinosaur.
Last edited by a moderator:
susanne
dB
If the US Postal System is to continue, the logical answer is for it to once again become self-sustaining. They could do a few things that would make an enormous difference:
Cutting Saturday service and perhaps cutting out another day or two could make a huge difference. Once everyone gets used to it, it would hardly be noticed. They used to deliver mail several times EACH day, but people adapted when that went bye-bye.
Cut way back on urban delivery. Most city residents live within blocks of a post office. They could cut home delivery for able-bodied people living near a post office. (Heaven forbid, city people might start walking!) Save home delivery for the elderly, infirm, and rural customers.
~or~
Simplify urban routes.
A huge amount of time is wasted walking up to each and every house. If every city house and apartment/condo complex had a curbside mailbox (locking, if you prefer), a great deal of time and expense would be saved. There would be fewer dog issues, too.
Good employees should always be rewarded, but pay increases should be based at least in part on merit, not just on number of years worked. Bonuses should be given to those who come up with cost-saving measures. Too many people in such systems (public and private) are afraid to rock the boat or make others look bad.
Cutting out bulk mail will hurt, not help matters, as it brings a fair amount of money in. Too bad the Post Office didn't recognize the value of email and, at the very least, incorporate it into their bulk mail system. Oh well, that ship has sailed!
Cutting Saturday service and perhaps cutting out another day or two could make a huge difference. Once everyone gets used to it, it would hardly be noticed. They used to deliver mail several times EACH day, but people adapted when that went bye-bye.
Cut way back on urban delivery. Most city residents live within blocks of a post office. They could cut home delivery for able-bodied people living near a post office. (Heaven forbid, city people might start walking!) Save home delivery for the elderly, infirm, and rural customers.
~or~
Simplify urban routes.
A huge amount of time is wasted walking up to each and every house. If every city house and apartment/condo complex had a curbside mailbox (locking, if you prefer), a great deal of time and expense would be saved. There would be fewer dog issues, too.
Good employees should always be rewarded, but pay increases should be based at least in part on merit, not just on number of years worked. Bonuses should be given to those who come up with cost-saving measures. Too many people in such systems (public and private) are afraid to rock the boat or make others look bad.
Cutting out bulk mail will hurt, not help matters, as it brings a fair amount of money in. Too bad the Post Office didn't recognize the value of email and, at the very least, incorporate it into their bulk mail system. Oh well, that ship has sailed!
Last edited by a moderator:
Nathan Luszcz
Well-Known Member
The post office has no control over its own policies. Any change requires Congressional approval.
Jill
Aspiring Cowgirl
And that contrasts / conflicts with what I said how?
Riverrose28
Well-Known Member
I heard on the news last night that they are considering closing some sorting/distribution centers, laying off 35,000 employees and reducing delivery to three days a week. I don't know if that will help get them back to being self-suffient, but it's better then doing nothing at all. It's a shame about laying off workers so hopefully they will at least get rid of some of the non-productive ones. The news also interviewed a business owner in D.C that stated that Fed-EX and UPS don't deliver his merchandise to some overseas locations, and he needs the USPS to deliver.
Jill
Aspiring Cowgirl
Trust me, if there's business or private need that is unmet due to a line of service being discontinued by the USPS, the private sector WILL step up to the plate. That's how it works. The free market and capitalism are what make the world go around. And for anyone who thinks "capitalism" is a dirty word -- if you own anything or aspire to, it's capitalism that makes it possible
Last edited by a moderator:
