Post Office Law Suit to Repeal Carry Rule

[ELB]

The other thing they tend to get right is flat rate; for about $6 I can send a flat-rate small box that gets to nearly anywhere in 3-4 business days, pay online, print the label, and send it from my mailbox just like a letter at no extra charge. UPS ground 3-day service tends to cost about double that for a 1-pound package, plus $5-6 if I want them to pick it up from my house.

Don't forget to add in the subsidy (from tax payers' pocket) that the Federal Government pays to keep USPS afloat. Of course sincd the Feds can print all the money they need, maybe it doesn't come from taxpayers' pockets -- yet.

[KsSteve]

The other thing they tend to get right is flat rate; for about $6 I can send a flat-rate small box that gets to nearly anywhere in 3-4 business days, pay online, print the label, and send it from my mailbox just like a letter at no extra charge. UPS ground 3-day service tends to cost about double that for a 1-pound package, plus $5-6 if I want them to pick it up from my house.

Don't forget to add in the subsidy (from tax payers' pocket) that the Federal Government pays to keep USPS afloat. Of course sincd the Feds can print all the money they need, maybe it doesn't come from taxpayers' pockets -- yet.

Actually, USPS no longer receives subsidies from the government. Since 1982 the USPS has been funded entirely by revenues from postage.

[ELB]

I was cranky and overstated the direct subsidies, but it is not quite true that they have existed on postage alone since 1982. They still receive direct subsidy for certain blind, and oveseas citizens, and Congressional franking. They also received significant indirect subisdies for their employee retirement plans up to 1990 or so.

They also receive subsidies in the other forms, like a monopoly on delivering all first class mail (and third class, I believe), plus a monopoly on delivery to mailboxes (specifically established to prevent private companies from delivering mail). The USPS also does not pay federal, state, or local taxes. Other federal agencies are required to use (and pay) the USPS to mail stuff unless there are compelling reasons to use one of the overnight services.

It also has a direct line of credit into the US Treasury, which it has maxed out ($15Bn), which sounds like a direct subsidy to me. They are supposed to pay it back, since it is "credit," but they are going broke again and want Congress to "do something."

Of course Congress could so something like removing both the monopoly restrictions AND the restrictions on how much the USPS can charge -- i.e. actually privatize it -- but I have my doubts.

[ScottDLS]

I was cranky and overstated the direct subsidies, but it is not quite true that they have existed on postage alone since 1982. They still receive direct subsidy for certain blind, and oveseas citizens, and Congressional franking. They also received significant indirect subisdies for their employee retirement plans up to 1990 or so.

They also receive subsidies in the other forms, like a monopoly on delivering all first class mail (and third class, I believe), plus a monopoly on delivery to mailboxes (specifically established to prevent private companies from delivering mail). The USPS also does not pay federal, state, or local taxes. Other federal agencies are required to use (and pay) the USPS to mail stuff unless there are compelling reasons to use one of the overnight services.

It also has a direct line of credit into the US Treasury, which it has maxed out ($15Bn), which sounds like a direct subsidy to me. They are supposed to pay it back, since it is "credit," but they are going broke again and want Congress to "do something."

Of course Congress could so something like removing both the monopoly restrictions AND the restrictions on how much the USPS can charge -- i.e. actually privatize it -- but I have my doubts.

Yeah, this is a Fannie & Freddie type subsidy. It's not a direct subsidy until it is. $15BB is probably low.

[Jimineer]

This is an interesting topic and the law suit may solve the problem. My solution is to just not go to
the post office. Buy your stamps online. They will come in the mail. If you're reading this you probably
have internet access. Ship your packages UPS, FedEx, etc. They will even come to your door and pick
them up. I once banked at a bank that prohibited customers from carrying legally concealed weapons. No
problem, changed banks.

Vote with your $

[one eyed fatman]

OK I think I got it figured out, all I gotta do when I enter the post office CCW is ask the teller which way that pig went that I'm a hunting (I know that pig came this way). After that I'm legally carrying since I'm hunting. But now I have a question... can I as a hunter buy a book of stamps while I'm in the post office hunting that pig?

[mgood]

OK I think I got it figured out, all I gotta do when I enter the post office CCW is ask the teller which way that pig went that I'm a hunting (I know that pig came this way). After that I'm legally carrying since I'm hunting. But now I have a question... can I as a hunter buy a book of stamps while I'm in the post office hunting that pig?

I love it.
Good luck sellin' it, but I love it.

[Dreamhopper]

Whether it's "or" or "and" misses the point. If you hang your hat on that semantic minutia, it's easy enough for legislators to "correct" the verbiage later to remove what should be a right to carry. The point is "shall not be infringed" has no grayness at all.

[mercury]

ELB wrote:
I was cranky and overstated the direct subsidies, but it is not quite true that they have existed on postage alone since 1982. They still receive direct subsidy for certain blind, and oveseas citizens, and Congressional franking. They also received significant indirect subisdies for their employee retirement plans up to 1990 or so.

