Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Rain? Snow? Try $5.5b in debt [US POSTAL SERVICE]

135678

Posts

  • WotanAnubisWotanAnubis Registered User regular
    psyck0 wrote:
    I think you guys should try to fix it. Canada post runs a profit and provides a similarly valuable service with a much lower population density to serve, which raises costs, so you should be able to make it work.

    I think the problem here is that the GOP doesn't want to make it work because that would be like admitting that there are some things government institutions actually can do better than corporations.

  • emp123emp123 Registered User regular
    psyck0 wrote:
    I think you guys should try to fix it. Canada post runs a profit and provides a similarly valuable service with a much lower population density to serve, which raises costs, so you should be able to make it work.

    Why did you say that, now we'll never fix it.

    camo_sig2.png
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic I've Done Worse Registered User regular
    psyck0 wrote:
    I think you guys should try to fix it. Canada post runs a profit and provides a similarly valuable service with a much lower population density to serve, which raises costs, so you should be able to make it work.

    Eh. Right now the Post Office's problems are chiefly of it being run in some ways like a government office (mandated routes, restrictions on pricing) while it is supposedly a private enterprise. If it were either one or the other it would be much better off.

    "When you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. When you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole."

    Borderlands 2 PA Xbox Metatag - Bazillion Guns
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    psyck0 wrote:
    I think you guys should try to fix it. Canada post runs a profit and provides a similarly valuable service with a much lower population density to serve, which raises costs, so you should be able to make it work.

    Everything would be apples if we had commie health care like you, comrade. The Post Office has to set aside enough money to cover their employees grandchildren's healthcare needs in what appears to be an attempt to destroy them by George W Bush
    A small part of me wants to see the Post Office close just for the massive havoc it would cause with contracts and laws that require notice be given in so many days by federal mail. The epic shit storm of litigation that would follow that would be something to see.

    It certainly would be hard for the Republicans to spin the shit storm in their favor, but being with the good guys means that only the lesser part of us actually wants to see it happen.

    override367 on
  • rockrngerrockrnger Registered User regular
    rockrnger wrote:
    Suriko wrote:
    Mail delivery isn't a vital program?

    To the middle of nowhere so some hermit doesn't have to deal with people. Not really.

    This is apparently news to you, or you are just ignoring it, but there are people who live in rural areas for reasons other than "not having to deal with people." Farming, AKA growing the food you eat, is one of those reasons.

    For free right? Out of the kindness of their heart? Why should farmers get more than anyone else who does a job.

    But I was more talking about Alaska where I don't think farmers are very thick on the ground.

  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    rockrnger wrote:
    rockrnger wrote:
    Suriko wrote:
    Mail delivery isn't a vital program?

    To the middle of nowhere so some hermit doesn't have to deal with people. Not really.

    This is apparently news to you, or you are just ignoring it, but there are people who live in rural areas for reasons other than "not having to deal with people." Farming, AKA growing the food you eat, is one of those reasons.

    For free right? Out of the kindness of their heart? Why should farmers get more than anyone else who does a job.

    But I was more talking about Alaska where I don't think farmers are very thick on the ground.

    Mining, fishing, oil, tourism. Not just farming, broski.

  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    Actually, no, I'm not getting into that argument, because it doesn't fucking matter. Regardless of why they live wherever they choose to live, universal postal service is something that we as a wealthy developed nation can absolutely provide. What, $5.5B? Even assuming it wasn't because of stupid pension-overfunding shenanigans, the Pentagon spends more than that on toilet paper. Per day. Who cares? We can absolutely afford to subsidize the post office if need be, because we are the United States of fucking America, not Uganda, and we can afford to deliver the mail. Even to hermits.

  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    And remember that both FedEx and UPS use the USPS for last mile service when it's cheaper to outsource it to them.

    Well, FedEx handles all their air freight, so I'll call that a net wash, which is probably being generous.

    1320673-1.png
    sig.png
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic I've Done Worse Registered User regular
    That is a line of attack that somebody really needs to start hammering people over the head with:

    "When did America become the guy who runs out on his tab?"

