What do you think? Privatize the US Post Office?

[gimmethesimplelife]

I keep reading that the post office is in dire shape and is about to miss a key payment to fund retiree health insurance and that perhaps in the future there will be no post office or whatever exists will look very different from what we now have. What do you think? Should it/could it perhaps be privatized or done away with entirely? Certainly the world of mail has changed and the only times I ever use the post office are to ship things I have listed or to ship things out to seasonal jobs I have taken, or when I have worked isolated seasonal jobs, I have used the contract stations (such as at the North Rim) to send money orders from saved tip money to my credit union. In this last instance, the post office has been a real blessing. But other than that, I hardly ever darken their door and I am afraid I am not the only one, hence they are in this situation. What do you'all think? Rob

[creaker]

The USPS has said what they need to do to get their house in order - Congress won't let them.

I think the plan is to run them into massive debt while providing below cost mail services to the private sector (and their lobbyists) - and then when the time comes balance the books on the backs of pensioned postal workers.

[ApatheticNoMore]

It seems to be mostly deliberate destruction (sabotage) of the post office, the post office is being required to comply with laws for retirement funding that *NO* private business does (fund the next 30 years of retirement now or something like that). It can't compete with "private business", with both hands tied behind it's back and it's legs tied to a chair (all these rules no private business has)? Well no, of course not ... nothing could. Congress made these rules and congress could change them to save the post office, will it bother?

It doesn't help I don't like the private companies in that business now. Fed-Ex and UPS have horrible customer service and so they have made me hate them. The post office has always been helpful. People don't use mail so much, yea but you think about how important the delivery of information, stuff, and money is. Critical. And then ... you think about redundency - always want critical systems to be redundant.

[Gregg]

It doesn't help I don't like the private companies in that business now. Fed-Ex and UPS have horrible customer service and so they have made me hate them. The post office has always been helpful.

Interesting. My experience is just the opposite. I don't use UPS often, but use Fed-Ex almost daily and I'm very satisfied with delivery, tracking, handling and response if there is a problem. For almost 20 years I had one of those quaint small town post offices where everybody knows everybody else. It was a nice social diversion (usually took about an hour to get mail because you had to chat), but in truth the people there were not properly trained, most did not give a lick about customer service, they did not know all their own products, they were not properly stocked with supplies, etc. From a business standpoint it was very poorly run. I have no experience with the management of the larger entity, it may be better. I think its silly to subsidize business with catalog mailings that cost pennies, but then I think most government subsidies of business are silly. I think the post office, overall, provides many useful and a few valuable tools and services. They need to be better managed, charge an appropriate price for their product, not be hog tied by Congress, etc. Basically, it needs to at least be run like a private entity.

[jp1]

Like Apatheticnomore mentioned, the only real reason the post office is in trouble is because they're being forced to play by different rules regarding pension funding then any private company.

I also seriously doubt that any private owner would provide the same service that the USPS does. Sure, any company could do what they do in urban/suburban areas at the same rates and make a profit. But does anyone really think that a private company is going to take on the money losing aspects like rural mail delivery? I would be willing to bet large sums of money that if/when privatization happens that before long there would be significant changes to make it more profitable, from cuts in rural/small town service to abrogation/elimination of union contracts. The fact that they can provide the services they do and would be fiscally successful if it weren't for the rediculous pension funding rules they face is more a testament to their success then a sign of failure.

This just strikes me as another attempt to give valuable public assets away so that the connected people that wind up with them can make a ton of money.

[fidgiegirl]

My mother in law gets a Postal pension. Did you know retired Postal employees CANNOT get Social Security for their time worked at the postal service? She gets very small SS from the time prior to working for USPS. Even if my FIL dies, she cannot get his SS benefits (I'm still tryin' to wrap my head around this one). So while I appreciate the economic hardship of those pensions on the system as a whole, on a personal level, I really hope nothing happens to her postal pension. Too bad Reagan didn't think about the eventuality that maybe USPS would ever lose money when the rules went in under him.

