by SallyLightfoot » Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:36 am
[quote][i]Originally posted by djcraig[/i]<br>So your choice between two unionized entities is to go with the less efficient, less profitable one. I like it.[/quote]The USPS is a self-sufficient independent agency-- it has not received taxpayer subsidies since 1983. It is mandated to be revenue-neutral. To eliminate the USPS, you'd have to amend the US Constitution.
[quote][i]Originally posted by djcraig[/i]<br>BTW ask Chrysler and the other automakers how that union thing worked out for them.[/quote]The automakers made poor business decisions and were focused on short-term profits. Their unions made things more difficult to restructure, but they weren't the cause of their problems (foreign competitors are also heavily unionized). It would be nice if unions weren't necessary. Unfortunately, history has shown otherwise.
[quote][i]Originally posted by djcraig[/i]<br>Far be it for me to divine the magic solution but I do know what doesn't work. Spewing out "the answer" so people don't have to do any individual thinking is the job of an authoritarian government, supported by those who fear that the success of others is always at the cost of someone else.[/quote]Nobody has "answers", but it's better if you make informed statements instead of playing the blame game. Frankly, I don't care if a solution is public or private, as long as it works well for everybody. Like the quote (from Deng Xiaoping) "It doesn't matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice."
[quote][i]Originally posted by djcraig[/i]<br>If you're holding up the USPS as a prime example of how well the gov't can run things you're making my point for me. Sure, you're paying .44 to get your letter to it's destination. You're also paying another 7.8 billion in taxes just for 2010, for the privilege.[/quote]USPS has asked to defer a mandated pre-payment for future employee benefits (it is unusual for any company to be required to do this). Although I don't know what Congress is proposing to do about it yet, as far as I know the USPS not technically asking for a taxpayer bailout. All of their other financial issues can be worked out by raising rates, which is what all carriers do to offset losses (UPS profits were down 50% last year also).
If you get rid of the USPS, mail delivery rates are likely to increase. Private carriers like FedEx and UPS give their rural mail (and some residential) to USPS for final delivery-- and UPS does not deliver on Saturdays (although they will for extra). The USPS also does local mail pickup. Those private carriers would have to build out their infrastructure, or drop coverage of some rural areas. The USPS also works with the FBI and CIA to monitor/regulate mail and make sure harmful/illegal substances go through the mail. New safeguards would need to be put in place.
Finally, if the free-market is so great, why don't the private carriers move into residential mail delivery now? There aren't any major roadblocks to this, and you as the consumer are free today to send your mail through their service as you wish. I think this is a good example of why there should be a public option in health care-- an independent, self-sufficient govt agency can offer a quality, universal, low cost option, and those who prefer to pay more for a private, higher-end white-glove service can do so.