    It's just ridiculous and it is going to so get worse when all the Boomers are retired.

    "When you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. When you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole."

    Borderlands 2 PA Xbox Metatag - Bazillion Guns
  • Boring7Boring7 Registered User regular
    mcdermott wrote:
    rockrnger wrote:
    rockrnger wrote:
    Suriko wrote:
    Mail delivery isn't a vital program?

    To the middle of nowhere so some hermit doesn't have to deal with people. Not really.

    This is apparently news to you, or you are just ignoring it, but there are people who live in rural areas for reasons other than "not having to deal with people." Farming, AKA growing the food you eat, is one of those reasons.

    For free right? Out of the kindness of their heart? Why should farmers get more than anyone else who does a job.

    But I was more talking about Alaska where I don't think farmers are very thick on the ground.

    Mining, fishing, oil, tourism. Not just farming, broski.

    That little shack in the middle of nowhere keeping an eye on the pipeline so you can heat your home in winter.

    Thanatos wrote: »
    Goldman Sachs may as well be named COBRA.
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    Actually, my mom lived in a little shack in the middle of nowhere so she could run the general store you go to when you stay on that end of Yellowstone Park.

    But fuck Yellowstone Park, m i rite?

    Everybody should just live in an apartment in the Bronx.

    EDIT: And this still doesn't answer the question of when we became such a sad, pathetic little nation that we decided that universal postal service was a luxury we could no longer afford.

    mcdermott on
  • TheBlackWindTheBlackWind Registered User regular
    That is a line of attack that somebody really needs to start hammering people over the head with:

    "When did America become the guy who runs out on his tab?"

    It's just ridiculous and it is going to so get worse when all the Boomers are retired.

    Worked for the UN.

    Pokemon Black FC: 0518-7386-3511
    Pokemon Black 2: 0519-5108-3139
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    mcdermott wrote:
    Actually, my mom lived in a little shack in the middle of nowhere so she could run the general store you go to when you stay on that end of Yellowstone Park.

    But fuck Yellowstone Park, m i rite?

    Everybody should just live in an apartment in the Bronx.

    EDIT: And this still doesn't answer the question of when we became such a sad, pathetic little nation that we decided that universal postal service was a luxury we could no longer afford.

    1982

    moniker on
    tea-1.jpg
  • rockrngerrockrnger Registered User regular
    mcdermott wrote:
    Actually, my mom lived in a little shack in the middle of nowhere so she could run the general store you go to when you stay on that end of Yellowstone Park.

    But fuck Yellowstone Park, m i rite?

    Everybody should just live in an apartment in the Bronx.

    EDIT: And this still doesn't answer the question of when we became such a sad, pathetic little nation that we decided that universal postal service was a luxury we could no longer afford.

    It's not about what they are doing out there. If it's worth it someone is just going to have to pick up the extra cost.

    What gets me, and I am not just talking mail here, is that the government is is spending resources to make it cheaper to live in places where people don't need to live.

  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    rockrnger wrote:
    mcdermott wrote:
    Actually, my mom lived in a little shack in the middle of nowhere so she could run the general store you go to when you stay on that end of Yellowstone Park.

    But fuck Yellowstone Park, m i rite?

    Everybody should just live in an apartment in the Bronx.

    EDIT: And this still doesn't answer the question of when we became such a sad, pathetic little nation that we decided that universal postal service was a luxury we could no longer afford.

    It's not about what they are doing out there. If it's worth it someone is just going to have to pick up the extra cost.

    What gets me, and I am not just talking mail here, is that the government is is spending resources to make it cheaper to live in places where people don't need to live.

    Yes, because the reason people move out into the boonies is because they can get mail. Sure. That's a deciding factor.

    This isn't about them. Those idiotic yokels who refuse to live in SoDo. It's about us. Do we, as a nation, have the resources to provide universal mail service? Yes, yes we do. It's not even a significant expenditure. As we've shown, it would largely be an issue of not forcing them to overfund pension savings. But even aside from that, the total required to make their ends meet isn't even a rounding error in our federal budget.