[bae]

Too bad Reagan didn't think about the eventuality that maybe USPS would ever lose money when the rules went in under him.

Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution lays the responsibility squarely on Congress.

[SteveinMN]

I also seriously doubt that any private owner would provide the same service that the USPS does. Sure, any company could do what they do in urban/suburban areas at the same rates and make a profit. But does anyone really think that a private company is going to take on the money losing aspects like rural mail delivery? I would be willing to bet large sums of money that if/when privatization happens that before long there would be significant changes to make it more profitable, from cuts in rural/small town service to abrogation/elimination of union contracts.
I think privatizing the Post Office would work. Postage would cost more. The residents of Frozen Nose, Montana, probably would dislike weekly mail service, but they'd get used to it. And you can bet the mortgage that a private company would resist unionizing to the point of bankruptcy. Then there's that matter of private business having to make a profit margin, be a revenue producer.

I think it comes down to whether we want to continue to treat people (customers and postal workers) more equally or provide yet another service for which some people do just fine and the folks who always come out on bottom just sink a little further down.

[morning girl]

I order online often I find the slowest service is FedEx. My sister in law who lives in a rural area says they often get lost inher neck of the woods. UPS does OK, but the best service is the Postal Service. Fidgiegirl federal employees of all branches of the government were not covered by Social Security. My mother worked as a civilian employee of the Navy and Air Force. She did not qualify for Social Security.

[jp1]

I think privatizing the Post Office would work. Postage would cost more. The residents of Frozen Nose, Montana, probably would dislike weekly mail service, but they'd get used to it. And you can bet the mortgage that a private company would resist unionizing to the point of bankruptcy. Then there's that matter of private business having to make a profit margin, be a revenue producer.

I think it comes down to whether we want to continue to treat people (customers and postal workers) more equally or provide yet another service for which some people do just fine and the folks who always come out on bottom just sink a little further down.

I think you're right. This is just another attempt by the haves to beat down the don't haves a little bit more. Yes, the people in Frozen Nose will learn to make do with weekly delivery. Yes the new, non-unionized employees of the new post office would make do with their lower paychecks and lack of pensions. And yes, we all might save a few pennies on the cost of a stamp. But frankly, even though I don't depend on the post office, I don't work for the post office, and I don't even know what the cost of a stamp is today since I use so few of them, it would be really sad to me if the evil robber barrons trying to get rich off of privatizing the post office succeed.

[ApatheticNoMore]

It's also not broken, the post office model works well (with some private competition and that's fine too. But I wonder how responsive the private companies will be without the competition of the post office. I guess it depends on how oligopolistic that industry is - market competition only works well in industries that aren't heavily cartelized and much of the U.S. economy is these days. Why those companies could let the post office be destroyed and then lobby for subsidies and other favoritism even - too big to fail! Much privitization really isn't!).

So if it's not broken (in a world where it seems much is - I mean so many things in both government and business are *not* working well) why fix it? The fact that congress has screwed things up royally doesn't mean the post office model itself is broken in my view.

[Rogar]

I was talking with the local clerk not too long ago after they were denied a postage stamp rate increase. He said inflation had not justified the increase and the proposal had been turned down. I wonder too wonder if they could be more profitable if they could operate more as an independent entity. I like the postal service. I like the fact that they deliver to podunk Montana, whether it is profitable or not. I like the fact that the delivery people can slow down and talk a second, maybe ask if one of the invalid neighbors is OK because they haven't see them for a while. Unlike the UPS men who are in a god awful hurry. I like Saturday mail and being able to send packages on Saturday. I like discount rates for media mail.

[creaker]

So if it's not broken (in a world where it seems much is - I mean so many things in both government and business are *not* working well) why fix it? The fact that congress has screwed things up royally doesn't mean the post office model itself is broken in my view.