They also receive subsidies in the other forms, like a monopoly on delivering all first class mail (and third class, I believe), plus a monopoly on delivery to mailboxes (specifically established to prevent private companies from delivering mail). The USPS also does not pay federal, state, or local taxes. Other federal agencies are required to use (and pay) the USPS to mail stuff unless there are compelling reasons to use one of the overnight services.

It also has a direct line of credit into the US Treasury, which it has maxed out ($15Bn), which sounds like a direct subsidy to me. They are supposed to pay it back, since it is "credit," but they are going broke again and want Congress to "do something."

Of course Congress could so something like removing both the monopoly restrictions AND the restrictions on how much the USPS can charge -- i.e. actually privatize it -- but I have my doubts.

Yeah, this is a Fannie & Freddie type subsidy. It's not a direct subsidy until it is. $15BB is probably low.

Until about four years ago the US Postal Service was putting into the US Treasury from postage collected One Billion dollars a year. That's a Billion dollars the tax payer didn't have to be taxed. Congress mandated the US Postal Service prefund retirement to the tune of 23 Billion dollars a year until a limit of about 75 billion was reached. Name one other company, entity, or organization that could make a profit under those conditions. If that mandate was removed the US Postal Service would immediately become profitable again. The Postal Service is a bloated beaurecratic system and does need to be trimmed but try to send written communications from any other organization for .43 cents to McCarthy, Alaska from any other part of the US for that cost.

[sjfcontrol]

Umm, I would contend that email is "written" communications, and doesn't cost anywhere near $0.43 to/from anywhere in the world with internet access.
Apparently, you are referring to "printed" or "hardcopy" communications.
So email your communications, and have them print it at the destination, if required.

[OldSchool]

Umm, I would contend that email is "written" communications, and doesn't cost anywhere near $0.43 to/from anywhere in the world with internet access.
Apparently, you are referring to "printed" or "hardcopy" communications.
So email your communications, and have them print it at the destination, if required.

Not everyone is adequately "connected." Takes money that many people don't have (and many have never had), and is a hard-learned skill for many more. These are good times to be thankful for what we have.

[koolaid]

ELB wrote:

Until about four years ago the US Postal Service was putting into the US Treasury from postage collected One Billion dollars a year. That's a Billion dollars the tax payer didn't have to be taxed. Congress mandated the US Postal Service prefund retirement to the tune of 23 Billion dollars a year until a limit of about 75 billion was reached. Name one other company, entity, or organization that could make a profit under those conditions. If that mandate was removed the US Postal Service would immediately become profitable again. The Postal Service is a bloated beaurecratic system and does need to be trimmed but try to send written communications from any other organization for .43 cents to McCarthy, Alaska from any other part of the US for that cost.

Right, but you ignored the meat of his post, which is that the only reason they have any success at all is because the federal government has made it illegal for other companies to do what they do.

FedEx can't compete on delivering mail to your mailbox for .43 cents because it is against the law for them to even try.

[Dave2]

ELB wrote:

Until about four years ago the US Postal Service was putting into the US Treasury from postage collected One Billion dollars a year. That's a Billion dollars the tax payer didn't have to be taxed. Congress mandated the US Postal Service prefund retirement to the tune of 23 Billion dollars a year until a limit of about 75 billion was reached. Name one other company, entity, or organization that could make a profit under those conditions. If that mandate was removed the US Postal Service would immediately become profitable again. The Postal Service is a bloated beaurecratic system and does need to be trimmed but try to send written communications from any other organization for .43 cents to McCarthy, Alaska from any other part of the US for that cost.

Right, but you ignored the meat of his post, which is that the only reason they have any success at all is because the federal government has made it illegal for other companies to do what they do.

FedEx can't compete on delivering mail to your mailbox for .43 cents because it is against the law for them to even try.

What? How? They can charge whatever they want.

[dicion]

ELB wrote:

Until about four years ago the US Postal Service was putting into the US Treasury from postage collected One Billion dollars a year. That's a Billion dollars the tax payer didn't have to be taxed. Congress mandated the US Postal Service prefund retirement to the tune of 23 Billion dollars a year until a limit of about 75 billion was reached. Name one other company, entity, or organization that could make a profit under those conditions. If that mandate was removed the US Postal Service would immediately become profitable again. The Postal Service is a bloated beaurecratic system and does need to be trimmed but try to send written communications from any other organization for .43 cents to McCarthy, Alaska from any other part of the US for that cost.

Right, but you ignored the meat of his post, which is that the only reason they have any success at all is because the federal government has made it illegal for other companies to do what they do.

FedEx can't compete on delivering mail to your mailbox for .43 cents because it is against the law for them to even try.

What? How? They can charge whatever they want.

Fedex is not legally allowed to touch your mailbox. Period.

[boba]

Congress mandated the US Postal Service prefund retirement to the tune of 23 Billion dollars a year until a limit of about 75 billion was reached. Name one other company, entity, or organization that could make a profit under those conditions. If that mandate was removed the US Postal Service would immediately become profitable again.

I'm good with removing that mandate as long as the taxpayers never have to cough up another penny for USPS pensions or other benefits. Let the USPS carry the pensions on their books as a liability like any other company, entity, or organization.