    The postal service should not be used to encourage people to move into cities. That's retarded.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    rockrnger wrote:
    mcdermott wrote:
    Actually, my mom lived in a little shack in the middle of nowhere so she could run the general store you go to when you stay on that end of Yellowstone Park.

    But fuck Yellowstone Park, m i rite?

    Everybody should just live in an apartment in the Bronx.

    EDIT: And this still doesn't answer the question of when we became such a sad, pathetic little nation that we decided that universal postal service was a luxury we could no longer afford.

    It's not about what they are doing out there. If it's worth it someone is just going to have to pick up the extra cost.

    What gets me, and I am not just talking mail here, is that the government is is spending resources to make it cheaper to live in places where people don't need to live.

    This is true and a form of needless government waste when it comes to things like, say, agricultural subsidies. It is not true when it comes to things like ensuring a minimum standard of living and access to economic opportunities for citizens. Universal postal service (as well as stuff like RUS) fall into the latter category.

    tea-1.jpg
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    Like, if we were talking about gas taxes or something maybe there'd be an argument here. Though I'd still not agree with you. But it's the fucking postal service. It's something a civilized nation provides, even if it costs a little bit, even if you choose not to live in Riverside.

    EDIT: Yeah, moniker puts it better than I do. Argue with him instead.

    mcdermott on
  • Boring7Boring7 Registered User regular
    mcdermott wrote:
    rockrnger wrote:
    mcdermott wrote:
    Actually, my mom lived in a little shack in the middle of nowhere so she could run the general store you go to when you stay on that end of Yellowstone Park.

    But fuck Yellowstone Park, m i rite?

    Everybody should just live in an apartment in the Bronx.

    EDIT: And this still doesn't answer the question of when we became such a sad, pathetic little nation that we decided that universal postal service was a luxury we could no longer afford.

    It's not about what they are doing out there. If it's worth it someone is just going to have to pick up the extra cost.

    What gets me, and I am not just talking mail here, is that the government is is spending resources to make it cheaper to live in places where people don't need to live.

    Yes, because the reason people move out into the boonies is because they can get mail. Sure. That's a deciding factor.

    This isn't about them. Those idiotic yokels who refuse to live in SoDo. It's about us. Do we, as a nation, have the resources to provide universal mail service? Yes, yes we do. It's not even a significant expenditure. As we've shown, it would largely be an issue of not forcing them to overfund pension savings. But even aside from that, the total required to make their ends meet isn't even a rounding error in our federal budget.

    The postal service should not be used to encourage people to move into cities. That's retarded.

    The USPS is being sabotaged by lawmakers so that they can get rid of it and watch UPS and Fedex stock rise. It really is like there's an illuminati conspiracy trying to turn the United States into a kleptocratic neofeudalist dystopia.

    Thanatos wrote: »
    Goldman Sachs may as well be named COBRA.
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    I'm not going to say 'constantly amazed' because my cynicism has grown a bit over the last decade, but it is still fairly surprising how far the social contract has broken down among some of the foundational aspects of civilization that wouldn't have even been thought of as questionable government services a generation ago. This seems a perennial disappointment when it comes to infrastructure spending/the 'highway' bill, but that sadness is spreading farther and wider than I would have dared guess. Things are becoming ideological/partisan when they have no actual reason to do so.

    tea-1.jpg
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    Boring7 wrote:
    mcdermott wrote:
    rockrnger wrote:
    mcdermott wrote:
    Actually, my mom lived in a little shack in the middle of nowhere so she could run the general store you go to when you stay on that end of Yellowstone Park.

    But fuck Yellowstone Park, m i rite?

    Everybody should just live in an apartment in the Bronx.

    EDIT: And this still doesn't answer the question of when we became such a sad, pathetic little nation that we decided that universal postal service was a luxury we could no longer afford.

