Scholarship table
R’s have been trying to undermine and privatize the USPS for years. They will continue to do so. Rather than having talks about changes that could help, we will see the battle go on.
The Constitution gives Congress the power to establish the USPS. It isn’t a requirement.
That would make more sense. I obviously either misunderstood what the twitter feed was saying, or they misstated it.
You can roll your eyes, Wags, but that doesn't stop efforts to privatize USPS. Of course the single biggest reason is because they have a strong union and nothing makes these people happier than busting unions.Times change, needs change. So as I said, the sides need to get together to come up with solutions. https://www.csmonitor.com/1995/0207/07014.htmlhttps://www.govexec.com/management/2018/09/dozens-senators-both-parties-push-measure-block-trumps-usps-privatization-plan/151396/https://www.mahablog.com/2020/04/12/the-republican-plan-to-kill-the-us-postal-service/https://ourfuture.org/20130210/you-should-be-outraged-by-what-is-being-done-to-our-post-officehttps://www.workers.org/2013/08/10387/
Isn’t lowest cost shipping kinda a big deal?
And that strong union is why the USPS is a mess and losing money. Their labor, benefit, and pension costs far outweigh what they do best or do well. A downsized and scaled back USPS could find an efficient niche and profitability again, but that would mean layoffs and location closings, and the union would never allow such a thing. Unions are supposed to protect worker rights and benefits, not protect failing/inefficient business segments/industries and handcuff the natural progress and development of the market.The USPS is great for letters and paper mailing, which is a rapidly declining area. Packages their only benefit is Smartpost or other JVs with other freight carriers. If they weren’t federally backstopped and forced to make money on such segments, their price would rise and Fedex/UPS/etc... would just do it themselves. Nobody ships a package with USPS unless time is unimportant and lowest possible cost is needed.To think the criticisms of the USPS as it currently stands is really only primarily to defeat a union by evil right wing hyper capitalists is silly agenda driven messaging. That’s why I rolled my eyes.
Sure, if time is no issue. Which many times isn’t the case. If you have a timeline, i struggle to recall the last time the USPS option going to be most attractive, regardless of price
https://theweek.com/articles-amp/767184/how-george-bush-broke-post-office?__twitter_impression=trueFrom what I've read/seen, the losing money isn't due to the union. I also have seen that Congress isn't in favor of scaling back. Imagine how reps would vote if it was suggested that all post offices in geographic areas with less than 5000 people should be closed.Also, i sincerely doubt any private entity is going to deliver to some backwoods address on a regular basis as it would likely be cost-prohibitive. We've already seen that with the extremely slow rollout of high speed internet from private sector.Lastly, this is a public service. It, currently, serves a purpose. Talking about money with a public service is strange. Should we do away with roads/road construction because maintaining roads is losing money?
USPS doesn't have to pay taxes, or most other government fees that other delivery services incur. Ever seen a USPS mail truck with a license plate?USPS has all sorts of competitive advantages and still can't break even.
See 'universal service mandate.' Much like public schools having to take every student while charter and private schools don't.