It's just really overdue for changes - snail mail usage has really changed over the past generation, and the post office has not been allowed to change to catch up.

The constitution empowers Congress to establish post offices and post roads - I don't think that requires them to, and more than the ability to declare war requires them to do that. When is the last time they made a post road? Rural areas may need a bit of help - but beyond that it's way past time for Congress to release the reigns.

[Gregg]

Just curious about a few things... How much would anyone be willing to pay to mail a letter? For me, about a buck. All I actually mail anymore is birthday cards (everything else is online), how about anyone else, do you actually use snail mail these days? How big a deal would it be if mail delivery was twice a week instead of daily? Thinking it could be set up more like gargabe collection routes than the current routes.

[SteveinMN]

do you actually use snail mail these days? How big a deal would it be if mail delivery was twice a week instead of daily? Thinking it could be set up more like gargabe collection routes than the current routes.
Good question. Of course, you're asking people who are computer-conversant enough to participate in a Web forum. Like you, I mail rarely and likely get more than I send (some magazines and newsletters, mostly; the bills and payments are almost all electronic). Twice a week would be fine for me.

When I think about my mom or MIL, though, who still don't "get" computers, the equation changes. Twice-a-week mail means the bill arrives and it's got to be turned around pretty fast to make the next mail collection. Miss it and you're 3-4 days behind. Given that some bills have been incurring finance charges since the service was done, that's now money. Not to mention late charges incurred by missing a mail pickup and having the bill returned late. Of course, maybe mail could be picked up every day at the Post Office, but there's the matter of getting there. Especially in less-urban settings. 'Course, with a little less nickel-and-dime greed on the part of financiers, this wouldn't be so bad, but billing cycles are somewhat predicated on daily deliveries.

Agreed that the PO has to change with the times; they should be allowed to. Not that postal retirees should get stiffed. But if "government should run like a business", let them do it. Don't hamstring them.

[creaker]

Just curious about a few things... How much would anyone be willing to pay to mail a letter? For me, about a buck. All I actually mail anymore is birthday cards (everything else is online), how about anyone else, do you actually use snail mail these days? How big a deal would it be if mail delivery was twice a week instead of daily? Thinking it could be set up more like gargabe collection routes than the current routes.

I think a buck would be a more than fair deal. I do my mortgage payment by mail, although I don't have to. So maybe I do it slightly more than once a month.

A big problem with the postal service is that they are major garbage distributors (junk mail) - while the unions want to continue Saturday delivery, the big push is from the junk mailers who feel Saturday delivery is important. I'd really like to see them do a buck a letter as well - or at least something closer to market rates (market rates defined as prices high enough they would attract competitors).

[awakenedsoul]

I use the P.O. to pay my electric, gas, trash, and internet bill. I like paying by check. I don't want to switch to on line payment, because I don't like the companies having the power to overcharge me or raise my rates. I also receive O Magazine, and I send several letters and cards per year.
I think the rates are fair. I would pay 50 cents to mail a bill, but I think a dollar is a bit high. I also have used those payment places where you can pay your gas and electric bill in person at no charge.
I would be fine with less delivery. I can ride my bike to our nearest P.O.

[ApatheticNoMore]

I use the P.O. to pay my electric, gas, trash, and internet bill. I like paying by check.

+1 I use them for bills. I also use them to get Amazon shipments (I develop DTs even thinking about giving up Amazon :~))

I would be fine with 50 cents too (it's nearing that now), but $1 does seem excessive. Currently rate increases are legally limited to the official rate of inflation, but you know even basic marketing sense wouldn't allow rates to be raised indefinitely and $1 may well be too high. Because if you do marketing estimates of total sales dollars you peak out, eventually the higher costs drives away enough consumers to be a net loss. Other alternatives do exist even if they aren't my favorite.

[goldensmom]

I pay utility bills by check/mail. I could pay locally but there is a $3.00 convenience charge whereas the cost of a stamp is only $0.45. We subscribe to several magazines, I like to chit chat with the mail delivery person and it is just fun to get mail. We can go days without getting any mail so reducing delivery days would be okay.