    It's not about what they are doing out there. If it's worth it someone is just going to have to pick up the extra cost.

    What gets me, and I am not just talking mail here, is that the government is is spending resources to make it cheaper to live in places where people don't need to live.

    Yes, because the reason people move out into the boonies is because they can get mail. Sure. That's a deciding factor.

    This isn't about them. Those idiotic yokels who refuse to live in SoDo. It's about us. Do we, as a nation, have the resources to provide universal mail service? Yes, yes we do. It's not even a significant expenditure. As we've shown, it would largely be an issue of not forcing them to overfund pension savings. But even aside from that, the total required to make their ends meet isn't even a rounding error in our federal budget.

    The postal service should not be used to encourage people to move into cities. That's retarded.

    The USPS is being sabotaged by lawmakers so that they can get rid of it and watch UPS and Fedex stock rise. It really is like there's an illuminati conspiracy trying to turn the United States into a kleptocratic neofeudalist dystopia.


    I think you're giving the current batch of lawmakers too much credit.

    There's an election next year and people blame the president for things going pear shaped. That's the only reason.

    override367 on
  • TheNomadicCircleTheNomadicCircle Registered User regular
    rockrnger wrote:
    mcdermott wrote:
    Actually, my mom lived in a little shack in the middle of nowhere so she could run the general store you go to when you stay on that end of Yellowstone Park.

    But fuck Yellowstone Park, m i rite?

    Everybody should just live in an apartment in the Bronx.

    EDIT: And this still doesn't answer the question of when we became such a sad, pathetic little nation that we decided that universal postal service was a luxury we could no longer afford.

    It's not about what they are doing out there. If it's worth it someone is just going to have to pick up the extra cost.

    What gets me, and I am not just talking mail here, is that the government is is spending resources to make it cheaper to live in places where people don't need to live.

    You sure have the worst ideas. People live where they want to live and they deserve all government insititutions that are avaliable to them.

  • tyrannustyrannus Registered User regular
    like, if you looked at my posts earlier in the thread there's a line for appropriations on the financial statements. that's so tiny. i'm sure they could get some relief.

    tyrannus on
  • MuddBuddMuddBudd Registered User regular
    I just thought of something.

    Do vote-by-mail ballots tend to skew Democrat, by any chance?

    r2lsig.jpg
  • SyrdonSyrdon Registered User regular
    rockrnger wrote:
    What gets me, and I am not just talking mail here, is that the government is is spending resources to make it cheaper to live in places where people don't need to live.
    You can't have national parks in the middle of a city. You can't get people into those parks unless there's somewhere for them to stay. There can't be somewhere for them to stay unless someone decides to live in the middle of nowhere next to the national park and set up a hotel. If they can't mail contracts, they're not going to live there. 5.5 billion a year is cheap to make sure we can have a national park system. Alternately, I really like corn. No farms means no corn, no farmers means no farms, no mail means that there can't reasonably be farmers, which means I don't get corn. We appear to spend more than 5.5 billion a year on corn subsidies already (nearly 20 billion on crops in general).

    If you want to stop the government from spending resources to make it possible to do things that otherwise would be silly, the USPS is the wrong place to start. You get minimal return for a lot of work. Start with the agricultural subsidies. Or with projects for various vehicles being spread across a huge number of congressional districts even though it massively increases the cost of the project. Or with switching to single payer health care. Or any number of other things that have returns several orders of magnitude higher for reducing silly government spending than this will.

    edit: I'd expect vote by mail tends to be predominantly military and rural, which I don't think are typically democratic territory (although, if you wanted to argue that military members will tend to be younger and lower class and therefore democratic I could be convinced).

    Syrdon on
  • ronzoronzo Registered User regular
    Doesn't the entire state of Oregon vote by mail?

    USPS folding would probably make that difficult

  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic I've Done Worse Registered User regular
    ronzo wrote:
    Doesn't the entire state of Oregon vote by mail?