[bae]

The constitution empowers Congress to establish post offices and post roads - I don't think that requires them to, and more than the ability to declare war requires them to do that. When is the last time they made a post road?

I think it is called "the Interstate Highway System" these days, along with a bit of our railroad network.

[Yossarian]

I like paying by check. I don't want to switch to on line payment, because I don't like the companies having the power to overcharge me or raise my rates.

Most banks have online bill paying. It's not a payee-orginated draft against your account, you have to go online and enter how much you want to pay people. Still much faster that actually writing checks.

[creaker]

I think it is called "the Interstate Highway System" these days, along with a bit of our railroad network.

It serves that purpose - but I believe it was justified as a defense project than a way to deliver mail. I could be wrong but I don't think we've had any road infrastructure built specifically for moving mail in a very long time, although that happened in the past.

Wikipedia says in 1838 they passed a law designating all current and future railroads as post roads, so it sounds like all the railroad network is.

Added: this is interesting: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/origin.htm

[awakenedsoul]

Most banks have online bill paying. It's not a payee-orginated draft against your account, you have to go online and enter how much you want to pay people. Still much faster that actually writing checks.

I've had problems with my old phone company, so I resist it. Maybe it's my age...Also, if there's a power outage, or if computers are down, I like the pay by check option. I don't know how much longer we'll have it!

[ctg492]

The postal system seems so obsolete to me. Important papers/checks being delivered and taken away from box by the road. Right like I would still do that:0! Gas powered cars driving from house to house to deliver stuff, when they for the most part could make one stop even on a designated corner for all. Daily trips to each home. Seems like in todays world what does still arrive could be delivered every few days. The rest could be run like UPS or FedEX.
Post service same as a news"paper",obsolete .

[ApatheticNoMore]

The postal system seems so obsolete to me. Important papers/checks being delivered and taken away from box by the road. Right like I would still do that:0!

But what could possibly go wrong with it all being done on the internet ... there's strong incentive for things not to go wrong but ..

[Gregg]

I use the P.O. to pay my ...internet bill.

I thought that was really funny awakenedsoul! :laff:

[ctg492]

I can't remember the last time I put a check for a bill in the mail box. I am lucky the few that ever do arrive like property taxes, sewer bill, I just bike it up and pay. My 80+year old mom, will put a check in the box and wait to make sure it gets picked up. Like it is now is safe hands after it leaves her box.

[peggy]

But what could possibly go wrong with it all being done on the internet ... there's strong incentive for things not to go wrong but ..

Kind of hard to send a physical object through the Internet.;) except....

http://www.gizmag.com/go/2578/

[jp1]

I've had problems with my old phone company, so I resist it. Maybe it's my age...Also, if there's a power outage, or if computers are down, I like the pay by check option. I don't know how much longer we'll have it!

My father was a systems accountant for the air force for nearly 30 years until he retired 20 years ago. During that time he was part of a committee that was tasked with figuring out how to pay employees scattered around the world, some in places that may not have much bank infrastructure, and whose families may be located elsewhere and need access to the employee's paycheck. The system they came up with was direct deposit. Up until a couple of years ago when the government forced him to begin using it for his pension he absolutely refused to use it. Somehow he felt that the 'realness' of a physical check was better and more reliable then an invisible money transfer into his account.

[Lainey]

Another reason to keep the P.O. around is the popularity of their new campaign "if it fits, it ships" using the free boxes the P.O. provides.
Some friends who used to use UPS or FedEx switched to the P.O. and claim it's much cheaper.

[Yossarian]

if there's a power outage, or if computers are down, I like the pay by check option.
Do whatever makes you comfortable, but you still have the option to write a check if you want. I don't think I have manually written more than one or two a year, but you could if there was ever a reason to.