    USPS folding would probably make that difficult

    This is such the tip of the iceberg about what would happen if the US post went down. There are so so so so so so so so many things that are contractually or legally bound to be done by USPS......

    "When you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. When you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole."

    Borderlands 2 PA Xbox Metatag - Bazillion Guns
  • emp123emp123 Registered User regular
    Syrdon wrote:
    edit: I'd expect vote by mail tends to be predominantly military and rural, which I don't think are typically democratic territory (although, if you wanted to argue that military members will tend to be younger and lower class and therefore democratic I could be convinced).

    The military, and most military towns, are pretty red. The myth that the republicans are good for defense is strong.

    camo_sig2.png
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Registered User regular
    Of course, officers and enlisted men are two very different stories on that, or so I've heard.

    Spoiler:
  • emp123emp123 Registered User regular
    Quite possible, but in my limited experience growing up in a huge military city its basically red all over.

    camo_sig2.png
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    Yeah officers and ROTC culture tend to be more purple than the rank and file, mostly because of the generic college educated vs not college educated red/blue dichotomy

  • rockrngerrockrnger Registered User regular
    moniker wrote:
    rockrnger wrote:
    mcdermott wrote:
    Actually, my mom lived in a little shack in the middle of nowhere so she could run the general store you go to when you stay on that end of Yellowstone Park.

    But fuck Yellowstone Park, m i rite?

    Everybody should just live in an apartment in the Bronx.

    EDIT: And this still doesn't answer the question of when we became such a sad, pathetic little nation that we decided that universal postal service was a luxury we could no longer afford.

    It's not about what they are doing out there. If it's worth it someone is just going to have to pick up the extra cost.

    What gets me, and I am not just talking mail here, is that the government is is spending resources to make it cheaper to live in places where people don't need to live.

    This is true and a form of needless government waste when it comes to things like, say, agricultural subsidies. It is not true when it comes to things like ensuring a minimum standard of living and access to economic opportunities for citizens. Universal postal service (as well as stuff like RUS) fall into the latter category.

    My problem is less government waste and more waste for society. When the government steps in and makes it cheaper and easier to live in rural places it screws with the market for living and working in those places.



    rockrnger on
  • SyrdonSyrdon Registered User regular
    rockrnger wrote:
    My problem is less government waste and more waste for society. When the government steps in and makes it cheaper and easier to live in rural places it screws with the market for living and working in those places.
    The point is that there is social value in having people living in those places even though it is otherwise a completely unworkable proposition. One of the functions of government is step in when a market solution results in a negative effect on society. The USPS serving rural areas is exactly that.

  • dojangodojango Registered User
    rockrnger wrote:
    moniker wrote:
    rockrnger wrote:
    mcdermott wrote:
    Actually, my mom lived in a little shack in the middle of nowhere so she could run the general store you go to when you stay on that end of Yellowstone Park.

    But fuck Yellowstone Park, m i rite?

    Everybody should just live in an apartment in the Bronx.

    EDIT: And this still doesn't answer the question of when we became such a sad, pathetic little nation that we decided that universal postal service was a luxury we could no longer afford.

    It's not about what they are doing out there. If it's worth it someone is just going to have to pick up the extra cost.

    What gets me, and I am not just talking mail here, is that the government is is spending resources to make it cheaper to live in places where people don't need to live.

    This is true and a form of needless government waste when it comes to things like, say, agricultural subsidies. It is not true when it comes to things like ensuring a minimum standard of living and access to economic opportunities for citizens. Universal postal service (as well as stuff like RUS) fall into the latter category.

    My problem is less government waste and more waste for society. When the government steps in and makes it cheaper and easier to live in rural places it screws with the market for living and working in those places.



    And when the government steps in and makes it cheaper and easier to live in urban areas, it screws with the market for living and working in those places? The cities wouldn't be so successful with out our sweet interstate highway system, our subsidized big water projects, our harbors and ports maintained and dredged by (whoever does that, the army corps of engineers, maybe? I don't really know).

    Making it cheaper and easier to live places is kind of the reason d' etra of government in the first place.

  • shrykeshryke Registered User regular
    dojango wrote:
    rockrnger wrote:
    moniker wrote:
    rockrnger wrote:
    mcdermott wrote:
    Actually, my mom lived in a little shack in the middle of nowhere so she could run the general store you go to when you stay on that end of Yellowstone Park.

    But fuck Yellowstone Park, m i rite?

    Everybody should just live in an apartment in the Bronx.

    EDIT: And this still doesn't answer the question of when we became such a sad, pathetic little nation that we decided that universal postal service was a luxury we could no longer afford.

    It's not about what they are doing out there. If it's worth it someone is just going to have to pick up the extra cost.

    What gets me, and I am not just talking mail here, is that the government is is spending resources to make it cheaper to live in places where people don't need to live.

    This is true and a form of needless government waste when it comes to things like, say, agricultural subsidies. It is not true when it comes to things like ensuring a minimum standard of living and access to economic opportunities for citizens. Universal postal service (as well as stuff like RUS) fall into the latter category.

    My problem is less government waste and more waste for society. When the government steps in and makes it cheaper and easier to live in rural places it screws with the market for living and working in those places.

    And when the government steps in and makes it cheaper and easier to live in urban areas, it screws with the market for living and working in those places? The cities wouldn't be so successful with out our sweet interstate highway system, our subsidized big water projects, our harbors and ports maintained and dredged by (whoever does that, the army corps of engineers, maybe? I don't really know).

    Making it cheaper and easier to live places is kind of the reason d' etra of government in the first place.

    The government doesn't step in there though. The people in those cities pay for the infrastructure.

    Rural living is subsidized in many ways because the taxes those people pay doesn't cover the expense of delivering them the services and such they need to live.

    Which isn't itself a problem. After all, as pointed out above, there's many good reasons to have people living out in many of these areas.

  • rockrngerrockrnger Registered User regular
    Syrdon wrote:
    rockrnger wrote:
    My problem is less government waste and more waste for society. When the government steps in and makes it cheaper and easier to live in rural places it screws with the market for living and working in those places.
    The point is that there is social value in having people living in those places even though it is otherwise a completely unworkable proposition. One of the functions of government is step in when a market solution results in a negative effect on society. The USPS serving rural areas is exactly that.

    Fair enough point. I would say the economic forces are enough but one could make an argument otherwise.

    What makes you think rural population are worth their resource cost?

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar Registered User regular
    rockrnger wrote:
    Fair enough point. I would say the economic forces are enough but one could make an argument otherwise.

    What makes you think rural population are worth their resource cost?

    Because having the ability to exist outside of a city provides tremendous mental and physical health benefits for millions of people and broadens our culture's diversity.

    freefallagent.jpg
  • ZehydraZehydra Registered User
    Dangit, I use USPS, mainly because it's cheaper than its alternatives, AND it runs on Saturday.

    Ah well, they ran an unsustainable program.

  • ZehydraZehydra Registered User
    ronzo wrote:
    Doesn't the entire state of Oregon vote by mail?

    USPS folding would probably make that difficult

    If that's their only voting method, then it looks like they'll have to either change, or develop something like USPS themselves, which I doubt will happen.

  • Fatboy RobertsFatboy Roberts Registered User
    It's not the ONLY voting method here in Oregon, but it's a big one.

  • MichaelLCMichaelLC In what furnace was thy brain? ChicagoRegistered User regular
    psyck0 wrote:
    I think you guys should try to fix it. Canada post runs a profit and provides a similarly valuable service with a much lower population density to serve, which raises costs, so you should be able to make it work.

    Yeah, but the reading/writing rates are much lower, so less mail.

    The pension/healthcare thing seems pretty ridiculous. I'd like them to go private, but as others said, that'd probably mean they'd drop all the non-profitable routes. We could try a model like we do with utils, but we all know how well that's worked out.

    MichaelLC on
    Farscape is pretty much the best at anything
Sign In or Register to comment.