[Gregg]

I taught all my kids how to write checks when they were young and learning about banking and whatnot. It dawned on me that I was probably teaching a skill they would never use. At our local bank they don't automatically give you checks when you open an account, you have to ask for them. So far I don't think any of my three kids have asked.

[pinkytoe]

My 80+year old mom, will put a check in the box and wait to make sure it gets picked up. Like it is now is safe hands after it leaves her box.
She recalls a time as many of us older posters do when it really was safe to entrust such things. I don't think the world is the same anymore.

[early morning]

I trust the post office more than the security at many web-sites. I pay some bills online, and some by snail mail. I've had checks lost in the mail, but no outright theft. I have had fraudulent purchases made on my credit card after using it to pay an online bill, though. And I detest reading most things on a computer screen - I want my magazines and newsletters! My vote is solidly for the post office, UNPRIVATIZED.

[Spartana]

My mother in law gets a Postal pension. Did you know retired Postal employees CANNOT get Social Security for their time worked at the postal service? She gets very small SS from the time prior to working for USPS. Even if my FIL dies, she cannot get his SS benefits (I'm still tryin' to wrap my head around this one). So while I appreciate the economic hardship of those pensions on the system as a whole, on a personal level, I really hope nothing happens to her postal pension. Too bad Reagan didn't think about the eventuality that maybe USPS would ever lose money when the rules went in under him.

Not only postal workers, but many other public/government employee's with pensions can't get So. Sec. unless they had other employment outside of those public jobs. Even then, if you get SS AND a public pension, SS Admin will reduce your SS benefits by 2/3 rd's of your public pension benefit. From Kiplinger: "Under federal law, any Social Security benefits you earned will be reduced if you were a federal, state or local government employee who earned a pension on wages that were not covered by Social Security. Reductions also apply to Social Security spousal or survivor benefits that are claimed by government pensioners."


I personally hope the postal service continues as I am one of those Ludite throw backs to another era of snail mail and paying by check. I think there are lots of cost saving thiobgs that can be done to reduce expenses like 3 day/week delivery. Doning away with personal mail boxes and having a large communal box with a locked slot for each home (this is probably get to reduce expenses in rural areas). And of course having postal employees pick up part of the cost of their pensions like many public workers do. I had to pay 7% (tax deferred) towards my public pension with Calif State and they matched it with another 7%. Same with retireree medical benefits. You can also make them have a later retirement age like SS does. Not sure what the postal services retirement age is but, if it's like many other public pensions, you can begin collecting benefits as early as 50 for law enforcement types and 55 for everyone else. Now some places like Calif are changing that to an older age - 65 or so.

As far as safety issues goes, I don't know which would have less risk -paying by check and using snail mail or using the internet to bill pay or using direct debit to bill pay. All have risks but I personally feel safer writing a check and using snail mail (and I also don't have home internet so it's definetely NOT safe to use use free wi-fi for bill paying or to buy stuff online). I hear of many financial fiasco's with direct debit and online bill paying. Things like being overcharged, double or more billed, etc... The recent Southwest Airline boondoggle is a good example. People who made plane reservations on their CC's were charged up to 10 times for a single flight purchase. They found out that they maxed out their CCs and had all those CC charges for going over their balances as well as had their interest rates raises because they went over their balances. And those who had their CCs paid by direct debit from their banks found their bank accounts emptied and had numerous overdraft charges on top of all the CC charges.

[jp1]

I taught all my kids how to write checks when they were young and learning about banking and whatnot. It dawned on me that I was probably teaching a skill they would never use. At our local bank they don't automatically give you checks when you open an account, you have to ask for them. So far I don't think any of my three kids have asked.

I write checks for three things. Our monthly rent, our catsitter whenever we go out of town, and once a year to the IRS. So probably 17 or 18 checks per year. A couple of months ago I finally got out the last 30 check checkbook with my NY address on them. I haven't lived at that address since April 2004. In another year I suppose it'll be time to have new checks printed.